Transcript Highlights:

• Well, thank you, everyone, for the robust conversation.
• And while the law currently does allow an application process for leave to file a late claim, that process
• We are happy to have further conversations on that process.
• We're happy to have conditional conversations around the process for an extension, but based on the information
• But what this behavior is, is the conversion.

Summary: The committee heard several bills, with the most detailed discussion focused on AB 316, AB 251, AB 474, AB 1201, AB 464, and AB 614. AB 316 would prevent AI developers or deployers from arguing in civil cases that an AI system’s alleged autonomy absolves them of responsibility. Supporters framed it as a narrow guardrail to protect families, especially children, from harms like dangerous chatbots and deepfakes; opponents, including TechNet and the Chamber of Progress, raised concerns about possible strict-liability implications. The bill was moved out of committee to Privacy and Consumer Protection. AB 251 would let judges lower the burden of proof in elder abuse cases when a skilled nursing facility or RCFE intentionally destroys evidence. Supporters said the measure is needed because elder abuse victims are often unable to testify and records are vulnerable to spoliation, while opponents argued existing sanctions are sufficient and warned of more litigation. The bill passed, with committee members emphasizing the vulnerability of elder abuse victims. AB 474 sought to expand nonprofit home-sharing programs, including tax incentives for low-income homeowners and changes to housing law and lodger rules. Supporters said it would help older adults and low-income Californians avoid homelessness, but several members and the California Apartment Association raised concerns about removing lodger-law protections for homeowners; the author committed to keep working on the issue. The bill passed to Human Services. AB 1201 would give courts discretion to provide family reunification services to parents with certain violent felony convictions, rather than applying an automatic bypass. Supporters from Starting Over Inc. described personal experiences with permanent family separation and argued the bill would give parents a fair chance when the conviction is unrelated to child safety. Some members supported the measure but questioned whether domestic violence histories should be treated differently; the author said the bill still allows courts to deny services when reunification would endanger a child. The bill passed to Human Services. AB 464 addressed sexual abuse and retaliation in state prisons by extending reporting time after release, adding 90-day monitoring after reports, barring rehiring of confirmed abusers, and strengthening reporting and anti-retaliation rules. Survivors testified about abuse, retaliation, and failures in CDCR’s response; the bill passed to Appropriations. AB 614 would standardize the Government Claims Act filing deadline at one year for all claims. The author and supporters argued the current six-month deadline for injury and wrongful death claims is too short for victims to learn the process, find counsel, and gather evidence, while businesses often get a full year. A civil rights attorney and a family member of a deceased jail detainee testified in support, describing how the current deadline can block meritorious claims. The bill was presented for committee consideration as the hearing continued.

Transcript Highlights:

• opportunities to streamline our own processes.
• process.
• Than the application process.
• A very good context to the whole conversation.
• and ultra-processed foods, and offer more minimally processed, freshly prepared foods.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I had some conversations with the Assembly Member last night.
• I think that's a fair debate to have, a fair conversation.
• We are concerned about process.
• So that just happens to be where we are in our process.
• The open regulatory process that exists.

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Utilities and Energy heard several bills focused on grid reliability, affordability, clean energy infrastructure, and industrial decarbonization. AB 222, by Assemblymember Bauer-Kahan, would require more data reporting on data centers and aim to prevent ratepayers from bearing related grid costs; supporters said better information is needed to plan for rapidly growing electricity demand from AI and data centers, while opponents warned about privacy, security, trade-secret, and cost-shifting concerns. The bill passed the committee on a 13-4 vote, with the roll left open for absent members. AB 941, by Assemblymember Bonta, would impose a 270-day timeline for CPUC review of priority transmission projects to speed clean-energy infrastructure buildout. Supporters argued that transmission delays are slowing California’s climate goals and raising costs, while opponents raised concerns about CEQA process, staffing, and prioritization. The bill passed 15-0. AB 1191, by Assemblymember Tangipa, would make existing large hydroelectric facilities eligible for the Renewable Portfolio Standard; supporters framed it as a way to lower rates and ease affordability pressures, while opponents said it would undermine the purpose of the RPS by substituting existing resources for new renewable development. That bill failed on a 4-11 vote. AB 1280, by Assemblymember Garcia, would expand state grant programs to support thermal energy storage projects for industrial decarbonization. Supporters said it would help modernize manufacturing, cut pollution in disadvantaged communities, and preserve jobs, with broad support from environmental and clean manufacturing groups and no opposition testimony. The bill passed 17-0. AB 1117, by Assemblymember Schultz, would require the CPUC to offer optional dynamic electricity rate tariffs for customers to shift usage away from peak periods; supporters said it could lower bills and improve grid efficiency, while utilities said they were not opposed to the concept but wanted more flexibility and time in the regulatory process. That bill passed 14-0. The committee also approved its consent calendar and other noncontroversial items, with several measures moving forward unanimously.

Transcript Highlights:

• We had a good conversation last week about this bill.
• We've had good conversations.
• The provider credentialing process is important, but it's a process that has become increasingly burdensome
• It's going to help shepherd you through this process.
• But the process is the same, and our bill points to that process for those counties who are not allowing

Summary: The Assembly Health Committee heard a long series of health-related bills, with most measures focused on access to care, administrative simplification, and behavioral health. Early items included AB 583, allowing nurse practitioners to sign death certificates; AB 492, requiring DHCS to notify local governments when new alcohol or drug recovery facilities are licensed; and AB 280, which would tighten provider directory accuracy requirements, add enforcement benchmarks, and allow use of a centralized database. Testimony on AB 280 highlighted the harms of “ghost networks,” while insurers and some provider groups opposed the bill as written, arguing it placed too much responsibility on plans and did not fully address provider-side data problems. AB 280 passed on a roll call vote, and several other bills were placed on consent and approved. The committee also advanced AB 636, expanding Medi-Cal coverage for medically necessary diapers for children up to age 21 and lowering the age threshold for access; AB 1041, streamlining physician credentialing with a uniform form and 90-day review deadline; and AB 787, requiring health plans to help enrollees find in-network providers quickly when directories fail. Supporters of these bills emphasized family financial strain, delays in care, and the burden of administrative red tape, while opponents of AB 1041 and AB 280 raised concerns about provider participation, accuracy, and liability. All three measures were approved and sent to Appropriations. The committee then took up AB 4 and AB 29. AB 4 would allow income-eligible Californians to buy Covered California coverage regardless of immigration status, and AB 29 would authorize Medi-Cal reimbursement for community health workers and doulas conducting ACE screenings. Both bills drew strong support from immigrant-rights, health access, and community-based organizations, and both passed on roll call votes, with AB 4 receiving some no votes. The committee also approved AB 416, which would allow emergency physicians to place 5150 holds in certain circumstances; supporters said it would reduce delays and overcrowding in emergency departments, while Disability Rights California and others warned it could increase unnecessary involuntary hospitalization and transfers to locked facilities. Despite those concerns, the bill passed and was sent onward for further consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so that conversation is sort of always happening.
• So again, probably worth further conversation.
• So they fully and fairly participate in the sanctioning process.
• Yeah, I think there are conversations going on.
• I think there's a lot of conversation around that.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance held an oversight hearing on the California State University system covering enrollment, core operations, Title IX/civil rights, and basic needs. The Department of Finance said the Governor’s 2026-27 budget does not change CSU enrollment targets from the prior year and proposes a 5% ongoing General Fund increase for core operations as the final year of the compact. The Legislative Analyst’s Office recommended a lower resident undergraduate enrollment target than the Governor’s proposal, separate funding for enrollment growth rather than folding it into base, a smaller or no base increase tied more closely to inflation, earmarking some base funds for capital renewal, retiring deferred payments, and avoiding new multi-year compact commitments. CSU said enrollment has rebounded for three straight years, but growth is uneven across campuses, with several Northern California campuses still facing structural declines tied to demographics and community college pipelines. CSU described a multi-year reallocation plan shifting about 10,000 FTE and $89 million in ongoing funding toward higher-demand campuses, plus $40 million in one-time support, and said seven campuses submitted turnaround plans aimed at recovering enrollment over the next several years. The system highlighted strategies such as dual enrollment, guaranteed admission pathways with community colleges, outreach to high school students, retention and advising efforts, and new degree models for working adults and military-connected students. Members raised questions about how campus targets are set, whether the May Board of Trustees discussion will address a systemwide enrollment framework, and how CSU will manage future deficits if projected out-year funding does not materialize. On core operations and facilities, CSU said it faces about $320 million in mandatory cost increases in 2026-27 and is pursuing shared services, procurement consolidation, campus administrative sharing, and program redesigns to reduce costs. CSU and the LAO emphasized the system’s large deferred maintenance backlog, estimated at $8.6 billion, and discussed whether CSU’s bond/debt capacity is sufficient to address it; CSU requested up to $1.1 billion for deferred maintenance, while the administration did not propose new funding. The committee also heard CSU’s annual Title IX and civil rights update: CSU said it has implemented 15 of 16 State Auditor recommendations, has dedicated Title IX coordinators at every campus, is using a systemwide case management dashboard, and is piloting centralized investigations at five campuses. Finally, on basic needs, the Governor maintained current funding levels for food assistance/basic needs, rapid rehousing, and mental health. CSU reported heavy use of food pantries, CalFresh support, emergency housing, and counseling services, while warning that federal changes to CalFresh and related funding could make it harder to serve students in need.

Transcript Highlights:

• through<00:14:08.160> the good conversations and through the good conversations and through
• as it moves through the process.
• the process.
• process that takes time and costs money. process that takes time and costs money.
• And I welcome that conversation and I look forward to continuing that conversation.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Records and conversations.
• So thank you, Representative. appreciate that conversation we had um appreciate that conversation we
• We've had conversations recently that folks weren't invited to the conversation, so I'm making sure I
• We've had conversations recently that folks weren't invited to the conversation, so I'm making sure I
• We've had conversations recently that folks weren't invited to the conversation, so I'm making sure I

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Again, it's allocated through an RFP process, and NMAA has to go through that bidding process, which
• This is a conversation that has never been had in New Mexico around water—a conversation between NGOs
• With the planning and process of regional planning.
• Planning is not a one-and-done process; it is an ongoing iterative process.
• Conversation.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so we do look forward to continuing this conversation as we go through the budget process.
• Standardization of the intake process.
• This is the federal grievance process.
• Streamlining our budgetary processes.
• So with that, looking forward to future conversations, and as we continue on through this process until

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Human Services held a hearing on the Governor’s May Revision, with no votes taken. The first major discussion focused on child care and early education, including proposed reductions tied to federal Child Care and Development Fund and Proposition 64 revenue changes, the shift of reductions from general child care to the California Alternative Payment Program, the end of funding for prospective pay implementation, a 2.01% cost-of-living adjustment, child care infrastructure grants, and a proposal to increase administrative funding for alternative payment agencies. The Legislative Analyst’s Office generally supported removing prospective pay funding and urged caution on the administrative-rate shift, while also recommending more justification for the slot reduction approach and more detail on infrastructure grant alignment. Committee members strongly objected to eliminating about 6,000 child care slots, arguing the Legislature should preserve and expand child care access. The Department of Education supported the preschool QRIS block grant increase and the COLA but raised concerns about rate alignment for three- and four-year-olds and the lack of funding to maintain enrollment growth. The committee then reviewed trailer bill language affecting child care, including codifying age-based reimbursement categories, expanding documentation for enhanced inclusion rates, clarifying CalWORKs child care eligibility, aligning health and safety standards with federal requirements, coordinating disaster-related infrastructure funding, and updating oversight language. Administration officials said the proposals were intended to support the single reimbursement rate structure, improve safety compliance, and coordinate disaster recovery funding. LAO said it had no major initial concerns with the trailer bill language but would continue reviewing it. The hearing then turned to CalFresh and nutrition programs. CDSS described projected caseload declines, a one-time augmentation for county administration to implement federal H.R. 1 changes, a proposed reassessment schedule for county administrative funding, and updated estimates that H.R. 1 could cut CalFresh funding by $2.3 billion to $3.7 billion annually and affect about 500,000 people. Members pressed the administration on the impact of H.R. 1, the “chilling effect” on immigrant households, county workload, and whether the state should backfill federal cuts, especially for families with children subject to new work requirements. The committee also discussed a one-time CalFood augmentation, state administrative expense funding, staffing for H.R. 1 implementation, and a small increase to the CACFP meal reimbursement rate. Finally, the committee began IHSS items, including the impact of reinstating the Medi-Cal asset limit, automatic IHSS termination tied to Medi-Cal loss, and related savings and caseload estimates, with the administration explaining that these proposals would reduce eligibility and that there is no broad substitute for IHSS for many recipients.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our process is our process. I am not a delegate; I cannot change Title II.
• and process it.
• we're not processing multiple IGAs.
• We don't know if DFA changed the process or if IAD is the one that changed the process or this language
• We've always followed the same process.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is that the thought process? Yeah, that's how we're treating it.
• to take the manual process out, to take the procedural process out of these determinations, to make
• We obviously went through our budgeting process.
• And I was just having this conversation a couple hours ago.
• Thank you for having this important conversation.

Summary: The joint informational hearing focused on the impacts of H.R. 1 on California’s Medi-Cal program and on community health effects from recent immigration enforcement actions. Committee leaders said H.R. 1 would sharply reduce federal funding, increase administrative burdens, and worsen access to care, especially for Medi-Cal enrollees, immigrant families, rural communities, and reproductive health patients. The second half of the hearing examined how ICE raids and related federal actions are creating fear, reducing clinic and emergency department use, and disrupting children’s access to schools and early childhood education. Department of Health Care Services Director Michelle Bass outlined the main H.R. 1 provisions affecting Medi-Cal: work requirements, semiannual eligibility redeterminations, shorter retroactive coverage, new cost-sharing, limits on provider taxes and state-directed payments, reduced federal support for emergency and lawful immigrant coverage, and a one-year ban on Medicaid funding for prohibited abortion providers. She estimated millions could lose coverage, with tens of billions of dollars in federal funding at risk. Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California warned the defunding provision could force clinic closures, service reductions, and loss of access to family planning, STI testing, and cancer screenings. The California Hospital Association said the financing changes could cut hospital revenue by tens of billions over 10 years and threaten access, especially for rural and safety-net hospitals. The Western Center on Law and Poverty argued the law would increase churn, paperwork, and uninsured rates, disproportionately harming working adults and people experiencing homelessness. Committee members asked about implementation timelines, notification systems, administrative costs, the effect on immigrant eligibility, and whether California could delay or mitigate some provisions. Bass said the state was still assessing federal guidance, planning county and provider outreach, and exploring a possible delay for work requirements and a transition period for provider-tax changes. Members also discussed how state budget actions may need to be revisited in light of H.R. 1, and how California might preserve access through state-only funding or other policy changes. In the second panel, CHIRLA, Los Angeles County Department of Health Services, and the Children’s Partnership described the health consequences of immigration enforcement. Speakers said raids and data-sharing fears are causing anxiety, trauma, and avoidance of care, with Los Angeles County reporting declines in emergency, urgent care, and clinic visits after enforcement actions. The Children’s Partnership said school and early childhood absences are rising in some communities and that enforcement is undermining children’s emotional well-being and access to education. Members asked for more data and discussed possible state protections, telehealth, mobile care, and legal and policy responses to reduce fear and preserve access to health and education services.

Transcript Highlights:

• Have had also conversations, not in my testimony, but follow-up conversations with UND related to state
• rather than an executive process.
• And they are in the process of drafting their report from that process.
• So you go through the hiring process and the teaching process and getting them to do some work, but their
• Where does it flow through the process, right?

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And wouldn’t it have made sense to perhaps... conversations along the way. conversations along the way
• process process we<00:19:26.320> accept<00:19:26.720> it.
• re and respecting this process. re and respecting this process.
• , we're going to talk about uh process, we're going to talk about uh process, knowing<00:21:21.280
• years well beyond uh this conversation years well beyond uh this conversation about<00:46:58.000

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up Senate File 856, a bill to create a statewide Office of Inspector General to combat fraud. Representative Norris presented a delete-everything amendment that would keep most of the Senate bill but add more emphasis on fraud prevention, fully fund the office, avoid duplicating work already done by the BCA’s financial crimes division, and preserve subject-matter expertise by keeping some existing inspectors general in their agencies. He said the amendment would retain strong investigative powers, including subpoenas, while using the BCA for arrests, and he acknowledged his original version was likely too broad, so he planned to offer smaller amendments if needed. Chair Nash and other members challenged the DE on both process and substance. Nash said the amendment had not been shared with key stakeholders, noted that the Senate author had publicly distanced herself from it, and pointed to a governor’s office document saying the administration wanted a different approach than the Senate bill. He argued the Senate bill was a bipartisan, bicameral product and said the committee should be careful about accuracy and process. Representative Davis questioned Norris about the claim that the Senate bill was underfunded and about the governor’s role in selecting the inspector general, arguing that the governor should not have broad control over the office. Norris responded that the Senate bill’s fiscal note estimated roughly $12 million for the biennium, but the bill appropriated less than that amount, and he said the Constitution requires the governor to appoint the inspector general if the office is in the executive branch. He said the DE tried to preserve independence through a bipartisan advisory commission, Senate confirmation, a five-year term, restrictions on partisan activity, and removal only for cause with a public hearing. After debate from several members, the committee held a roll call and the DE failed on a 7-7 tie, so it was not adopted.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think the conversation is, to the point that Ms.
• I think it's a healthy part of the conversation.
• She's going to talk to us about the 2026 adequacy study process. 2026 adequacy study process.
• What's the process? Go ahead. Well, again, the process is always up to you all.
• What's the process? Go ahead. Well, again, the process is always up to you all.

Summary: The meeting began with approval of the previous minutes and then focused on an update from the Department of Education on early childhood programs, especially the state-funded Arkansas Better Chance (ABC) program. Secretary Jacob Oliva and Deputy Commissioner Stacey Smith said Arkansas had received a federal Preschool Development Grant and described ongoing work to review ABC slots, which have been flat for years at about 23,800 slots and roughly $114 million. They said about 1,000 slots statewide are currently unfilled despite a waiting list of more than 2,000 families, and the department is shifting toward paying based on enrollment rather than guaranteed slots. Members asked about school choice, income eligibility, year-round access, curriculum flexibility, transportation, and whether funding should be increased or rebalanced; the department said it is collecting data, may survey providers more formally, and is considering whether to modernize income thresholds, daily rates, and other program rules. The committee agreed to form an early childhood subcommittee and asked the Bureau of Legislative Research to help gather historical information on income limits and other program details. The second major portion of the meeting was a legal presentation on the framework for Arkansas school adequacy by BLR education attorney Taylor Lloyd. She reviewed the constitutional basis for a “general, suitable, and efficient” public school system, the Dupree and Lake View cases, and the principle that adequacy and equity are different but related: adequacy asks what resources are needed, while equity asks whether those resources are distributed fairly. She explained that the General Assembly must define adequacy, study it, and react to evidence over time, and that the current adequacy definition includes curriculum and career/technical frameworks, the 38 mandatory Carnegie units, state testing standards, and sufficient funding. She also described the matrix as a funding tool, not a spending mandate, and noted that categorical funds are separate from the matrix. BLR’s Elizabeth Bynum then gave the historical framework, tracing legislative responses from Dupree through Lake View and into the present. She highlighted major changes such as the creation of equalization funding, fiscal distress and academic distress laws, the adequacy study process, the Educational Adequacy Fund, facilities and transportation changes, declining enrollment and student growth funding, and later adjustments to teacher salaries, isolated funding, and categorical programs. She explained that the adequacy study has evolved through committee hearings, surveys, site visits, and outside consultants, and that recent changes include updates to accountability references and the addition or removal of certain funding categories. Members asked follow-up questions about how the matrix is used, whether homeschool or private-school funding raises comparable issues, whether stakeholders include private and homeschool participants, whether school board members should be surveyed, and whether the state should revisit average daily membership versus attendance-based funding. No votes were taken on the adequacy presentations, but the committee did agree to continue the early childhood discussion in a future subcommittee meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• I would like this to be a collaborative process.
• of those processes.
• If you know, for a second, I think process-wise, we might want to collapse some of those processes and
• But I think it will continue to be an ongoing process, and I think that's an ongoing process that happens
• We'll have that conversation too. All right.

Keywords: Code Commission, 976, house, all

Summary: The Virginia Code Commission met on June 3, 2026, approved the November 17, 2025 minutes, and adopted an electronic meeting policy for July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2027. The commission also welcomed a new member, Travis Hill, the Attorney General’s designee, and later approved the 2026 work plan for the Administrative Law Advisory Committee (ALAC), which will continue work on updating Articles 1 and 2 of the Administrative Process Act, the preservation of error doctrine, and the harmless error doctrine. A major discussion focused on a plain-English forms initiative raised by Justice McCullough. Members agreed to create a work group including clerks, the Office of the Executive Secretary, judges, and practitioners, and to survey circuit and general district court clerks for the most problematic forms as a starting point. The goal is to identify code changes and possible plain-language alternatives that could improve court forms and user understanding, with the commission approving that next step by motion. The commission also approved extending its contract with LexisNexis for three years, with one member abstaining because of a firm relationship with the parent company. It accepted and acted on an Attorney General opinion regarding Virginia Beach charter provisions, directing staff to update the law portal to reflect the opinion’s conclusions about which sections were repealed or remain historical. In addition, the commission noted that the Title 30 recodification passed with a reenactment clause and will require a work group and further review next year; it also heard a request from the Virginia Electoral Board Association to consider Title 24.2 for future recodification, but took that under advisement for later discussion. The meeting ended with plans to poll for an August or early September meeting and to discuss a separate “shall” bill referral at the next meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:03:40.080> that we needed to do, the conversation that we needed to do, the conversation
• again I do appreciate the conversations again I do appreciate the conversations on<00:53:35.200>
• First District processes First District processes 40%<01:17:58.560> 40%<01:17:59.280> of
• > with<01:22:55.760> our have this conversation with our have this conversation with our
• <01:23:22.400> do<01:23:22.480> with conversations about what we do with conversations

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• where we can process permits. where we can process permits.
• process um is for all of us to look at. process um is for all of us to look at.
• <01:30:47.360> legislative<01:30:48.000> process during that process legislative process
• and to and the septic conversion goals. and to and the septic conversion goals.
• improving the building permit process. improving the building permit process.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:12:11.959> from continuation of our conversation from continuation of our conversation
• sir everybody recalls the conversation sir everybody recalls the conversation from<00:40:47.920>
• those conversations those conversations and<01:11:25.719> consider<01:11:26.040> some<
• and we've had had several conversations and we've had had several conversations over<01:13:26.679
• So we kicked off conversations in the interim, and we've continued those conversations through today.

Keywords: Meeting start 00:06:05 Roll Call 00:06:33 HB 152 Discussion 00:07:55 HB 152 PHS 2 Vote 00:10:12 HB 545 Discussion HB 545 PHS 1 Vote 00:13:47 HB 606 Discussion 00:15:15 HB 606 Vote 00:16:32 HJR 30 Discussion HJR Vote 00:19:07 HJR 32 Discussion 00:20:25 HJR 32 PHS 1 Vote 00:23:11 HJR 34 Discussion 00:25:04 HJR 34 PHS 1 Vote 00:28:50 HJR 46 Discussion 00:30:09 HJR 46 Vote 00:34:15 HJR 53 Discussion 00:35:40 HJR 53 Vote 00:38:55 HJR 54 Discussion 00:40:15 HJR 54 Vote 00:40:50 HB 546 Discussion 00:42:15 HB 546 PHS 1 Vote 00:46:15 HB 605 Discussion 00:47:38 HB 605 PHS 1 Vote 00:52:10 HB 694 Discussion 00:53:46 HB 694 Vote 01:07:47 HB 695 Discussion Only 01:10:20, 958, all

Summary: The House Standing Committee on Appropriations and Revenue met on February 25 and considered a series of bills and joint resolutions, mostly involving appropriations, capital projects, and local infrastructure funding. The committee first adopted PHS 2 and passed House Bill 152, which creates a Medicaid supplemental payment program for public ground ambulance providers; the sponsor said the substitute ensures no state general fund dollars will be used and that local agencies must identify a funding source for any required match. HB 152 was reported favorably on a 20-0 vote. The committee also passed House Bill 545, the annual claims bill, after members confirmed all executive-branch claims were included; it was reported favorably on a 21-0 vote. House Bill 606, requiring reporting for general obligation bonds, also passed unanimously and was reported favorably. The committee then took up several joint resolutions tied to capital and infrastructure spending. House Joint Resolution 30, concerning water projects, was described as implementing ranked projects under the Waters program administered by KIA and was reported favorably on a 21-0 vote. House Joint Resolution 32, concerning school facilities construction, was amended by PHS 1 and advanced after discussion referencing the Auditor’s report and questions about a Johnson County Schools expenditure; it also passed 21-0. House Joint Resolution 34, relating to contingent appropriations for KCTCS, was amended by PHS 1 and advanced after testimony outlining three projects in Somerset, Jefferson Community and Technical College, and Glasgow; it passed 21-0. House Joint Resolution 46, for local road projects, was described as funding the highest-scoring local road requests from a larger pool of applications and passed 21-0. The committee also advanced House Joint Resolution 53, authorizing release of funds for KSU’s Health Sciences Center project, after KSU officials said the building is needed for nursing and allied health programs and promised a business plan report by November 1, 2025; it passed 21-0. House Joint Resolution 54, authorizing funds related to the State Fair Board, also passed unanimously. Later, the committee considered House Bill 546, which revises the local roads and streets program by adding a DOT-developed scoring system, monthly reporting, a match requirement, and a $500,000 project cap; members asked about the cap and were told larger projects should be handled through other mechanisms. HB 546 was reported favorably on a 21-0 vote. Finally, House Bill 605, a technical corrections and update bill for the local economic relief grant program, was amended by PHS 1 and discussed as expanding eligibility, including to the Delta Regional Authority and certain local-affiliated applicants; the transcript cuts off before the final vote on HB 605.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I look forward to your questions and having that robust conversation as to the process and what improvements
• Those are very difficult conversations, very emotional conversations.
• Those are very difficult conversations, very emotional conversation.
• I mean, it's a very important conversation and obviously an ongoing conversation, and we will all continue
• I mean, it's a very important conversation and obviously an ongoing conversation.

Summary: The Pre-K through 12 Budget Subcommittee met to review how Florida’s Education Finance Program (FEFP) works, receive an update from the Department of Education on the October 2024 FTE survey and third FEFP calculation, and hear from three county superintendents about forecasting enrollment and reconciling scholarship students. The chair explained that FEFP is funded by both state and local dollars, is recalculated multiple times during the year, and is now closely tied to school choice policy. Department staff said the third calculation was still being rerun but should be completed soon, and described the forecasting process as collaborative among districts, DOE, and the Education Estimating Conference. Superintendents from Polk, St. Lucie, and Hendry counties said enrollment shifts, especially students moving to Family Empowerment Scholarships, homeschooling, or private schools, make budgeting and staffing difficult. They said districts often must hold back funds to protect against midyear losses, which affects collective bargaining, staffing, transportation, and classroom organization. Several members raised concerns about duplicate counting, transparency, and whether students receiving scholarship funds can also remain in district classrooms. DOE said districts can access scholarship information through a secure portal and that scholarship funding organizations are paid quarterly, with a new process requiring certification and possible future payment adjustments to reduce duplication. The superintendents urged better real-time tracking of students through a statewide ID or student information system and suggested scholarship students should be funded separately from district FEFP calculations. Members also discussed whether more frequent or daily attendance-based calculations would improve accuracy, though some warned that daily attendance could create new problems for high-poverty districts. The committee also briefly discussed categoricals, including mental health and ESE funding, with DOE saying it evaluates programs through studies, reporting requirements, and legislative direction. No votes were taken; the meeting ended with a motion to rise and adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• I appreciate the conversation.
• We've been having lots of conversations with the opposition, and we'll continue to have those conversations
• If the problem is the lengthy process, why not address the lengthy process instead of completely wiping
• any conversion kit moving forward?
• This is a transferable process.

Keywords: 987, senate, all