Transcript Highlights:

• , on April 26, last month, implemented a major project release with functionality for the AHSC and CDBG

Transcript Highlights:

• But CDBG-R funding for programs like that and other programs, these municipalities, and I'm talking about

Summary: The joint Senate and Assembly select committee hearing focused on the challenges facing California nonprofits in 2025 and possible state responses. Opening remarks emphasized the sector’s size and importance, the impact of federal funding disruptions and tax policy changes, and the need for stronger public-private partnerships, especially in disaster response and recovery. Witnesses from community foundations, food banks, Cal OES, long-term recovery groups, CalNonprofits, and nonprofit finance organizations described funding uncertainty, delayed reimbursements, reduced indirect cost coverage, staffing strain, and the effects of climate disasters and immigration-related fear on service delivery. Testimony highlighted several policy ideas, including advance payments for state grants and contracts, prompt payment standards, sustainable indirect cost rates, contract flexibility in emergencies, streamlined registration and reporting, and a possible new Office of Nonprofit Empowerment to serve as a central point of contact and coordination within state government. Speakers also described how nonprofits and VOAD networks support wildfire response and long-term recovery, but noted that recovery groups often lack stable operating funding even when they are recognized as best practice. A food bank leader described federal food aid cuts and disruptions to deliveries, while other witnesses stressed that nonprofits are increasingly forced to use reserves, loans, or service reductions to manage cash flow gaps. Committee members generally expressed support for the sector and asked how the state could better partner with nonprofits during both disasters and budget crises. Several members raised the possibility of incremental steps if full legislative changes are not immediately feasible, and witnesses suggested pilots, better sharing of best practices, and stronger state leadership on payment timelines. Public commenters echoed the need for better contracting practices, support for community-based organizations, and attention to nonprofit worker compensation and protections. No formal votes or committee actions were taken in the hearing, which concluded with adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• But CDBG-R funding for programs like that and other programs—these municipalities, and I'm talking about

Summary: The joint Senate and Assembly Select Committee hearing focused on the nonprofit sector’s mounting challenges in 2025 and possible state responses. Opening remarks emphasized the sector’s size and importance in California, the impact of federal funding disruptions and new federal tax policy, and the need for stronger public-private coordination, especially during disasters. Witnesses and members repeatedly pointed to nonprofits as essential providers of food, housing, health, education, environmental, and emergency services, while warning that sudden funding losses are forcing layoffs, service cuts, and operational instability. Testimony from community foundations and food bank leaders described how federal cuts, delayed reimbursements, and disaster-related demand are straining nonprofits. Monica White of Food Share Ventura County said H.R. 1 and USDA food cancellations are worsening hunger needs, while immigration enforcement fears are keeping some families from seeking help. Abby Browning of Cal OES outlined how the state coordinates with nonprofits, philanthropy, and businesses through VOADs and long-term recovery groups in wildfire response. Bruce Yerman of the Camp Fire Collaborative said recovery groups are effective but lack dedicated funding, and urged flexible spending, sustainable support, and streamlined partnerships. The second half of the hearing focused on institutional reforms, including a proposed Office of Nonprofit Empowerment, advance payments, prompt payment, and higher indirect cost coverage. Jeff Green of CalNonprofits argued for a central state office to coordinate policy, technical assistance, and interagency alignment. Annie Chang of Nonprofit Finance Fund cited survey data showing widespread late payments, low cash reserves, and indirect cost rates below federal guidance. Alfredo Cruz Jr. of Community Resource Project described how reimbursement-only contracts, delayed payments, and underfunded overhead create cash-flow crises and staffing problems. Members discussed possible interim steps, including expanding advance pay, improving payment timeliness, modeling best practices, and using state leadership to spotlight nonprofit needs. The hearing ended with public comment from nonprofit, labor, and advocacy representatives, and no votes or formal actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• The CDBG-DR action plan was approved in late June 2025. $1.6 billion in disaster recovery funds was awarded
• The<00:20:35.280><c> CDBG-DR</c><00:20:36.200><c> action</c><00:20:36.560><c> plan</c><00:20:37.120><
• c> was</c><00:20:37.280><c> approved</c><00:20:37.680><c> in</c> The CDBG-DR action plan was approved
• in The CDBG-DR action plan was approved in late<00:20:38.080><c> June</c><00:20:38.400><c> 2025.

Transcript Highlights:

• She added that her experience with CDBG-DR is that it has been very large infusions of money into hurricane
• Dan reminds me that, on the previous question, CDBG is all over at DEED, so if there’s CDBG-DR, it’s

Committee: Senate Housing and Homelessness Prevention

Transcript Highlights:

• The other thing we saw this year is the administration moving more aggressively to say things like CDBG

Committee: Senate Senate Committee on Intergovernmental Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• And we're doing that now across a number of capital programs through Curb, CDBG, the early learning facilities

Committee: House Capital Budget

Summary: The Capital Budget Committee met on December 4 and heard presentations from the Department of Commerce, the Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO), and a consultant on the School Construction Assistance Program (SCAP) study. Commerce described its $5 million pilot under SB 5200 to reduce barriers for historically excluded community organizations and local governments, using trusted community messengers and technical assistance; officials said 18 organizations received readiness funding and 79 smaller projects were also supported. Commerce emphasized persistent barriers such as match requirements, reimbursement-based payments, site-control rules, insurance and audit costs, and extensive contracting requirements, and said it is responding with more outreach, digital modernization, internal process improvements, and planned innovation centers. Members asked about small business support, housing program placement, outreach in Eastern Washington, and tribal engagement, and Commerce said it would share contact and demographic information and continue follow-up. RCO reported on its equity work and implementation of a 2021-23 proviso directing it to reduce barriers and improve equitable delivery of grants. The agency said it had already made changes before the proviso, including a small-communities carve-out in youth athletic facilities, stipends for advisory committee members, and match reductions in some programs. Its equity review recommended prioritizing high-need areas, changing scoring criteria, improving applicant capacity, and funding projects that address broader community challenges. RCO said it has since updated grant criteria, added objective measures, aligned application questions, expanded technical assistance, and launched the Planning for Recreation Access program, which funded 54 projects in 34 counties. It also described the Community Outdoor Athletic Facilities program, which did not require match and drew broad interest, with about $200 million in applications across COAF and youth athletic facilities. Members raised concerns about access to information and application complexity, and RCO said it is expanding outreach, advisory committee diversity, and support for outdoor learning programs. The final presentation summarized the SCAP planning study and proposed nine policy changes to address school facility funding challenges. The report found that construction costs have risen faster than SCAP support, many districts have limited debt capacity, and local bond/levy approvals have become harder to secure. Proposed solutions included stronger planning support, a new minor modernization category, use of unused biennial SCAP funds for faster deployment, an education-specification prototype, a SCAP enhancement program for low-capacity districts, acceptance of all non-SCAP local funding, phased modernization, streamlined D-form and reimbursement processes, and revisions to the SCAP formula to better reflect grade-band differences, enrollment projections, and regional cost variation. Committee members said some recommendations could be implemented by OSPI in the near term and asked for supporting documentation on the application and funding formulas. The committee took no formal vote and adjourned after the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• And we're doing that now across a number of capital programs through Curb, CDBG, the early learning facilities

Summary: The Capital Budget Committee heard presentations from the Department of Commerce, the Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO), and a consultant on the School Construction Assistance Program (SCAP) study. Commerce officials described their agency’s role in housing, energy, local government, broadband, and other capital programs, and reported on a $5 million pilot under Senate Bill 5200 that used trusted community messengers and technical assistance to help historically excluded organizations prepare for capital funding. They said 18 organizations received direct support and 79 smaller projects were also funded, but emphasized that statutory match rules, reimbursement-based payments, site-control requirements, insurance and audit costs, and extensive contracting rules remain major barriers. Commerce outlined efforts to expand outreach, digital modernization, internal contracting improvements, tribal MOUs, and innovation centers, and members asked about small business support, housing program placement, and outreach to Eastern Washington and communities of color. RCO described its grant programs for recreation, conservation, education, and salmon/orca recovery, and reviewed equity work done before and after a 2021-23 proviso. The agency had already created a small-communities carve-out in youth athletic facilities, piloted stipends for advisory committee members, and reduced match requirements where allowed. Under the proviso, RCO completed an equity review and a planning program that funded 54 projects across 34 counties, with many applicants being new or long-absent grantees. Staff said the review led to changes in scoring criteria, clearer application guidance, more objective data measures, expanded technical assistance, and targeted community engagement. Members asked about application burden, project sizes, outreach, and how the agency is broadening participation and representation on advisory committees. The final presentation summarized a planning study on SCAP, which examined rising construction costs, fragmented grant programs, local funding barriers, and uneven district capacity. The report recommended nine major changes, including stronger planning support, a new minor-modernization category, a mechanism to use unused funds more quickly, an education-specification prototype, a SCAP enhancement program for low-capacity districts, acceptance of non-SCAP funds, phased modernization, streamlined D-form and reimbursement processes, and revisions to the SCAP formula to better account for grade-band differences, enrollment projections, and regional cost factors. Additional recommendations included ongoing monitoring and evaluation, facilities-impact reviews, matching SCAP increases to construction-cost inflation, earlier locking of funding estimates, flexible program spaces, and updated statewide building-condition assessments. No votes were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Which is why yesterday I introduced my CDBG-DR, or AAA, legislation, the first in a series of bills to
• Which is why yesterday I introduced<02:15:52.960><c> my</c><02:15:53.280><c> CDBG</c><02:15:54.560><c
• > DR</c><02:15:55.199><c> or</c><02:15:55.679><c> AAA</c> introduced my CDBG DR or AAA introduced my
• CDBG DR or AAA legislation,<02:15:57.119><c> the</c><02:15:57.360><c> first</c><02:15:57.520><c> in</

Bills: HB9238 , HB8340 , HB8467 , HB8464 , HB8312 , HB7892

Keywords: financial management, accountability, government oversight, taxpayer funds, federal agencies, budget, performance metrics, improper payments, fraud prevention, payment integrity, government waste, waste, fraud, and abuse, financial loss, federal spending, federal programs, OMB Circular A-123, Do Not Pay Initiative, Treasury Department, Office of Management and Budget, Inspector General

Transcript Highlights:

• The CDBG program's main aim is to expand economic opportunity in rural Texas.

Committee: Senate Water, Agriculture and Rural Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• Ninety-one percent of this agency is other charges, and that's due to the grants, major fines, and CDBG

Committee: House Appropriations

Summary: The committee began a series of House Appropriations budget hearings focused on the fiscal year 2026-2027 executive budget, the preamble, and the executive department. Staff presented revenue and spending trends showing projected declines in revenues alongside increasing expenditures, with members emphasizing the need for a standstill budget and additional efficiencies. The House Fiscal Division also reviewed the FY25 surplus and FY26 excess, the constitutional uses of surplus funds, and the overall FY27 budget structure, including the distinction between discretionary and non-discretionary spending. The commissioner of administration described the administration’s use of one-time money, efficiency reviews, and budget reductions, while members asked about revenue forecasts, the motor vehicle sales tax dedication, corporate tax changes, and the impact of federal policy changes on state costs, especially SNAP and Medicaid administration. The committee then moved through several executive department agencies. The Division of Administration presentation covered its budget, vacancies, debt service, and reductions tied to statewide adjustments and efficiency measures. GOSEP’s functions were described as transferred into the Department of Military Affairs under Act 262 of 2025, and military officials outlined the new combined structure, emergency response duties, overseas deployments, youth programs, and concerns about future federal funding. The Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority reviewed its largely dedicated funding and explained that large apparent balances reflect long-term project planning and multi-year capital work. The Office of the State Inspector General presented a budget increase for consulting services tied to the governor’s DOGE-style efficiency initiative, and the inspector general said the effort had identified nearly $1 billion in savings across the executive branch, largely through eligibility reviews in Medicaid and SNAP and implementation of prior audit recommendations. Members raised questions throughout about how budget figures were calculated, why some totals appeared to rise while state general fund support fell, and how federal changes would affect state agencies. There were also questions about the transition of GOSEP into Military Affairs, the status of school safety centers, and whether the new structure would change local emergency responsibilities. No formal votes or amendments were taken during the portion provided; the meeting consisted of presentations, explanations, and member questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• That does not count CDBG-DR. It does not count My Safe Florida Home.

Committee: Senate Banking and Insurance

Summary: The Banking and Insurance Committee heard a series of presentations focused on mitigation, flood and wind resilience, and insurance discounts. Kevin Guthrie of the Florida Division of Emergency Management outlined several funding streams for mitigation, including federal Hazard Mitigation Grant Program dollars, BRIC grants, flood mitigation assistance, and the state hurricane loss mitigation program. He emphasized the new Elevate Florida initiative, which will use about $400 million initially to elevate or reconstruct flood-prone homes, starting with National Flood Insurance Program properties and severe repetitive-loss homes, with no current per-home cap. Guthrie said the state will contract directly with licensed vendors and aims to reduce future flood losses, lower insurance costs, and keep properties on the tax rolls rather than relying on buyouts. Insurance Commissioner Mike Yaworski described Florida’s windstorm mitigation discount program, explaining that the 1802 inspection form is used to assess a home’s overall “envelope” and determine statutory discounts. He said the office is updating the program based on a new wind loss study, with likely changes including greater recognition of roof types such as metal roofs and possible territorial risk adjustments. He also said the Legislature now requires the office to revisit the study every five years. Stephen Fielder of the Department of Financial Services reported on My Safe Florida Home, noting that the program offers inspections and grants for roof and opening protections, has completed more than 100,000 inspections, and has reimbursed hundreds of millions of dollars. He said the department has validated its discount calculations with insurers and that the program is intended to help homeowners reduce premiums through verified mitigation work. Michael Newman of the Insurance Institute for Business and Home Safety said Florida’s building code is nationally leading and that post-Ian surveys found no wind-driven structural damage in buildings built after adoption of the code. He argued that mitigation should be treated as a system, not isolated upgrades, and suggested adding Fortified designation to the state’s mitigation form to better document verified resilience improvements. Bill Truex, a county commissioner and builder, stressed the need to educate homeowners about floodproofing and roof choices, citing examples where flood panels prevented damage and noting that asphalt shingles often do not last as long in Florida as their marketing suggests. In panel discussion, senators asked about program eligibility, outreach to elderly and digitally challenged residents, contractor vetting, roof-life disclosures, and whether flood insurance should be more broadly required. Officials said outreach will include call centers and in-person assistance, and several participants urged better consumer disclosure and more data-driven guidance on roof and mitigation choices.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then federal funds is basically grant funds that come from, of course, FEMA, TANF, CDBG block grants

Summary: The House Ways and Means Committee met on March 10, 2026, for a series of informational presentations rather than bill hearings. House Fiscal Division staff reviewed the state’s tax structure, the 2024 third special session tax reform package, and the Revenue Estimating Conference process. They explained the move to a 3% flat individual income tax, a 5.5% flat corporate income tax, the higher standard deduction and retirement-income exclusion, the repeal of several deductions and credits, the repeal of the corporate franchise tax, and the expansion of the sales tax base to certain digital goods. Staff also walked through tax exemption data, showing the size of exemptions relative to collections, and discussed forecasted revenue gaps in the out years, including the effect of the scheduled sales tax rate reduction and the return of transportation-related revenues to their prior dedication. Members asked about declining mineral revenues, digital sales tax collections, corporate collections, and the impact of tax credits and exemptions. Division of Administration and Legislative Fiscal Office staff said lower oil and gas prices, long-term production declines, and the timing of corporate payments were major factors in revenue trends, and that it will take at least another year or two of tax returns to fully understand the reform’s effects. They emphasized that corporate collections are still below the $600 million threshold that affects the state general fund and Revenue Stabilization Fund, though the forecast remains $900 million. The committee also discussed surplus and excess revenues, the distinction between discretionary and non-discretionary spending, and how current-year and prior-year balances are allocated under the constitution. A significant portion of the meeting focused on the relationship between Ways and Means and Appropriations. Chairman McFarland stressed that new fiscal-note bills can force cuts elsewhere if revenue is not available, and urged members to coordinate early with fiscal staff before advancing costly legislation. Members also asked how pending constitutional amendments on teacher pay and inventory tax might affect the budget; staff said the teacher stipend proposal is not currently funded in the executive budget and that the inventory tax proposal would mainly affect local governments and any reimbursements from the Revenue Stabilization Fund if approved. The committee then heard from Louisiana Economic Development Secretary Susan Bouchoux, who reported strong results from recent reforms, including $92 billion in capital investment, 37,000 new jobs, a record year of announcements, a top-10 corporate tax climate ranking, and a pipeline of 189 active projects representing nearly 42,000 potential jobs and $280 billion in potential investment. Members praised LED’s work and discussed the need to pair economic development with workforce training, infrastructure, and predictable tax policy.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then federal funds is basically grant funds that come from, of course, FEMA, TANF, CDBG block grants

Committee: House Ways & Means

Transcript Highlights:

• Administration. 91% of this agency is other charges, and that's due to the grants, major FEMA, and CDBG

Committee: House Appropriations

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, and this also involves CDBG community development block grant disaster recovery dollars as well as
• The CDBG may be funding roads and that kind of stuff.

Summary: The meeting began with routine business, including welcoming new committee member Senator Reginald Thomas, approving the minutes, and receiving a correspondence report on several information items. Those items included University of Kentucky research equipment funding, UK capital project funding using federal/private funds, debt issues from McGoffin County and Owen County school districts, lease modifications by the Division of Real Properties, asset preservation project revisions at Eastern Kentucky University and Northern Kentucky University, and Kentucky Communications Network Authority (KCNA) information on Kentucky Wired critical infrastructure. The main discussion focused on a dispute over the Kentucky Wired communication shelters, or “huts,” and related payments under KCNA’s agreement with Asellicom/Excel. Brad Kilby of Asellicom testified that KCNA had not paid for the huts, that Asellicom had not received the alleged $8 million or any later payment, and that Asellicom remained the legal owner. Committee members pressed him on whether payment had been received, whether anyone else might have received it, and whether the lawsuit or dispute resolution process clarified the issue. Kilby said no payment had been received and that the matter was part of ongoing litigation. KCNA Executive Director Doug Hendricks and General Counsel Adam Atkins then testified. They said a certified check for $8.5 million was mailed in July, based on the Finance and Administration Cabinet secretary’s determination that $8.5 million was due under the model procurement code, even though KCNA had initially requested about $12 million to cover a worst-case estimate. They said the contract allowed payment in full or in tranches, that the huts were completed and operational, and that KCNA had not received documentation supporting Asellicom’s higher $10.1 million claim. Members expressed frustration over the missing check and the broader implications for Kentucky Wired, and one member requested that the committee obtain all agency requests related to KCNA/Kentucky Wired since inception; the co-chairs said they would look into making that information available. No formal vote was taken on the dispute during the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator Nichols knows very well that we get transportation grants, airport grants, HUD grants, and CDBG

Bills: SB434 , SB844 , SB898 , SB1177 , SB1214 , SB1454 , SB1920 , SB1927 , SB1935 , SB1965 , SB2010 , SB2046 , SB2068 , SB2073 , SB2183 , SB2260 , SB3034 , SB907

Committee: Senate Local Government

Transcript Highlights:

• One is the Community Development Block Grant Program, the CDBG program.

Transcript Highlights:

• services through federal funding, allocating about $22 million from 2019 to 2025 from programs such as CDBG

Summary: The committee heard a series of child and family services bills, with testimony from authors, county officials, advocates, and members of the public. AB 2083 would authorize a regional child care special district for Marina Valley and Paris; there was no public opposition, but a vice chair raised concerns about lack of outreach to Riverside County and possible added fees for residents. The bill was held pending quorum and later noted as enjoying a due pass recommendation, though no final roll was taken in the excerpt. AB 1579, which expands the Children’s Crisis Continuum Pilot Program to allow additional CDSS-approved residential models, drew strong support from San Francisco County, Seneca Family of Agencies, and several counties and advocacy groups, who argued the current crisis residential model is financially and operationally unworkable and leaves youth in hospitals or emergency departments. The Youth Law Center and allied organizations opposed the bill, saying it departs from the original small, community-based crisis model and could lead to more institutional care. The committee passed the bill 6-0 to Appropriations. AB 1628 would extend California’s safe surrender window for newborns from 72 hours to 30 days. The author and fire service supporters said the change would better reflect postpartum recovery and help prevent unsafe abandonment; there was no opposition, and the bill passed 6-0. AB 1634, dealing with the “Kids” specialty license plate program, sought to raise plate fees and revise distribution formulas to generate more revenue for child safety and child care programs. Supporters said the update would modernize outdated 1992 pricing and expand county access, while a committee member objected that the bill would reallocate funds away from state agencies and private nonprofits; the bill was moved on a 5-0 vote with some members not voting. AB 1643 would streamline child support enrollment by having courts transmit support orders directly to child support agencies unless a custodial parent opts out. Supporters said automatic enrollment would reduce poverty and remove paperwork barriers, while opponents warned it could undermine parent choice and create problems for families with sensitive circumstances. The committee passed the bill 6-0. AB 1708 would require regions receiving HHAP homelessness funds to more meaningfully engage smaller cities; many city officials supported it as a way to include jurisdictions that are doing local homelessness work, while Los Angeles’ mayor’s office opposed it. The bill passed 5-0. AB 2395 would standardize access to the child support debt reduction program; supporters described it as a way to help low-income obligors escape uncollectible government-owed debt, while receiving parents and child support agencies warned it could reduce money owed to families and needs more work. The bill passed 4-0. The committee then began AB 1914, which would require local governments to plan for child care in general plans; supporters framed child care as essential infrastructure, while at least one member raised concerns about state mandates on local jurisdictions, and the excerpt ends before any vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• tax-exempt bonds, which allow developers to borrow at lower interest rates, federal block grants like CDBG

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Housing Finance and Affordability held its first hearing of 2025 to examine California’s housing finance system, with opening remarks emphasizing the state’s severe housing shortage, high costs, and the need for practical recommendations to the Legislature and Governor. Co-chairs described the committee as an educational and problem-solving forum focused on financing housing production, first-time homeownership, mixed-income developments, and affordability across the income spectrum. Witnesses from state agencies and the development sector were invited to explain how housing is financed and where the system is breaking down. Panelists from the California Housing Partnership, the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency, the Tax Credit Allocation Committee/State Treasurer’s Office, CalHFA, and Related outlined the “capital stack” used to finance affordable housing, stressing that projects typically rely on multiple public and private sources, including federal and state low-income housing tax credits, tax-exempt bonds, state subsidies, local funds, and rental income. Speakers noted that affordable housing rents generally cannot support full project costs without public subsidy, and that recent federal changes—especially the expansion of the 4% and 9% tax credit programs and the reduction of the bond financing threshold for 4% credits—should allow California to finance substantially more units. CalHFA also described its homeownership programs, including My Home, Dream For All, and disaster-related mortgage assistance, as well as its multifamily lending and bond issuance programs. Several witnesses and committee members emphasized that the system remains too complex, too slow, and underfunded. They pointed to the need for more state funding, a housing bond, a permanent funding source, and better coordination among agencies, while also citing recent streamlining efforts such as AB 434’s SuperNOFA, AB 519’s one-stop-shop working group, and the planned California Housing and Homeless Agency reorganization. Members raised concerns about equity, access, missing-middle housing, gender and racial disparities, and whether current programs adequately serve extremely low-income households and those at risk of homelessness. No formal votes or actions were taken during the hearing; the discussion ended with committee members and witnesses agreeing that both funding and administrative reform are needed to increase production and improve affordability.