Transcript Highlights:

• So for that reason, I am recommending support with the technical amendments outlined in the analysis.
• I will be accepting the committee amendments in numbers six and seven of the analysis.
• I will be accepting the committee amendments in numbers six and seven of the analysis.
• After consulting with staff and the committee, analysis.
• The analysis referenced it as well.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• analysis.
• The practical impact is that investigators cannot simply request medical records.
• Our folks who do talks caught toxicology analysis, it compares to illegal substances.
• And and that's why when it comes to DNA analysis, specifically blood analysis for BNA on violent crimes
• So toxicology will not impact the DNA category.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• of executive branch agency impact of executive branch agency models.<00:06:45.120> And<00:06:
• analysis of new executive branch agency rules.
• And to be able to do that economic analysis, we need a software. We need the software.
• <00:08:27.919> analysis to perform an economic impact analysis to perform an economic impact
• analysis of<00:08:28.960> new<00:08:29.759> executive<00:08:30.319> branch<00:08

Bills: HB0105, HB0107, SF0002

Keywords: K-12 education, school facilities, security improvements, public funding, state appropriations, school construction, local government funding, sales tax distribution, municipal funding, economic equity, state revenue, Wyoming Legislature, legislative appropriations, Legislative Service Office, LSO budget, general fund, biennial budget, legislative branch, legislator travel, per diem

Transcript Highlights:

• According to the analysis, the bill has no significant state costs.
• Per the analysis, any cost to the IG is minor and absorbable within the IG's budget.
• Tungabod, if you could confine your questions to the fiscal impacts of this specific bill, that'd be
• As noted in the Assembly Appropriations Committee analysis, this bill has no state fiscal costs.
• As noted in the Assembly Appropriation Committee analysis, this bill has no state fiscal costs.

Summary: The Assembly Appropriations Committee met on April 22, 2026, with a quorum present and first took up a large consent calendar. It moved a set of bills to the Assembly Floor consent calendar by unanimous vote, including AB 1773, 1785, 1828, 1873, 1918, 2001, 2085, 2173, 2412, 2536, 2644, and 2781, and separately approved another group of unanimous bills not eligible for floor consent, including AB 1544, 1555, 1614, 1621, 1637, 1704, 1816, 1933, 2529, 2559, 2663, and 2731. The committee then heard several individual bills, with each author describing the measure and witnesses generally testifying in support; no organized opposition was recorded on the bills discussed. Among the measures heard, AB 2393 would create fixed statutory damages for certain false imprisonment and arrest claims, while exempting peace officers, custodial officers, and public entities. AB 1697 would delay implementation of a recently enacted prohibition on employment contracts that require workers to repay employer debts if they leave a job, and AB 2534 would extend Domestic Violence Prevention Act restraining order protections to attempted forced marriages and survivors of forced marriages. AB 1608 would strengthen the High-Speed Rail Inspector General’s office by adding staffing and contracting authority, requiring public reports, and allowing limited temporary confidentiality for sensitive information; the bill drew questions from members about transparency and whether information could be withheld, but the author and Inspector General said the measure would increase accountability and only allow narrow, time-limited confidentiality. The committee also approved AB 1916, which would allow American Sign Language interpreters to participate in the same collective bargaining process as other certified court interpreters, and AB 1803, which would require anti-hate speech training as part of workplace harassment prevention training for employers with five or more employees. AB 1821 would change Public Records Act response timelines from calendar days to business days, with local government sponsors arguing it would better reflect actual processing time for broad and complex requests without reducing access. AB 1919 would establish election procedures to let voters decide the future of Santa Cruz Metro service funding after a one-time grant expires. Each of these bills was moved forward on due pass votes, with some members not voting on certain measures. The committee then approved a long suspense file, and the remaining suspense bills were deemed approved without further discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• What is the impact of those tools?
• by those health impacts.
• And so the analysis talks about a Faraday case.
• It looks like that's, whether intended or not, the impact. Also, in 22502... ...the impact.
• Because I think when that happens, we lose sight of who's really impacted and directly impacted, both

Summary: The committee first heard AB 56, which would require social media platforms to display a warning label about potential mental health harms from prolonged use, with amendments shortening the initial warning and allowing immediate access to the platform. The author and supporters, including a parent who lost a daughter to suicide and a therapist, argued that social media contributes to teen anxiety, self-harm, and other harms and that families need clearer public health information. Opponents from tech and civil liberties groups argued the bill would be ineffective, burdensome, and likely unconstitutional, saying it would create warning fatigue and should be replaced by more targeted tools and digital literacy measures. Several members discussed emergency access concerns, language access, and whether the warning should be more actionable; the bill was moved on a 9-0 vote to the Judiciary Committee. The committee then took up AB 358, which would amend CalECPA to allow law enforcement, with the victim’s consent, to inspect certain abandoned tracking or surveillance devices found in a victim’s home, vehicle, or personal property without first obtaining a warrant. The author and a San Diego prosecutor said the bill is narrowly tailored to devices used solely for spying and is intended to help stalking and domestic violence survivors act quickly before evidence is lost. Opponents from EFF and the ACLU warned the bill would weaken warrant protections, create a loophole around CalECPA, and reduce transparency and accountability. Members debated Fourth Amendment issues, abandonment, and the practical need for rapid access; the bill passed the committee on a 9-0 vote to Appropriations. The committee also heard AB 1137, which builds on last year’s CSAM reporting law by allowing any user to report child sexual abuse material, requiring clearer reporting mechanisms, adding human review in some cases, and mandating third-party audits and public reporting. Supporters, including survivor advocates and a parent of a child victim, said the bill would reduce the burden on survivors and improve removal of abusive content. Tech industry opponents said they support the goal but objected to the human-review mandate, public audit disclosures, and enforcement provisions, arguing they could create security risks and compliance burdens. Members generally supported the bill’s intent but raised questions about audit frequency and human review; the bill was moved on call with seven votes at the time of the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Department of Revenue does its analysis as to that budget.
• Lots of impact on our residents.
• That is a real thing as far as their analysis.
• So it's a very thorough analysis of that, the check for that sales chasing portion of it.
• Quitty said, we were impacted by three hurricanes in the past two and a half years.

Summary: The Committee on Finance and Tax met with a quorum present and heard a presentation from the Property Appraisers Association of Florida on ad valorem valuation, exemptions, and the property tax process. Lauren Levy reviewed the legal and historical framework of Florida property taxation, including Save Our Homes, the 10% cap on non-homestead assessments, portability, tangible personal property exemptions, TRIM notices, and the distinction between taxable value and millage rates. He emphasized that property appraisers are independent constitutional officers who assess just value, administer exemptions, and are overseen by the Department of Revenue, with values and exemptions generally determined as of January 1 and subject to challenge through the Value Adjustment Board or circuit court. Mike Twitty described the mass appraisal process in Pinellas County, explaining how property appraisers value large numbers of parcels using the same core approaches as fee appraisals but with statistical testing, field reviews, aerial imagery, and technology. He discussed the importance of budget, staffing, and the January 1 valuation date, and noted that recent hurricanes caused significant damage, increased petitions, and required new procedures to help property owners with value reductions and FEMA-related issues. Paul Polk focused on Department of Revenue oversight, explaining sales ratio studies, uniformity measures such as COD and PRD, time adjustments, sales qualification reviews, and in-depth studies that can lead to corrective action if assessment standards are not met. He also noted that the Department reviews property appraiser budgets to preserve independence from county pressure. Senators asked about the supersized homestead concept, DOR review and rejection standards, value trends, and the impact of storms and new construction on taxable value. Twitty and Polk said value growth has been driven by a mix of new construction, market appreciation, cap resets, and storm-related adjustments, while noting that some counties saw market value decline even as taxable value rose. They also said some property tax relief proposals would be easier to implement than others depending on how local tax bills are structured, especially where law enforcement millage is separately identified. No votes were taken on legislation, and the committee adjourned after the presentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'll end on this trend analysis here on page 14.
• A change to factors that they can control is impacting the supply, which then has impacts on our price
• And so really, there's weather impacts.
• to differentiate revenue versus economic impact.
• This contains policy and performance analysis, and the policy analysis, in particular, helps frame the

Transcript Highlights:

• As noted in the fiscal analysis related to costs, DFPI examiner costs are anticipated because the bill
• This will lead to legal challenges that would impact... ...outside the terms of the agreements.
• As you can see in your analysis, the fiscal impacts are limited, if any at all, with a Housing and Community
• Additionally, under— Again, on page 2 of your analysis today.
• This is a bill about the insurance crisis, which impacts us all. It's affordability.

Summary: The Assembly Appropriations Committee met on March 19, 2025, adopted its committee rules unanimously, and then heard a series of housing, insurance, and disaster-recovery bills. Early bills focused on wildfire relief and insurance issues, including AB 238 on mortgage forbearance for Los Angeles County wildfire survivors, AB 493 on insurance payout interest for homeowners, AB 597 on consumer protections after disasters, and AB 226 on strengthening the California FAIR Plan’s liquidity tools. Supporters generally framed these measures as necessary protections for disaster survivors and market stability, while opponents and concerned witnesses raised issues such as investor guidelines, compliance conflicts, and market disruption. Several members also noted equity concerns and the need to balance relief with consistency across the state. The committee also heard a cluster of housing-production bills. AB 306 proposed a six-year pause on new state building code updates affecting residential construction and limits on local code modifications, drawing strong support from housing and building industry groups who argued it would reduce costs and improve predictability. It also drew opposition from code, environmental, and clean-energy advocates, who warned about safety, local control, and the loss of important code updates. AB 253 would allow licensed third-party professionals to perform plan checks if local review takes 30 days or more, and AB 301 would impose state-agency permitting timelines similar to those already applied to local governments; both were presented as ways to reduce delays and speed housing development. AB 462 would exempt ADU construction from coastal development permit requirements in Los Angeles County, especially to aid fire recovery and expand housing supply. After hearing testimony and brief member discussion on each measure, the committee placed the bills on suspense or advanced them as appropriate. In the suspense hearing at the end of the meeting, the committee took up the suspense-file bills and reported AB 226, AB 238, AB 301, and AB 306 out with due pass recommendations on roll call votes. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• But we did a standalone analysis of the total impact of the legislation after the 2023 session, and that
• <00:56:35.839> impact<00:56:36.240> of<00:56:36.480> the analysis of the total
• impact of the analysis of the total impact of the legislation<00:56:37.520> at<00:56:37.839><
• regressive impact on the lower deaths. regressive impact on the lower deaths.
• impacting people at the lower deaths. impacting people at the lower deaths.

Bills: HF331, HF916

Keywords: school supplies, sales tax exemption, use tax, sales and use tax, back-to-school, classroom supplies, education tax relief, tax holiday, retail exemption, Minnesota sales tax, school materials, binders, calculators, notebooks, pencils, backpacks, book bags, local tax revenue, taxable sales base, income tax

Transcript Highlights:

• So with your analysis, this, you're, That's required.
• So, with your analysis, the analysis you all did, did it include, like, data extraction from GIS, where
• Typically, when that analysis is done, you're looking at the basin you let the water out of.
• We have nowadays a lot of infrastructure in order to support our analysis.
• So we would like to count the trees that are impacted after a hurricane.

Summary: The Natural Resources and Disaster Subcommittee met to discuss the use of artificial intelligence in emergency management and related public-safety applications. The panel included the Florida Division of Emergency Management, the University of Florida, and Florida International University. FDEM described current uses of AI for invoice anomaly detection, automated situation report drafting, and data synthesis in WebEOC, emphasizing that AI is used to speed analysis and improve efficiency but not to replace human decision-making. The agency also said counties retain access through backup communications such as Starlink and generators, and that WebEOC provides shared visibility, archived documentation, and a common operating picture across all 67 counties. University of Florida representatives highlighted Beacon, an AI-enabled public safety audio service developed with FDEM and public media partners to distribute official alerts across multiple platforms, including mobile devices and digital streams. UF IFAS described a geospatial AI “Gaia bot” that turns satellite data into natural-language answers and maps for crop damage assessment and flood-risk mapping, with a focus on making complex Earth-observation data more accessible to growers and policymakers. FIU presented AI models that predict water levels and flood mitigation settings much faster than traditional simulation tools, with comparable or better accuracy, and said the work includes explainability features and broader research on compound flooding. Members asked extensive questions about storm surge, hallucinations, whether generative AI or large language models were being used, data vetting, and hardware needs. The witnesses repeatedly stressed that their systems are not autonomous, that human review remains central, and that the models used are primarily data-driven predictive tools rather than chatbot-style generative AI. The meeting ended with thanks to the panelists and an announcement that the committee’s policy chief was leaving for another position. Representative Mooney then moved that the committee rise, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• impact assessment and mitigation<00:31:36.080> accounts.
• The council is also directed to submit the analysis to the legislature by January 15, 2026.
• So this section directs MnDOT to enter into an agreement for analysis.
• So this section directs MnDOT to enter into an agreement for analysis.
• So this section directs MnDOT to enter into an agreement for analysis.

Bills: HF2438

Keywords: transportation finance, transportation policy, MnDOT, Minnesota Department of Transportation, Department of Public Safety, Metropolitan Council, highway funding, trunk highway fund, county state-aid highway fund, municipal state-aid street fund, state aid roads, local roads, bridge funding, road construction, transit funding, passenger rail, freight rail, aviation, airport development, safe routes to school

Transcript Highlights:

• Significantly impacts transportation.
• But is this tax credit going to have a life cycle analysis also?
• What's going to be the impact? So I want to come back...
• So I believe the analysis that UC Berkeley relied on is assuming this sort of...
• We're already seeing an impact on the market.

Summary: The meeting began with a budget subcommittee hearing on a proposed sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) tax credit trailer bill. Assembly Members Ávila Farías and another member spoke in support, emphasizing union jobs, refinery investments, and the need to decarbonize aviation. The Department of Finance said the Governor’s proposal would provide a $1 to $2 per gallon credit against the diesel excise tax for SAF sold in California from 2026 to 2036. The Legislative Analyst’s Office recommended rejecting the proposal, arguing it is a relatively expensive way to reduce emissions, has uncertain environmental benefits, could significantly reduce transportation revenues, and conflicts with the spirit of voter restrictions on transportation taxes. Committee members questioned whether the credit would mainly benefit out-of-state producers, whether firms would have diesel tax liability to use the credit, and whether the proposal would shift production away from renewable diesel and raise fuel prices. Administration and CARB staff said the credit is intended to support aviation decarbonization, preserve jobs, and help keep California on track toward its 2045 climate goals. LAO and UC Berkeley testimony countered that the policy could mostly subsidize existing technologies, that feedstock supply is limited, and that the net emissions benefit may be small relative to the cost. Members also asked about the effect on local streets and roads, SHOP, and trade corridor funding; Finance estimated a $165 million annual revenue impact would reduce those programs, while LAO said the reductions would mean fewer projects over time. No vote was taken, and the chair said the issue would remain open for further discussion. The committee then moved to a zero-emission vehicle incentive trailer bill proposing a one-time $200 million appropriation to CARB for a new point-of-sale incentive program focused on first-time buyers and leases of new and used light-duty ZEVs. Supporters said the program would help offset the loss of the federal EV tax credit, maintain momentum in California’s ZEV transition, and use a one-to-one match with participating automakers to double the state’s investment. LAO recommended rejection, saying the proposal does not meet the high budget bar this year, lacks enough program detail to evaluate, is unlikely to move sales significantly given the size of the appropriation, and could duplicate existing state and utility programs. Members asked about current incentives across light-, medium-, and heavy-duty sectors, the recent decline in ZEV sales, and whether the program would help lower-income buyers rather than subsidize purchases that would have happened anyway. CARB said the proposal is meant to fill a gap in the light-duty market, where sales fell sharply after the federal credit expired, and noted existing programs for other vehicle classes. The Department of Finance also addressed a separate question about the Motor Vehicle Account, saying a previously planned GGRF transfer was no longer needed because updated forecasts showed the fund had sufficient balances, though LAO said the account still has a structural long-term imbalance. The discussion ended before any vote or action on the ZEV proposal.

Transcript Highlights:

• So it was not clear in our analysis of this definition.
• So the analysis is based on the definition of “alien” within that national...
• Now what we'll actually see in this biennium is we'll see a net positive impact.
• Now what we'll actually see in this biennium is we'll see a net positive impact.
• Now what we'll actually see in this biennium is we'll see a net positive impact.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The meeting began as a Division 3 work session on HB 71, but much of the early discussion focused on whether a previously discussed non-germane amendment could be considered or voted on that day. Members and the chair debated process and notice requirements, and the clerk’s guidance was that the amendment needed a separate public hearing before the full Finance Committee. The amendment was described as requiring DHHS contracts and addenda to include compliance with the Patient Bill of Rights, with a repeal date so the requirement would expire on November 30, 2026. The motion to move OTP on HB 71 with the amendment was withdrawn, and the committee agreed the amendment would be scheduled for a future full Finance hearing instead. The committee then turned to HB 71 itself and heard testimony from DHHS representatives John Williams and Jenny O’Higgins on the fiscal note and policy implications. Members questioned the estimate that the bill could put $12 million to $18 million per year in federal funding at risk, including HUD and Office of Refugee Resettlement funds. DHHS explained that the estimate was based on a broad reading of the bill’s term “specified alien,” which they said was not clearly defined in the bill, so they analyzed it using the federal definition of “alien” and assumed the bill could affect lawfully present non-citizens as well as undocumented individuals. They said the figure represented a worst-case scenario and that they were not claiming the loss was certain. Members also pressed DHHS on whether the bill could affect emergency sheltering in schools, public academies, or institutions of higher learning during disasters. DHHS said the language could create conflicts with federal funding conditions because emergency shelter programs generally cannot impose barriers on who may be sheltered, and they warned that excluding certain people could affect refugee-related and HUD funding. Questions were raised about whether the bill’s language would apply to private institutions as well as public ones, and whether the state could still use schools in short-term emergencies. DHHS said the language was broad, that they could not answer every legal question definitively, and that they would need input from public health and legal staff. No final vote on HB 71 was taken in the portion provided; the committee remained in discussion/work session mode after the amendment motion was withdrawn.

Transcript Highlights:

• It depends on each individual storm and what the impact is on that.
• Language added the required analysis Turman defending.
• So that's not right that that have an impact on.
• That is a major, major impact on the upper part of the program.
• That was last impacted last year because of curriculum.

Transcript Highlights:

• THE DEP IS HERE TODAY TO ADDRESS TWO ITEMS REQUESTED BY THIS COMMITTEE, ONE IS THE ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
• BEFORE I GET INTO THE ECONOMIC ANALYSIS I WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH BACKGROUND INFORMATION.
• SAME THING THAT'S PART OF THE STATUTE THAT IS BEFORE YOU TODAY, WE HAD TO DO THE SAME ANALYSIS AS PART
• THAT WOULD BE IMPACTED BY THIS RULE AND INDEED THE PEOPLE OF FLORIDA.
• IT ALSO HINGES UPON GOING THROUGH AND PROVIDING AN ANALYSIS OF PRE-IMPOSED CONDITIONS.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Last summer, regarding an economic impact and contribution analysis for state parks across the state
• We used two methodologies for the economic benefits. economic impact and economic contribution analysis
• With economic impact analysis, we're looking at out-of-state sources, so this is going to be out-of-state
• In any impact or contribution analysis, we're measuring these impacts in terms of changes to economic
• So on the fifth page of your presentation, you're discussing the economic impact analysis, and you're

Transcript Highlights:

• So based on that analysis, here are our recommendations.
• Okay, now I'll provide a summary of our funding gap analysis.
• And you can see that there's a 26% impact.
• We saw the same lasting impacts.
• So the other major impact is media.

Summary: The committee began with member introductions, then heard a presentation on a draft final report studying alternative funding mechanisms for sidewalks and related pedestrian infrastructure. Consultants said current local funding sources are insufficient, with most jurisdictions unable to complete planned sidewalk networks within 50 years. They evaluated four options: a sidewalk utility fee, a modified transportation benefit district sales tax, a new real estate excise tax option, and expanded stormwater fee use for ADA sidewalk ramps. The consultants recommended authorizing the modified TBD sales tax and new REET option, considering a sidewalk utility despite legal uncertainty, broadening any authorization to all pedestrian improvements, and not pursuing the stormwater fee option. Members asked about legal authority, fairness, revenue adequacy, and whether jurisdictions had been consulted; the presenters said state enabling legislation would likely be needed for a sidewalk utility and that fairness could be defined either by direct benefit or by need. The committee then received an update on the 2025 assessment of city transportation funding needs. The consultants reported that city transportation revenues have grown in some local and federal categories since 2019, but state revenues have remained relatively flat and smaller cities are especially affected by declining fuel tax revenues and limited tax bases. They estimated annual city transportation needs at $4.25 billion, average annual spending at $1.89 billion, and a funding gap of $2.37 billion, larger than in the prior study because of updated data, inclusion of system improvements, and higher preservation costs. Draft recommendations focused on reducing costs and improving efficiency, preserving and increasing state support, and expanding local funding options, including preservation-first spending, a permanent federal fund exchange program, streamlined review processes, better coordination with WSDOT, possible property tax flexibility, and exploration of new local tools. Members raised questions about design standards, the role of density and transit, federal compliance, and whether the report would identify specific consolidation or process changes. The committee also heard a project update on evaluating zero-emission vehicle and electrification programs funded by the Climate Commitment Act. Consultants said they had reviewed roughly 23 programs and projects across seven agencies and were now evaluating options to improve delivery, including process improvements, reorganizing programs, or consolidating governance and administrative functions. Early findings highlighted staffing shortages, duplication and variation across agencies, differing levels of risk, and the challenge of coordinating climate priorities across agencies with other core missions. Members asked about program outcomes, administrative costs, whether some programs should have exit strategies, and how to strengthen the EV Coordinating Council. Finally, WSDOT provided an implementation update on its new public-private partnership authority under SB 5801, saying work is underway to prepare governance, legal, policy, and organizational structures ahead of the January 1, 2027 effective date.

Transcript Highlights:

• GGRF funds should have significant funding to address these impacts.
• And I hope that ...to help protect them from the worst impacts of that.
• And it can help mitigate some of the impacts of the program.
• So, I mean, I don't think we have a full cost-effectiveness analysis.
• And that's what's made it hard for us to do any kind of analysis.

Summary: The Budget Subcommittee No. 4 hearing focused on the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) and cap-and-trade reauthorization, with members and panelists discussing how to balance climate goals, affordability, and legislative oversight. The chair emphasized the hearing as a broad review of past GGRF spending and future options, while the LAO outlined how GGRF revenues are generated, how variable they have been, and the tradeoffs between continuous appropriations and annual budget control. Two academic panelists, Dr. Kyle Meng and Danny Cullen Ward, argued that cap-and-trade remains an effective climate policy, but stressed that future revenue will depend heavily on market design, allowance allocation, and price levels. They also raised the idea that GGRF could be used more directly for affordability, especially by lowering electricity costs, and for targeted investments in technologies that the market would not otherwise support. Committee members pressed the panelists on where revenues come from, how much has actually been spent, and whether continuous appropriations reduce oversight. CARB staff said more than $33 billion has been generated to date and a little over $11–12 billion has been spent, with the rest committed or in process, and noted that project timelines can be lengthy. Members also asked about ways to lower electricity rates, reduce wildfire-related utility liabilities, and support electrification. The panelists said transportation fuels are the largest source of GGRF revenue, that industrial emitters receive a smaller share of free allowances, and that reducing wildfire liability and investing in grid-scale batteries could help lower costs and speed decarbonization. Public commenters largely urged the Legislature to preserve or expand continuous appropriations for specific climate programs. Speakers supported funding for nature-based solutions, natural and working lands, urban greening, agricultural climate solutions, waste and composting programs, clean transportation, AB 617 community air protection, clean cars, transit, affordable housing near transit, and dairy digesters. Several groups argued these programs are cost-effective, provide public health and affordability benefits, and should receive dedicated shares of GGRF. Others urged reducing free allowances and using more GGRF revenue to directly lower energy costs for households. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• So necessarily might not impact the clinical sites.
• and they're impacting our students, faculty, and staff.
• And it's also been shown to positively impact university retention and graduation rates.
• Page 7 of the committee analysis highlights some of the impacts from not having a coordinating body.
• The one I would like to highlight is our impact on students.

Summary: The Assembly Higher Education Committee heard a series of bills focused on expanding access to higher education, addressing workforce shortages, student housing, and labor standards on campus projects. AB 662 would create a South County Higher Education Task Force to explore a mixed-use, intersegmental institution in Chula Vista; supporters said South San Diego County is a “college desert,” while the bill passed on a due pass as amended motion to Appropriations. AB 885 would establish a College Access for All Fund to help make CSU and UC attendance more affordable; supporters cited student debt and affordability concerns, and it also passed to Appropriations. AB 730 would provide $15 million to help establish a medical school in the Central Valley to address physician shortages, and it advanced on a due pass motion. AB 1400 would let up to 15 community college districts pilot bachelor’s degrees in nursing; supporters argued it would expand affordable BSN access and keep students local, while CSU, UC, and other higher education groups opposed it as unnecessary and inconsistent with the master plan. The bill passed to Appropriations, with members raising questions about clinical placements, faculty shortages, and possible effects on associate-degree programs. The committee also considered AB 1235, which would require CSU design-build projects to use a skilled and trained workforce, aligning CSU with other public higher education construction standards. Supporters said it would improve safety, training, and local job opportunities, and the bill passed to Appropriations. AB 1247 would restrict contracting out of classified school and community college jobs unless workers meet training and qualification standards and would address pension and training concerns; supporters said it would protect students and classified employees, while school and college groups warned it would disrupt services and add unfunded mandates. The bill passed to Appropriations with one no vote. AB 1470, presented on behalf of Assemblymember Haney, would allow a portion of student housing revolving loan funds to be used for affordable student, faculty, and staff housing in downtown and commercial districts; it was discussed as a housing and downtown revitalization measure, but the committee held off on a motion pending more members. ACA 3, also on behalf of Haney, would require UC to offer limited down payment loans to eligible long-term support staff first-time homebuyers; it drew extensive support from UC workers and unions, while UC and business groups opposed it as costly and outside UC’s mission, and the measure was still under discussion at the end of the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• These were informed by 2020 analysis from our office.
• These are tended to have larger impacts on the valuation itself.
• These are tended to have a larger impacts on the valuation itself.
• Assumption changes impacted the valuation, in particular those four assumptions.
• There's a couple outliers, but for most plans, the impact was fairly small.

Summary: The Pension Funding Council met on June 23, 2026, for a work session that began with an overview of the Higher Education Supplemental Retirement Plan (SRP) and a 2025 accounting valuation of that plan. Staff explained that the SRP is a closed defined benefit supplement for higher education employees hired before the 2011 closure, with employer contributions currently pre-funding benefits in institution-specific trusts while institutions still pay benefits on a pay-as-you-go basis. The State Actuary’s office reported that the plan’s accounting position has improved, with combined market assets of about $245 million against $377 million in accrued liability, and that strong market performance since 2022 has increased the asset-to-liability ratio. The office emphasized that this was an educational accounting valuation, not a funding valuation for rate-setting. The council then received the 2025 actuarial valuation report for the state retirement systems. Actuaries reviewed the recent demographic experience study, noting updated assumptions for mortality, retirement, termination, and salary growth, and said the net impact on most plans was small. They reported that most plans’ funded ratios improved, with all plans at least 94% funded and several at or above 100%, and that contribution rates for the 2027–2029 biennium are generally lower than current rates. They also noted that future rates could be affected by market volatility as deferred gains are recognized over the next few years. During public comment, a representative of the Association of Washington Cities urged the council to consider rate reductions to help local governments facing budget pressures. In executive session, the council first approved a motion directing the Office of the State Actuary to perform an actuarial evaluation and analysis of each institution’s Higher Education Supplemental Retirement Plan, including institution-specific contribution rates, asset sufficiency, and funding policy options, due by July 1, 2028. The council then adopted the 2027–2029 pension contribution rates based on the 2025 actuarial valuation report. Both motions passed 5-0, with one member excused. The meeting concluded with no further business.