Transcript Highlights:

• We do data analysis, tech and technical support throughout the state of Minnesota underneath our Veteran
• aid and our assist training we do first aid and our assist training we do data<00:03:59.040> analysis
• Tech and Technical Support data analysis Tech and Technical Support um<00:04:02.079> throughout
• <00:16:06.680> and<00:16:06.959> we they're doing landscape analysis and we they're
• doing landscape analysis and we want<00:16:07.160> to<00:16:07.519> make<00:16:07.639>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Both these items are critical as we go through the analysis of what we have at the state fairgrounds.
• Well, it seems as though they've gone through what I envision now is the proper analysis.
• I believe originally it was a brief analysis of what we needed, and then they came back and gave a more
• thorough, brought in the vendors, a more thorough analysis of what it would cost to get what we need
• But from what I'm seeing now, it certainly makes sense to do that, and obviously the analysis the first

Summary: The Joint Committee on Capital Review met on May 6 and first approved the minutes from its January 29, 2026 meeting. It then took up the consent calendar, which included agenda items 1 through 7, 8A, 8B, and 9B, plus item 9A with standard university financing provisions; the committee gave favorable review or approval to all consent items without opposition. The only non-consent item was agenda item 10 for the Arizona Exposition and State Fair Board. JLBC staff explained that the fair was seeking an additional $400,000 for prefabricated restrooms at the exhibit building and another $400,000 for replacement of the Veterans Memorial Coliseum risers, both after earlier approvals in December 2024. State Fair Executive Director Dale Adams said the projects were important for safety and expanded use of the grounds, and noted the revised amounts followed a more thorough cost analysis. Committee members questioned why the request had increased and emphasized that agencies should come prepared with accurate costs and ready-to-implement plans. After discussion, the committee voted to give agenda item 10 a favorable review. The meeting ended with no opposition on any action items, and members were told it was likely the committee’s last meeting until the fall before adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Again, we're talking about the economic analysis tool.
• And so that, you know, in this analysis, the new analysis, that would be a part of what is looked at
• in figuring the cost-benefit analysis.
• working up a use attainability analysis.
• I thought we made great progress today on the economic analysis.

Summary: The committee opened its third interim meeting with roll call, approved the November 13, 2025 minutes, and the chair reviewed prior committee work, including a denied request for a fertilizer-capacity study and a planned later discussion of the Union Pacific/Norfolk Southern merger issue. Commissioner Doug Goring then presented Department of Agriculture updates on uncrewed aerial systems grants to detect noxious weeds, the state’s irrigation potential, the low-carbon fuels program for ethanol plants, the Environmental Impact Mitigation Fund, model zoning ordinances for animal feeding operations, and fertilizer production and supply in North Dakota. Members asked about funding sources, fertilizer storage and availability, natural gas and water needs for future fertilizer plants, and how the model zoning website would help counties and townships apply setback and odor tools. A substantial portion of the meeting focused on the Department of Water Resources’ economic analysis tool for water conveyance and flood-related projects. Dr. Dwayne Poole explained that the department is proposing changes to better account for end-of-useful-life conditions and updated hydrologic data, while still limiting the model to direct, demonstrable costs and benefits. He said the goal is to make the analysis more realistic and consistent without changing statute, and he provided examples of how project benefits could change as drains age or as rainfall and flood data evolve. Committee members and water-user representatives generally supported continued work on the proposal, while raising concerns about downstream impacts, closed-basin projects, and whether the changes would meaningfully affect project approvals. The committee then heard from John Paskowski, state engineer, on Devil’s Lake, the West End and East End outlets, and the Tolna Coulee control structure. He reviewed lake history, outlet capacities, sulfate and downstream flow limits, and explained that the control structure is intended to prevent a catastrophic uncontrolled release by slowing erosion and head cutting. Members asked about water quality trends, the length of the downstream flow constraint, and whether the Tolna Coulee area had been studied for possible natural overflow or silt buildup. The discussion emphasized ongoing flooding concerns, mitigation for affected landowners, and the need to balance outlet operations with downstream water quality and infrastructure protection.

Transcript Highlights:

• The A5 amendment to this bill provides for a bus rapid transit alternative analysis study.
• analysis analysis comparison<00:31:56.240> to<00:31:56.720> a<00:31:57.440> light
• <00:48:16.800> of will be doing a cost benefit analysis of will be doing a cost benefit analysis
• It says it's not limited to planning, analysis, predesign, design, engineering, environmental analysis
• It says it's not limited to planning, analysis, predesign, design, engineering, environmental analysis

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• And finally, I'll share some quantitative risk analysis.
• And looking at that same stochastic analysis, only 100 of our same...
• And the analysis that we are looking at is essentially roughly a 50%...
• Once that comes in, then we can start doing the analysis of that data.
• We'll look at the cost analysis in detail.

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: The Select Committee on Pension Policy approved its minutes by roll call vote, then postponed an OSA annual update due to a family emergency. The committee received an Open Public Meetings Act refresher from Assistant Attorney General Kate Adams, who reviewed key compliance points including quorum and serial meetings, notice and agenda rules, executive session limits, public comment requirements, and the consequences of violations. She also noted a litigation hold notice sent to members and provided resources for further guidance. Staff then briefed the committee on E2 Second Substitute House Bill 2034, which restates and terminates LEOFF 1 on June 30, 2029, creates a restated LEOFF 1 funded by transferred assets, and places excess assets into a pension surplus holding account that could later be used by the state. The bill requires DRS to seek IRS guidance, directs OSA to calculate the transfer amount and assess any future unfunded liability, assigns implementation duties to DRS, OSA, the Pension Funding Council, the State Investment Board, and the Treasurer, and requires two SCPP studies on LEOFF 1 medical benefits and policy oversight. OSA’s actuary estimated the transfer to the surplus holding account at about $3.9 billion under current assumptions and said the bill increases the modeled chance of future state contributions if the restated plan falls below 100% funded; members asked about IRS timing, the 2029 transfer date, and whether the 110% buffer is sufficient. The committee also received an update on the LEOFF 1 medical benefits study required by the bill. Staff said the study will examine the administration of pension boards and medical liabilities, likely focusing on medical benefits, and will gather anonymized data from local boards, cities, counties, and related agencies over the next three years. Members and public commenters discussed the number and structure of local boards, whether spouses receive medical benefits, and the possibility of regionalizing or consolidating administration. No action was taken, but staff said they would return with milestones and further updates. Finally, staff outlined a possible Plan 3 study, prompted by DRS, to evaluate whether the original goals of Plan 3 have been met after 30 years. The proposed study would review historical context, member choice outcomes, policy questions, and possible recommendations over a two-year period. The committee also heard an update on new correspondence procedures, including a new online web form, a correspondence log in meeting packets, and removal of correspondence from the public website. During public comment, retiree groups urged the committee to pursue an ongoing COLA for PERS and TRS Plan 1, with interim ad hoc COLAs until then, while LEOFF 1 retirees urged caution about changing the current board structure and emphasized the complexity of medical benefit administration.

Transcript Highlights:

• And again, their financial impact or project analysis tools are scarce.
• Again, their financial impact or project analysis tools are scarce.
• The value proposition is difficult without objective analysis tools.
• We need, we as citizens, need more tools to be objective, to do objective analysis.
• Not a paper analysis that may not be accurate. Key questions if problems are found.

Summary: The committee met in Grand Forks, approved the February 26 minutes by voice vote, and recessed for a tour of the Mincota Power Cooperative headquarters before returning for presentations on large energy consumers, especially data centers. The first presentations focused on how North Dakota should respond to rapid growth in energy-intensive projects, with speakers emphasizing the need for reliable transmission, local decision-making tools, and factual information for county and township officials who are being asked to weigh major projects with limited staff and technical support. The North Dakota Transmission Authority director said local governments are being asked to make high-impact decisions on pipelines, transmission lines, large agriculture, wind, solar, carbon dioxide pipelines, direct-air capture, and data centers, and urged development of simple statewide decision tools and support from the League of Cities and Association of Counties. The Department of Environmental Quality’s air division director said North Dakota’s air remains among the cleanest in the nation, but large data centers can create air-quality concerns because of diesel backup generation; he said the department is requiring air monitors at some facilities and expects grid power and, potentially, cleaner natural gas backup to reduce emissions. Members asked about emissions standards, misinformation, monitoring costs, and staffing succession at DEQ. The Department of Water Resources director said North Dakota’s water law is based on common ownership and prior appropriation, and that data centers generally use relatively small amounts of water, often in closed-loop systems. He said the Missouri River and groundwater supplies are ample for projected needs, that the department’s permitting process protects senior water rights, and that even a worst-case data center scenario would use a very small share of Missouri River flow. Members asked about downstream impacts and compared data center water use with fracking. Later, McLean County State’s Attorney Ladd Erickson urged the committee to study how other states regulate data centers, warned against litigation-driven delays and overly broad local ordinances, argued reclamation bonding should be handled at the state level if at all, and said data centers can bring jobs and tax base but should remain subject to local zoning. The committee ended the morning session for lunch and later heard an EERC update from CEO Charles Gorecki on the center’s 75 years of work in energy and environmental technologies, especially oil and gas development and related research.

Transcript Highlights:

• Do retraining of all our staff on multiple levels, as well as conducted a root cause analysis of the
• So our consultant group has done a root cause analysis that we are happy to share with the group.
• So our consultant group has done a root cause analysis that we are happy to share with the group.
• So through our root cause analysis process, it was identified that...
• It seemed like you mentioned root cause analysis, and that's the first thing: root cause analysis, who

Summary: The Joint State Agencies committee met to approve prior minutes and then focused on the death of Zachary Moore at the Southeast Arkansas Human Development Center, later clarified in discussion as the Warren facility. DHS officials described Moore’s background, said he died after a prolonged prone restraint followed by a delayed chemical restraint, and reported that 13 staff were terminated, the superintendent was replaced, a consultant was brought in, and the agency entered a settlement with the family for $725,000. Members pressed DHS on the cause of death, restraint policies, staff training, supervision, family notification, and why the family had not been kept informed; DHS said a family-notification procedure exists but that communications during litigation had been handled through counsel. The committee also heard that six staff had been criminally charged with manslaughter and neglect of a vulnerable person, and that the death certificate listed the manner of death as homicide with cause of death tied to physiologic stress associated with struggle and prone restraint. DHS officials gave broader context on the five human development centers, their licensing and accreditation, resident population, mortality review process, and training programs. They said the centers serve highly medically and behaviorally complex residents, that annual restraint training and CPI-based instruction are required, and that the mortality review committee and Office of Long-Term Care review deaths and make recommendations. Members repeatedly criticized the agency for not having complete information at the meeting and for what they saw as gaps in oversight, staffing, and chain-of-command clarity during emergencies. DHS responded that the Warren facility had not been meeting the same standards as the others, that the consultant’s root-cause analysis identified multiple failures, and that new crisis-team and chain-of-command procedures were being drafted. A second major topic was staffing and recruitment. Members discussed low pay, turnover, use of float and on-call staff, rural staffing shortages, and a waiting list of about 2,000 people for home- and community-based services. DHS said CNAs at the centers start at about $39,000 a year, that a broader retention and recruitment plan is being drafted for all five centers, and that a separate rate study for PASS services will be implemented in January 2027 but does not cover CNA pay. The meeting ended with testimony from Moore’s mother, Angela Stevens, who said money could not replace her son and urged stronger training, background checks, and supervision so other residents would be protected. The committee asked DHS to keep members and Stevens updated on consultant reports, recruitment efforts, and follow-up on the family communication issue, and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• The analysis of this bill acknowledges this risk, and here is how that risk plays out in real school
• I accept the committee analysis committee amendments as noted on pages 10 and 11 of the analysis.
• Certainly you understand the analysis and the history there.
• Again, as the committee analysis points out— Again, as the committee analysis points out, students with
• , and two of them... ...have been from the San Joaquin Valley as designated in the analysis, and two

Summary: The Assembly Education Committee heard a lengthy agenda of education-related bills, with quorum established at the start and several measures taken up on consent or special order. The committee also announced that AB 1644, AB 2362, and later AB 2197 were pulled from the hearing. Members reminded the public of hearing rules and limited testimony to two witnesses each in support and opposition. AB 2651, by Assemblymember Bonta, would require schools to notify parents when school vaccination rates fall below herd-immunity thresholds. Supporters, including physicians, the California State PTA, public health groups, and school employee organizations, argued that families need timely, school-specific information to protect children and vulnerable community members. Opponents raised concerns about privacy, stigma, and whether school-level snapshots could be misleading. The bill passed the committee 5-1 and later 7-1 on the roll call. AB 2509, by Assemblymember Schultz, would allow districts to use a five-year rolling average for ADA funding calculations; supporters said it would stabilize funding amid attendance declines, while one member noted concerns about masking long-term enrollment problems. It passed 5-1 and later 7-2. The committee also approved AB 2430, which would expand after-school access, especially for high school students, improve funding and transparency, and create a work group on program quality. Testimony emphasized the value of expanded learning for youth development and working families, and members discussed the need to address middle school access as well. AB 2526, focused on special education funding, would expand the low-incidence fund to include students qualifying for the California alternate assessment; supporters said it would better align funding with student need, while some concerns remained about over-identification. AB 2325, the Pathways to Bilingual Teaching Act, would create a grant program to build bilingual teacher pipelines through partnerships among schools, community colleges, and universities; it received strong support and passed unanimously. AB 2460, presented by Assemblymember Pellerin for Assemblymember Celeste Rodriguez, would update school mental-health referral protocols to address trauma related to immigration enforcement; it also passed unanimously. AB 2404, which sought to require Central Valley representation on several governor-appointed bodies, drew debate over geographic representation and board composition and ultimately failed on a 2-5 vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• I did not receive my FIRs until 3 o'clock yesterday afternoon, and we did not have all the analysis as
• That same analysis by NMED, however, shows that while New Mexico is on track to meet its 2025 goal, it
• Yes, and it's also included in the analysis. We received it in time to include it in the analysis.
• took place: the best available control technology analysis.
• That analysis was an economic analysis, a practicality analysis.

Transcript Highlights:

• But if you work with us, we can tighten them up and we'll redo the analysis for you.
• My understanding is that with that clarified, it will change the analysis quite a bit.
• <00:54:31.240> for them up and we'll redo the analysis for them up and we'll redo the analysis
• So I'll stop rambling and I'll turn it over to Michelle to go through her analysis.
• But if we had more of those parameters, we could do some additional analysis.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I also wanted to spend some time doing some analysis of what the changes to the secondary factor that
• We wanted to conduct as empirical an analysis of this anecdotal feedback as we could.
• On page eight, you can see the results of that analysis.
• of those costs. initial estimates from our rough analysis of those costs.
• We could do some additional analysis to figure out exactly what those costs might look like.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the agency had to take that into consideration in its analysis.
• So, our analysis of that is still pending. Follow-up, yes, please.
• And so I think that analysis has to be done.
• Wouldn't that analysis be initiated by the rulemaking process? Thank you.
• Wouldn't that analysis be initiated by the rulemaking process? You recognize, sir?

Summary: The Joint Administrative Procedures Committee reviewed several agency rules and objections under Chapter 120. First, the committee revisited prior objections to Agency for Health Care Administration rules containing sunset provisions. AHCA’s general counsel said the agency amended 26 of the objected rules but declined to amend five others, arguing sunset provisions are lawful, are not themselves rules, and were consistent with a 2019 gubernatorial directive. Committee members questioned that position, especially for licensing and certificate-of-need rules, and urged the agency to consider legislative changes; no formal action was taken on that item during the discussion. The committee then considered an objection to Department of Management Services Rule 60G-1.001 defining the Governor’s Mansion grounds. Committee staff argued the rule is vague and improperly refers to future land acquisitions without updating the rule since 1998. DMS defended the rule as a general definition tied to publicly recorded property and a master lease, but said it would not object if the Legislature chose to codify the definition in statute. After discussion, the committee voted to file the objection. Members also received informational updates from the Department of Environmental Protection on the Solaris state lands inventory system, and from the Florida Gaming Control Commission on its response to the Tampa Bay Downs unadopted-rule litigation, in which the commission said it has stopped relying on the prior tax interpretation and will not promulgate a rule on that issue. The Department of Business and Professional Regulation said it would remove an unsupported cigar wholesale dealer permit reference, repeal an obsolete excise-tax deduction rule, and amend penalty guidelines and an affirmation in its alcohol, beverage, and tobacco rules. Finally, the Division of Administrative Hearings’ interim director discussed case-processing times, possible changes to ALJ status, and whether the Florida Rules of Evidence should apply in administrative proceedings, emphasizing the need to weigh costs, independence, and impacts on pro se litigants. The chair noted this was likely the committee’s final meeting of the year.

Transcript Highlights:

• The A5 amendment to this bill is the amendment that provides for a bus rapid transit alternative analysis
• It's the most effective Analysis will be done, and once that's done, we can take a look and choose the
• We have written a report that provides a bus rapid transit analysis comparison to a light rail that is
• And members, we know—I mean, I honestly can't believe there hasn't been a cost-benefit analysis.
• , pre-design, design, engineering, environmental analysis, land acquisition, and construction.

Transcript Highlights:

• Nora Angeles with Children Now, in support, along with the 30 organizations in the analysis.
• Urban analysis, coverage of both disease-modifying and symptomatic treatment...
• I accept the amendments described in the analysis and that are reflected in the mock-up.
• Yeah, on average, if you spread it out, but the CHBRP analysis...
• On average, if you spread it out, but the CHBRP analysis...

Summary: The Assembly Health Committee heard several measures, beginning with SB 331 by Sen. Menjivar, which would require large-group health plans to cover hearing aids for children. The author and supporters described the bill as a long-running effort to address a developmental emergency and reduce out-of-pocket costs for families, while opponents were absent. Testimony from parents, advocates, medical experts, and organizations emphasized the importance of early access to hearing aids; committee members voiced strong support, and the bill was moved on a do-pass basis to Appropriations, with several members requesting to be added as coauthors. The committee then heard SB 608, also by Sen. Menjivar, to expand access to condoms in school-based health centers and related settings and to prevent barriers such as ID checks. Supporters, including students and school health advocates, argued the bill would improve sexual health and reduce stigma, while opponents from family and faith groups argued it would undermine parental authority and normalize early sexual activity. The bill was supported by committee members and moved forward on a do-pass basis to Appropriations. Next, SB 971 by Sen. Choi proposed community-based healthy aging partnerships for older adults, with testimony from the California Senior Legislature and supporters from aging and dementia organizations. The measure was described as voluntary and focused on connection, independence, and local collaboration; there was no opposition, and the committee moved it on a do-pass basis to Appropriations. The committee also heard SB 869 by Sen. Weber Pierson, which would require warning icons and statements on chain restaurant menus for beverages with very high added sugar content. Supporters framed it as a transparency and public health measure, while restaurant and beverage industry representatives opposed it unless amended, citing cost and menu-space concerns; the bill was nevertheless moved on a do-pass basis to Appropriations after a roll call vote, with some members voting no and the measure placed on call. The committee also considered SB 950 by Sen. Weber Pierson, aimed at ensuring timely coverage of FDA-approved, medically necessary treatments for early-onset Alzheimer’s disease on commercial plans. Supporters, including the Alzheimer’s Association and a patient advocate, said the bill would reduce delays and barriers to care, while health plan representatives opposed it over step therapy and utilization-management concerns. Members discussed the limited treatment window and the need for early access, and the bill was moved on a do-pass basis to Appropriations. In addition, SB 490 by Sen. Umberg would set timelines for DHCS investigations of unlicensed sober living homes and allow counties to assist if the department cannot act in time; supporters from Anaheim and a patient-brokering survivor described serious abuse and oversight gaps, while county behavioral health representatives opposed the county role as an unfunded and potentially liability-creating burden. After discussion, the bill was also moved on a do-pass basis to Appropriations. Finally, the committee began hearing SB 1037 by Sen. Weber Pierson on health insurance affordability and rate review, with supporters arguing it would tie premium increases more closely to affordability targets and public reporting; the transcript cuts off before the committee completed action on that measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• Their incomes range in our analysis between $25,000 and $101,000 a year.
• That analysis is available on our website.
• That is an analysis.
• We don't have access to the complexity of the actuarial-style capitated rate analysis.
• that analysis to the Legislature by May 14, 2025.

Summary: The joint Assembly Budget Subcommittee hearing focused first on long-term services and supports for older adults, especially the “forgotten/overlooked middle” who earn too much for Medi-Cal but cannot afford private long-term care. Administration witnesses from DHCS, the Department of Aging, and Social Services described Medicare’s limited long-term care coverage, Medi-Cal’s role, the elimination of the Medi-Cal asset test, and ongoing state studies and listening sessions on financing options. Testimony from advocates and researchers emphasized rising homelessness among older adults, the need for better navigation and coordination across health, aging, housing, and social service systems, and short-term policy steps such as share-of-cost reform, housing stability supports, and protecting home- and community-based services. Members highlighted the need for a coordinated, no-wrong-door approach and asked for the most impactful budget investments to address affordability and homelessness risk. The second major topic was the Community-Based Adult Services (CBAS) program. CDA reported that CBAS helps participants remain in the community, that 304 centers operate statewide serving about 42,000 people, and that demand is stable but access gaps remain in some regions. DHCS explained that a 2024 rate increase authorized by SB 159 became inoperative after Proposition 35, and that a separate 10% rate change on the fee schedule was the result of a DHCS system error; the department said it would not require recoupment, though managed care plans may act under their contracts. CBAS providers and advocates warned that reimbursement rates have not kept pace with costs, that several centers have closed, and that clawbacks could trigger more closures. They requested $74.8 million ongoing General Fund to close part of the rate gap and preserve the program, while members expressed concern about closures and the cost savings of keeping people out of more expensive institutional care. The hearing then moved to In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) and statewide collective bargaining. CDSS reviewed provider recruitment and retention efforts, including electronic timesheets, direct deposit, and the now-completed IHSS Career Pathways program, which trained more than 59,000 providers. CDSS also summarized its AB 102 workgroup report on statewide versus regional bargaining, saying the final report would be sent to the Legislature soon and that statewide bargaining appeared more viable than regional bargaining, though it would require clear statutory scope and major fiscal changes. The department estimated that each $1 per hour statewide wage increase would cost at least $1.3 billion to $1.5 billion annually. Labor advocates argued that IHSS wages, benefits, and training are too inconsistent across counties and called for statewide bargaining, consumer participation, and ongoing state funding. County representatives supported stronger wages but cautioned that counties need protection from new costs and administrative burdens, and consumer advocates warned that moving bargaining to the state could weaken local consumer control and the program’s consumer-driven structure.

Transcript Highlights:

• Benefit analysis and see if we can do something about that. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
• And so there's just been no analysis done since this subcommittee has last heard that.
• To not have any analysis that's going to inform.
• No numbers were presented, no cost analysis shared. Reject the return to office.
• It would give you all time to get some type of survey or analysis.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I don't think, um, does because it says, and I'm looking at the language, um, the creation, analysis,
• This uh says creation, modification, or analysis of trade secrets.
• This uh says creation, modification, or analysis of trade secrets.
• /c><00:52:40.800> from analysis that I've gotten from analysis that I've gotten from employment
• > of<00:53:17.760> trade modification, or analysis of trade modification, or analysis of

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there an additional workload analysis that is kind of fee by fee?
• There is an additional workload analysis that outlines for all the application fees.
• So we did align all of the application fees with the workload analysis.
• The workload analysis for that full approval came to about $12,000. Our proposal...
• The workload analysis for that full approval came to about $12,000. Our proposal is 10.

Summary: The joint Sunset Review Oversight Hearing focused on the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education (BPPE) and its reauthorization, operations, enforcement, fiscal condition, and student protections. Committee leaders and DCA officials praised the Bureau’s recent improvements in data systems, licensing, inspections, and enforcement, while noting the Bureau’s role has become more important as federal higher education oversight weakens. Bureau Chief Deborah Cochran said the agency has met its inspection mandate for the first time since the law was enacted, increased citations and disciplinary actions, reduced pending complaints, and used data tools to identify risk and monitor institutions more effectively. A major portion of the hearing centered on student harm, especially school closures, transcript access, predatory recruiting, and the Student Tuition Recovery Fund (STRF). Members asked how the Bureau protects students when schools close, whether bad actors can reopen under new entities, and whether enforcement tools are strong enough. Cochran said the Bureau can cite, fine, place schools on probation, revoke licenses, and order refunds, but it is seeking new authority to deny approval to operators who previously closed schools improperly or failed to refund students. She also said the Bureau is tracking ownership data and is concerned about institutions targeting immigrant and visa students. On STRF, Cochran explained that the fund is currently healthy, assessments are at zero because the balance is above the statutory target, and the Bureau paid about 1,100 claims totaling roughly $17 million over the last four years. Several members questioned the fairness of the assessment structure and discussed alternatives such as surety bonds, but the Bureau said STRF is working well and no change is needed at this time. Fee increases and the Bureau’s structural deficit were another major topic. Cochran said the Bureau reduced costs by eliminating positions, streamlining inspections, improving data analysis, and shifting some student-relief costs to STRF, but that legislative action is still needed to address the deficit. She said the proposed fees were based on workload analyses and that application fees generally match service costs, while annual fees are designed to cover most of the Bureau’s revenue needs. Some members and stakeholders criticized the proposed increases as too high, especially for out-of-state registration and campus fees, while others argued the Bureau needs sufficient resources to regulate effectively. Public commenters from private schools, Northeastern University, San Joaquin Valley College/Carrington College, and TICAS generally supported the Bureau’s mission and reauthorization, but urged changes such as risk-based oversight, better transcript protections, stronger limits on repeated provisional approvals, and more targeted fee and STRF reforms. No votes were taken, and the hearing ended with no formal action beyond discussion and receipt of testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• Do current market analysis of available technology solutions that would best meet those requirements
• So they I have invited AI Lab, which is the company that performed this analysis for us to walk us through
• These areas include high-level business requirements, an analysis of a potential partnership with AHCA
• Based on our analysis, I loved determined that cause EV solution is capable of meeting APD's needs and
• What the state pay you guys to do this analysis.

Transcript Highlights:

• The obligations, as you know, are laid out in the bill and in the analysis, talk about recognizing sort
• This committee noted in the analysis that the range of duties assigned to the coordinating entity is
• The Assembly Committee on Education questioned in their own analysis whether the coordinating entity
• The Committee on Labor and Employment provided comments in the Higher Ed analysis in which they note
• Comments in the Higher Education analysis showed valid concerns.

Summary: The Assembly Higher Education Committee met in a special hearing and took up SB 638 by Senator Padilla, a workforce development bill aimed at creating a coordinating entity called the Middle Class Pipeline Project. The bill would streamline interagency education and workforce programs, improve career technical education and career pathways, and direct resources toward high-unemployment, low-income regions through changes to the CTE incentive grant program. Supporters, including the Association of Independent California Colleges and Universities, the California Edge Coalition, National University, Long Beach City College, and United Ways of California, argued that California needs a statewide coordinating body to reduce silos, improve access to high-quality jobs, and better align education with labor market needs. Committee members focused heavily on whether the proposed entity would duplicate existing bodies such as the California Workforce Development Board and other education/workforce agencies, and whether its broad duties could be carried out with the $1.5 million budget allocation. The author said the bill is intended to move an operational coordinating entity into broader tri-party negotiations with legislative leadership and the Governor, and that the final structure and staffing would depend on those talks. Some members supported the concept but raised concerns about scope, duplication, and whether the bill should be delayed or audited; one member opposed it as too broad and underfunded. The committee ultimately voted to pass SB 638 to the Assembly Appropriations Committee on a courtesy vote. The roll call showed five ayes and three noes, with one member not voting, and the chair later allowed additional members to add on, including an additional aye from Assemblymember Haney. The hearing then adjourned with the chair noting that further conversations would continue on the coordinating entity and its responsibilities.