Transcript Highlights:

• But on that note, I'm not asking you to make a budget projection.
• So I would argue that reform has actually made us more proactive.
• Returning to this process allows for budget discipline, Three-year period.
• Our budget is set independently of the commission.
• We do come before the legislature with budget change proposals.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Energy, Utilities and Communications held an oversight hearing focused on electric rates, utility regulation, affordability, reliability, and wildfire-related costs. The chair framed the discussion around the challenge of transitioning to a cleaner grid while keeping bills affordable and the system reliable, and noted the hearing also served as the annual update from the CPUC and Public Advocates Office. Professor Severin Borenstein gave a primer on utility regulation, explaining the split between deregulated generation and regulated transmission/distribution, the basics of cost-of-service regulation, and the role of return on equity. He argued that high allowed returns can encourage capital-intensive spending and that many public policy costs now embedded in rates would be better funded through the state budget, while warning that price caps or performance-based regulation are not silver bullets. CPUC President-designate Alice Reynolds described the commission’s role as economic regulator of investor-owned utilities and said affordability is being addressed through rate case scrutiny, reasonableness reviews, and legislative direction. She said wildfire mitigation and insurance costs have been major drivers of rate increases, but some wildfire-related costs are time-limited and will roll off rates over time. She also highlighted progress on clean energy procurement, battery storage growth, and integrated resource planning to meet climate goals while maintaining reliability. Reynolds said the CPUC is reviewing utility spending, disallowing imprudent costs where appropriate, and litigating at FERC to challenge transmission costs. Members pressed both witnesses on several issues, including whether rates are being inflated by legislative mandates and balancing accounts, whether utility returns are too high, and whether the state should shift more public-policy costs off electric bills and into the General Fund. Senators also raised concerns about load growth from data centers and ports, gas-system stranded assets as electrification advances, and whether the CPUC is over-regulating or discouraging innovation. Reynolds said the CPUC is working with the Energy Commission, CAISO, and the Air Resources Board on a holistic planning process, and pointed to tools such as interconnection reforms and demand flexibility. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational, with several follow-up requests for reports and data.

Transcript Highlights:

• If they were in the state budget, that would bring rates down substantially.
• So I would argue that reform has actually made us more proactive.
• Returning to this process allows for budget discipline,... ...budget discipline, prioritization of utility
• Our budget is set independently of the commission's.
• We do come before the legislature with budget change proposals.

Committee: Senate Energy, Utilities and Communications

Transcript Highlights:

• The need for these reforms is clearly documented.
• You know, I led this select committee on permitting reform last year.
• , only a small fraction of the state's housing budget.
• , and in this budget cycle, there is no funding stated for it.
• I know this is going to be a budget question.

Summary: The Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee heard several housing-related bills, with most of the discussion focused on streamlining approvals, clarifying housing law, and expanding planning resources. AB 2005 would expand SB 9 urban lot split eligibility to homeowners using living trusts or LLCs and allow partnerships with small builders; supporters said it would help owner-occupants create more homeownership opportunities, while members raised concerns about enforceability and possible loopholes for corporate investors. AB 2676 would clarify the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 to make clear that referendums or initiatives cannot be used as de facto moratoriums on approved housing projects in affected cities and counties; the author said it codifies existing intent and court rulings, and members discussed retroactivity and pending actions before moving it forward. AB 1621 sought to tighten timelines and accountability for post-entitlement permits by limiting repeated plan checks and preventing local agencies from requiring changes that deviate from already approved plans, with supporters from the building industry and apartment sector saying delays add major costs. Cities and counties opposed unless amended, arguing the bill could limit their ability to ensure compliance with local and state standards and create unintended loopholes. The committee also heard AB 2002, which would codify and expand the REAP 1.0 regional planning grant program to support RHNA-related planning, housing elements, technical assistance, and some housing trust fund activities; supporters emphasized its value for under-resourced jurisdictions, while the building industry sought guardrails against grant conditions that exceed state standards. AB 2118 would refine the AB 2011 streamlined pathway for mixed-income housing by clarifying that state permits are ministerial when objective standards are met and limiting local standards that block mixed-use projects; it drew broad support from housing and planning groups and no opposition. AB 2074 proposed a ministerial pathway for high-rise mixed-income housing in major transit-rich downtowns, paired with labor standards and a state-backed revolving loan fund; supporters said it could revitalize downtowns and leverage private capital, while housing advocates and some members questioned whether public financing should prioritize mostly market-rate high-rise projects and raised budget concerns. The committee took roll-call votes and advanced the bills, with AB 2676, AB 1621, AB 2002, AB 2118, and AB 2074 all moving out on majority or unanimous votes, and consent items AB 1899 and AB 2390 also approved.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think it's an important reform, and I hope that members will support it.
• It does make up a pretty significant amount of budget.
• , and those budgets increased by 67% over the last five years.
• I mean, the state budget is $17 billion.
• Budgets are not linear, especially when you're dealing with people.

Bills: HB2780 , HB4029 , HB4030 , HCR2052

Committees: House Ways & Means , House House Ways & Means Committee of Reference

Keywords: judicial foreclosure, tax lien, redemption rights, excess proceeds, property auction, income tax, federal tax conformity, revenue analysis, legislative session, tax reporting, municipal fees, county fees, utility rates, moratorium, tax classification, local government, inflation, economic stability, tax increases, cost-of-living protection

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, county budgets, state budgets never get reduced.
• Well, county budgets, state budgets never get reduced.
• Well, county budgets, state budgets never get reduced.
• Well, county budgets, state budgets never get reduced.
• Well, county budgets, state budgets never get reduced.

Bills: HF3831 , HF3603 , HF1900 , HF495 , HF3750 , HF4316 , HF2136 , HF4384

Committee: House Children and Families Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• You know, we did, in this budget that was just passed, cut the final round of behavioral health bridge
• This is a reform that is way, way, way overdue.
• 116, the Health Budget Trailer Bill, which achieved many of those goals for the governor.
• As opposed to waiting until next year's budget to stand it up.
• They were working on PBM reform from 1989.

Committee: House Health

Summary: The committee heard several health-related bills. SB 27 by Senator Umberg would expand and clarify the CARE Court process, with amendments narrowing the new diagnosis category to bipolar I disorder with psychotic features, clarifying the “clinically stabilized” standard, and limiting the role of nurse practitioners and physician assistants. Supporters, including a psychiatrist, a family member, and several local and business groups, said the bill would help more people access needed services; opponents, including counties, disability rights, peer-run organizations, and consumer advocates, warned it would expand the program faster than counties can provide housing, staffing, and court-related services. The committee discussed capacity concerns at length, then passed SB 27 on a do pass motion to the Committee on Public Safety. SB 503 by Senator Weber Pearson would require AI used in health care facilities to be identified, monitored, and mitigated for bias when used in clinical decision-making or resource allocation. The author and supporters from Kaiser Permanente, the California Medical Association, hospitals, and psychiatrists said the bill would help prevent discriminatory outcomes and improve trust in AI tools. Committee members noted the need to clarify deployer and developer responsibilities and accepted amendments before voting. The bill passed as amended to the Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee. SB 68 by Senator Menjivar would require allergen disclosure on restaurant menus, with different requirements for larger chains and more flexible options for smaller restaurants. The bill was presented with emotional testimony from the author and a nine-year-old witness with severe food allergies, along with broad support from medical, nursing, parent, and allergy advocacy groups. The California Restaurant Association opposed the bill unless amended, seeking broader menu-format flexibility and additional liability language. After discussion of those concerns, the committee passed SB 68 as amended to Appropriations. SB 403 by Senator Blakespear would remove the sunset date from California’s End of Life Option Act, making the law permanent. Supporters, including a physician, a social worker, hospice professionals, and family members of terminally ill patients, described the law as a compassionate, carefully regulated option that has worked as intended. Faith-based and Catholic health organizations opposed the measure. The committee approved SB 403 and sent it to Judiciary. The hearing also included consent items, which were approved, and a vote change on SB 68 from no to aye by Senator Sanchez.

Transcript Highlights:

• The emergency services program is one where they do the RFP the winter before the budget session.
• That next budget cycle.
• The emergency services program is one where they do the RFP the winter before the budget session.
• The emergency services program is one where they do the RFP the winter before the budget session.
• Winter before the budget session.

Summary: The committee took up House File 3732, with the author moving both the bill and two separate amendments. The DE1 amendment would create a healthcare workforce grant program to let the Department of Employment and Economic Development identify and fund healthcare workforce shortage areas, while the A1 amendment would establish an Office of Community Investment to provide strategic grant management and help align grants with legislative priorities. Both amendments were adopted, and the bill was laid over for later consideration. The bill author explained that the healthcare workforce proposal is meant to address shortages that market forces alone have not solved, citing examples such as CNA training and rural oncologist recruitment. The Office of Community Investment was described as a way to improve grant oversight, set clearer goals, and strengthen collaboration between agencies and the legislature, drawing on the model of the Office of Justice Programs. Testimony from the Mong American Partnership strongly supported the healthcare workforce grant program, describing successful CNA and phlebotomy pathways, but also noting long waitlists and the need for flexible funding. Members discussed the importance of locating training opportunities in greater Minnesota and in communities with workforce gaps, so distance and travel barriers do not limit access. Several legislators said the proposal would help create good-paying jobs, strengthen healthcare access, and support overworked healthcare workers. The bill’s sponsors also emphasized that codifying grant programs can speed up future funding decisions and improve accountability, and they said the measures would return for further consideration in a few days.

Transcript Highlights:

• So although we are very hopeful, ...that when we get the final federal budget numbers, they will not
• However, before we can develop major recycling reforms similar to what seven other states, including
• This work is essential to inform comprehensive recycling reform, which we seriously need.
• But I think more broadly, what is needed is just an entire kind of system reform in who's responsible
• So we thank the legislature for recent increases in DCR's operating budget.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Bonding, Capital Expenditures and State Assets

Summary: The Joint Committee on Bonding, Capital Expenditures and State Assets held a hearing on S. 2542, the Mass Ready Act, the Healey-Driscoll administration’s environmental bond bill. Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs Rebecca Tepper and Undersecretary Jen Sullivan described the bill as a $3 billion resilience package to protect drinking water, farms, fisheries, roads, bridges, parks, and communities from flooding, heat, drought, wildfires, and other climate impacts. They highlighted major authorizations for flood and coastal resilience, DCR infrastructure, drinking water and wastewater upgrades, PFAS remediation, open space and land protection, food security infrastructure, and a new Resilience Revolving Fund for low-cost loans to municipalities, tribes, and water districts. Committee members asked about project lifespans, flood and salt marsh permitting, wastewater and combined sewer overflow funding, parkway maintenance, land acquisition priorities, Quabbin stewardship, and how the revolving fund would be capitalized and administered. The administration said the fund would be modeled on the Clean Water Trust, use existing trust resources rather than new fees, and could later support special obligation bonds; they also said the bill would streamline certain permitting and improve flood-risk disclosure and climate-related building standards. Many witnesses urged the committee to strengthen the bill’s funding levels or add related policy provisions. Labor, contractor, and plumbing groups supported creating a water reuse and graywater recycling commission, saying it could conserve water, reduce stormwater and sewer burdens, and create skilled jobs. Boston Harbor Now asked for higher authorizations for the Municipal Vulnerability Preparedness program and resilient coast work, plus permitting reforms for nature-based and waterfront projects. The Massachusetts Rivers Alliance backed the bill but also urged inclusion of drought-management legislation, a water reuse commission, a statewide flood buyout program, and more support for community resiliency. Environmental justice advocates from Green Roots called for dedicated funding for outdoor and indoor air quality monitoring and indoor air quality improvements in schools and public housing, while conservation and tree advocates sought larger investments in urban forestry, local nurseries, and workforce training, along with clearer language to ensure municipal reforestation funds go to cities and towns. Agricultural and food system witnesses emphasized the importance of the bill’s food security and farmland provisions. The Southeastern Massachusetts Agricultural Partnership and the Mass Food System Collaborative supported the $125 million food security infrastructure grant program, saying it has funded critical facilities and equipment for farmers, fishers, processors, and food access organizations, but warned that without the bill there could be a funding gap in fiscal year 2027. They also supported farmland protection and asked for more funding for agricultural capital programs, used-equipment eligibility in grant programs, and a next-generation farmer fund. Water utility representatives said the bill still falls short of the state’s long-term drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater needs, citing EPA estimates of nearly $37 billion in needed investments over 20 years and urging dedicated recurring funding and broader eligibility for climate resilience grants. No votes were taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• stability of our budget.
• The second document is the actual budget recommendation for recurring budgets.
• . budget.
• You've grown the budget 61% before you adopt a budget this session.
• Based budget 5.7%.

Committee: House House Appropriations & Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• Debt reform for medical debt and garnishment, making sure kids get treatment for their rare diseases,
• We continue to underinvest in services for people with disabilities, balancing budgets on their backs
• </c><00:03:33.800><c> debt</c><00:03:34.239><c> and</c> Um debt reform for medical debt and Um debt reform
• </c><00:05:09.680><c> These</c><00:05:09.919><c> are</c> budgets on their backs.
• These are budgets on their backs. These are bipartisan<00:05:11.000><c> issues.

Transcript Highlights:

• Throughout the Mass Wins Act, targeted policy reforms work alongside these authorizations to reduce barriers
• I have concerns that we're conflating reforms to process with progress.
• If you look at the capital plan rolling forward, economic development is currently budgeted at about
• At the same time, the federal Treasury has been... ...zero in the current budget.
• We applaud the NISW's efforts to reform the certification process and we support these provisions.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Bonding, Capital Expenditures and State Assets

Transcript Highlights:

• DOC reports a budget of around $822 million.
• That's part of the Reform Act.
• That's part of the Reform Act.
• True reform isn't about blame.
• That will necessarily include parole revocation reform.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Public Safety and Homeland Security

Summary: The hearing before the Joint Committee on Public Safety and Homeland Security focused on several correction-related bills, including visitation reform, elder and medical parole, incarcerated persons’ human rights, and creation of an independent correctional oversight office. Vice Chair Christopher Worrell chaired the hearing in place of Chair Dan Cahill for much of the session and explained that the committee would first hear from incarcerated individuals remotely, then move to public testimony. The committee repeatedly enforced three-minute limits and accepted written testimony as well. Much of the testimony from incarcerated people emphasized that visitation is central to rehabilitation, family stability, and reentry, and that current DOC policies—visitor caps, pre-approval requirements, scheduling rules, dress-code enforcement, and restrictions on contact—have reduced family contact and caused harm. Several speakers argued that elderly and medically frail prisoners should be released through parole because incarceration is costly, ineffective, and inhumane for people who pose little public-safety risk. Others described poor prison conditions, limited programming, inadequate healthcare, segregation-like housing, and the impact of K2 use, suicides, and self-harm. Supporters of the oversight bill said an independent office is needed to address racial disparities, grievance failures, and lack of accountability within the DOC. A number of speakers tied their support to personal experiences, including alleged racial discrimination, denial of programs, and barriers to family visits. Some testified that rehabilitative programming, education, and restorative justice reduce violence and improve outcomes, while others said the DOC spends too little on programming and too much on punishment. Committee members asked a few follow-up questions, including about K2 contraband and how to reduce drugs in facilities, and one member asked about typical visitation lengths. No votes were taken during the hearing; the committee heard testimony on the bills and several witnesses urged favorable reports.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> to which the budget or how the budget to which the budget or how the budget uses<00:08:25.440><c
• </c> removed by the Senate from the budget. removed by the Senate from the budget.
• </c> that is that it was done in this budget. that is that it was done in this budget.
• Are you just, to clarify, are you asking about the budget for the program? >> Budget?
• The The The &gt;&gt; budget?<01:05:18.240><c> Yeah.</c> &gt;&gt; budget? Yeah. &gt;&gt; budget?

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 219, which would revise the renewable portfolio standard by changing several class definitions, eliminating Class 2, lowering the utility obligation for Class 1 thermal renewable energy certificates from 2.2% to 1.7%, and adjusting alternative compliance payments. Representative Vose said the bill would save ratepayers an estimated $5.7 million annually, arguing that Class 2 is already saturated and that the changes would not materially affect renewable energy development. Members questioned the fiscal impact, with an amended fiscal note cited as showing a $1.2 million reduction in general fund revenue, and some members raised concerns that the bill could weaken one of the remaining incentives for renewable investment. The committee also reviewed the bill’s history, including that it had been added to HB 2 and then removed in conference committee. No vote was taken in the work session. The committee then heard House Bill 164, concerning local records retention and the creation of a local records manager position. Secretary of State David Scanlan testified that the position has existed in statute for years but has never been funded, and said the need has grown as records management has become more digital and ADA accessibility has become more important. He described the bill as a way to help towns preserve and digitize records, especially for smaller communities with limited resources, while keeping records locally when possible. Members asked about the fiscal note, the potential cost of a public website and storage system, and whether the state could start by funding the position alone; the secretary said the staffing cost estimate remained accurate but that storage costs could rise over time. Several members expressed support and suggested further discussion with the Department of Information or other agencies. The work session was then closed without action. Finally, the committee opened House Bill 365, which would provide proof of U.S. citizenship assistance for indigent voters. Secretary Scanlan said the bill is intended to help voters comply with the new voter registration documentation requirements by allowing the state to verify eligibility through federal, private, and other state databases, and by providing vouchers to cover the cost of obtaining documents such as birth certificates. He compared the proposal to the earlier voter ID law, which he said was successfully implemented with accommodations for voters lacking acceptable ID. Members asked how “indigent” would be defined and how the process would work for out-of-state-born applicants; the secretary said indigency would likely be based on a voter’s statement of inability to pay and that the state would help identify where to obtain records and, if necessary, verify them through outside databases. The discussion continued as the transcript ended, with no vote recorded.

Transcript Highlights:

• For me, my first priority is funding Cal Grant reform.
• and through the budget process.
• AB 1204 introduces essential reforms to California's Local Control Funding Formula.
• In Pleasanton Unified, we are now going through our third consecutive year of budget reductions.
• And as Senator noted, we are both the budget sub-chairs on this issue in both our houses, too.

Summary: The committee first heard AB 402, which would increase Cal Grant award amounts for students attending private nonprofit colleges and extend transfer entitlement eligibility to those institutions. The author and supporters argued the bill would improve affordability and access for low- and middle-income, working, military, and transfer students, while some senators emphasized the need to pair any increase with broader Cal Grant reform and funding. The bill drew support from private nonprofit universities, community college districts, and student advocates, and no opposition was presented. It passed on a due pass motion to Senate Appropriations and was placed on call. The committee then took up AB 2067, a sunset extension for the competitive lease-lease-back process for TK-12 school construction through July 1, 2032. Supporters from school facilities groups, school districts, and contractors said the method provides flexibility, early contractor involvement, cost control, and legal certainty for school construction projects. Some senators questioned how often the method is used and raised concerns about the bill’s skilled-and-trained workforce provisions, with one senator opposing on the grounds that such requirements limit contractor participation. The bill passed on a due pass motion and was placed on call. Next, AB 1204 proposed changes to the Local Control Funding Formula, including a lower concentration-grant threshold, regional cost adjustments, a minimum annual COLA, and other equity-focused revisions. Supporters said the bill would better reflect regional costs and student need, while opponents—especially several school district leaders—argued it would shift money away from the base grant, widen disparities, and create new fiscal cliffs. Committee members raised concerns about the scale of the rewrite, the lack of a broader funding strategy, and the proposed 4% COLA guarantee, though the author said the bill was intended as a phased update to improve equity. The bill was supported by the chair and several members, then passed on a due pass motion to Appropriations and was placed on call. Finally, the committee heard AB 1235, which would require a skilled-and-trained workforce process for CSU design-build projects. Supporters said it would align CSU with other segments and promote quality training, while opposition from contractor groups argued it would add liability, reduce competition, and increase costs without evidence of better outcomes. Senators again focused on the effect of skilled-and-trained requirements on contractor participation, with one member stating opposition to limiting who can work in California and another noting the bill’s broader policy implications. The transcript ends during committee discussion of AB 1235, without a recorded final vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> that could have brought some real reform that could have brought some real reform that<00:09:40.080
• Because if you want real reform in government, first we need to get out of the way.
• Because if you want real reform in government, first we need to get out of the way.
• Because if you want real reform in government, first we need to get out of the way.
• </c> that we have in our state budget. that we have in our state budget.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have budget issues, but the problems identified in this bill, unsworn witnesses, discovery limits,
• We have budget issues, but the this.
• This is one of the reforms that is in the process now of being implemented.
• So this is just a long way of saying reforms have been started.
• So this is just a long way of saying reforms have been started.

Summary: The committee took up House Bill 518 and House Bill 652FN, both related to the family court system and child/family matters. HB 518 drew extended discussion about DCYF/DCYF’s role and whether the bill should be retained, amended, or studied further. Representative Love argued the agency is deeply troubled, citing abuse cases, lack of training, and fear among constituents, and said he would vote against ITL while preferring interim study so the bill could still be used as a future amendment vehicle. Other members emphasized that the family division has ongoing reform work underway and that abolishing or moving cases to superior court would not solve the underlying problems. On HB 652FN, the subcommittee chair and Representative Pearson gave a detailed defense of the family division, explaining its history, statewide structure, caseload, and the rationale for specialized family courts. Pearson said the bill would reverse progress by shifting jurisdiction back to superior court, overload dockets, and deprive families of judges with specialized expertise. He pointed to reforms already underway, including simplified forms, more mediation, and review of possible judicial bias patterns. Several members and public comments supported keeping the bill as a tool for reform rather than killing it, while critics argued the family court system suffers from due process, oversight, and rule-of-law problems. The committee also heard broader testimony on family court concerns, including allegations of systemic bias, discovery limits, unsworn witnesses, and lack of oversight, as well as support for mediation as a less adversarial and more effective option. Some members said the judiciary needs more judges and mediators, but that budget constraints limit those improvements. The discussion ended with no final vote recorded in the excerpt; instead, members continued debating whether the bills should be ITL’d or retained for interim study and further reform work.

Transcript Highlights:

• That gave counties the time to develop budgets, hire and recruit staff, and train them in order to meet
• You know, we did, in this budget that was just passed, cut the final round of behavioral health bridge
• Of course, licensure is now part of the budget. This is a reform that is way, way, way overdue.
• AB 116, the Health Budget Trailer Bill, which achieved many of those goals for the governor.
• As opposed to waiting until next year's budget to stand it up.

Summary: The committee heard several health-related measures. SB 27 by Senator Umberg would revise and expand California’s CARE Court by limiting the expansion to people with bipolar I disorder with psychotic features, clarifying the definition of “clinically stabilized,” and narrowing the role of nurse practitioners and physician assistants. Supporters, including behavioral health officials and family members, said the bill would reduce dismissals and better serve people with severe illness; opponents warned the expansion would strain county staffing and housing resources and could undermine voluntary engagement. The bill passed on a do pass motion to the Committee on Public Safety. SB 503 by Senator Weber Pierson would require AI tools used in health care facilities to be identified, monitored, and mitigated for bias when used in clinical decision-making or resource allocation. The author and supporters from Kaiser Permanente and the California Medical Association said the bill would help prevent discriminatory outcomes and improve trust and safety. The committee discussed the need to clarify developer and deployer responsibilities, and the bill passed as amended to Privacy and Consumer Protection. SB 68 by Senator Menjivar would require restaurants to provide written allergen information for the top nine food allergens, with tiered flexibility for smaller establishments. The bill was supported by patients, families, nurses, and allergy organizations, who described severe reactions and the difficulty of relying on verbal disclosures alone. The California Restaurant Association opposed unless amended, seeking broader use of the national model food code and additional liability language. The bill passed as amended to Appropriations. The committee also heard SB 403 by Senator Blakespear, which would remove the sunset from the End of Life Option Act; supporters described the law as a compassionate, well-functioning option for terminally ill patients, while faith-based groups opposed it. The bill passed to Judiciary. Later, SB 41 by Senator Wiener was introduced to rein in pharmacy benefit manager practices that steer patients to mail-order pharmacies and reimburse community pharmacies below cost; community pharmacists and several health organizations testified in support, describing pharmacy closures and patient access problems.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:15:23.720><c> we</c> is is government training and reform we is is government training and reform
• Senate File 1123 also focuses on state grant reform.
• Well, those budget bills come through individual committees.
• Well, those budget bills come through individual committees.
• Well, those budget bills come through individual committees.

Transcript Highlights:

• This isn't just reform. This is how we do it. The focus of primary care reform is patient access.
• That had a very important and negative impact on reform.
• So we have doctors very suspicious of payment reform. At least I can...
• So we have doctors very suspicious of payment reform.
• This is no longer a budget problem; it is a system issue.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Health Care Financing

Summary: The Joint Committee on Health Care Financing held a public hearing on a large docket focused on primary care, workforce development, and medical debt. Chairs Cindy Friedman and John Lawn outlined hearing procedures and noted that testimony would be taken on 17 matters. The committee first heard testimony on bills to establish a community health center nurse practitioner residency program and to strengthen mental health centers. Senator Keenan, Rep. Keefe, and health center leaders described the Worcester nurse practitioner residency as a successful pipeline and retention strategy, citing workforce shortages, training needs in community health centers, and the cost of the program. Rep. O’Day also supported the mental health centers bill, saying it would raise payment rates, improve reimbursement for behavioral health services, and help clinics retain staff and expand access. The committee then took testimony on bills to address medical debt through hospital financial assistance reform. The Attorney General’s Office, Health Care for All, Health Law Advocates, the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, and individual patients supported the measure, arguing that hospital financial assistance policies are inconsistent, hard to find, and difficult to navigate. Witnesses said the bill would standardize eligibility criteria, create a uniform application, improve notice requirements, and expand access to discounted care up to 400% of the federal poverty level. Several personal stories described medical bills being sent to collections, confusion over insurance billing, and the burden of debt on low-income and chronically ill patients. Committee members asked about hospital concerns, the role of the health safety net, and whether the bill addressed root causes of medical debt; testimony emphasized that the proposal was meant to improve transparency and access rather than replace broader insurance reforms. The hearing also focused heavily on “Primary Care for You” legislation, H. 1370 and S. 867, which would increase primary care investment and create a new payment model. Rep. Haggerty, physicians, a patient, community health center leaders, and the Massachusetts League of Community Health Centers described a primary care crisis marked by low reimbursement, staffing shortages, long waits, burnout, and difficulty recruiting clinicians. Supporters said the bills would shift spending toward preventive, team-based care, improve access and equity, and reduce long-term costs. The Massachusetts Association of Health Plans said it was directionally supportive of increased primary care investment but warned that any new spending must stay within the cost growth benchmark and preserve existing contracting structures. The hearing ended with additional testimony on a community health center workforce and loan repayment grant bill from Rep. Stanley, and with further discussion from Dr. Alan Garo about the need for payment reform in primary care.

Transcript Highlights:

• You know, I also sit on a budget subcommittee, and we're seeing the kind of devastation that these cuts
• AB 1067 is a common-sense reform for our state and local government systems. Thank you.
• Chair and members, AB 1383 makes limited revisions to the California Public Employees' Pension Reform
• That's over 8% of our budget.
• This bill rolls back hard-won reforms in the Public Employee Pension Reform Act of 2013 and reinstates

Committee: House Public Employment and Retirement

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Public Employment and Retirement heard several bills dealing with pensions, holidays, public employee accountability, and first responder retirement. AB 912 was taken up on the consent calendar and passed. AB 569, as amended, would allow local public employers and unions to negotiate contributions to supplemental defined benefit pension plans; the author and Teamsters said it would clarify existing PEPRA grandfathering rules, while labor supported it, and the bill passed to Appropriations. AB 989 would make California Native American Day a paid state holiday, with strong support from Native organizations and tribes and no opposition; the committee members spoke in favor and the bill passed. AB 268 would recognize Diwali as an official state holiday, also with broad support and no opposition, and it passed. AJR 3 urged protection of Social Security, Medicare, and Medi-Cal from federal cuts; retirees, caregivers, and health advocates testified in support, and the resolution passed. AB 1067 would require public employers to complete misconduct investigations even if an employee retires during the process; the author said it closes an accountability loophole, while opposition raised due process and family-retirement concerns, and the bill passed as amended. AB 1510 was presented as a cleanup bill making technical changes to state employee pay and benefits and Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority labor law; it passed with support from AFSCME. The committee then heard AB 1233, which would create a statewide database of classified school employee positions and certain egregious misconduct records to help school employers screen applicants. School administrators and county school officials supported the bill as a student-safety tool, while classified employee groups raised concerns about fairness, due process, and the scope of misconduct covered; the author said the bill already focuses on serious sex and drug offenses involving children and was open to narrowing language. The bill passed to the Committee on Education. Finally, AB 1383, a major first responder retirement bill, drew extensive testimony. The author and firefighters argued that lowering the normal retirement age for public safety employees from 57 to 55 and restoring some bargaining flexibility would help recruitment, retention, and health, citing cancer and other job-related risks. Cities, counties, and local government associations opposed it, warning it would roll back PEPRA reforms, increase pension costs, and strain local budgets. Despite the opposition, committee members spoke strongly in favor of first responders and the bill passed to Appropriations. The committee then adjourned after all items were voted out.