Transcript Highlights:

• </c> income and corporate franchise taxes. income and corporate franchise taxes.
• :04:40.000><c> it's</c><00:04:40.160><c> split</c> the income article because it's split the income article
• </c><00:05:13.440><c> tax</c> establish new individual income tax establish new individual income tax
• This again is a high-level overview.
• So I'll again is a high level overview.

Bills: HF9

Committee: House Taxes

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:42:56.640><c> of</c> on the level of on the level of right<00:42:58.319><c> um</c><00:42:59.319
• </c> ended um I think I think at a 2% level ended um I think I think at a 2% level in<01:34:26.080><c
• or the 50% claimed at the 65% level or the 50% level<01:43:53.400><c> um</c><01:43:54.400><c> we</c>
• </c> on family income not the child's income on family income not the child's income it's<02:57:05.920
• income.

Summary: The House Finance Division 3 work session continued its review of the Department of Health and Human Services’ Medicaid budget and related policy issues, with CFO Nathan White and Medicaid Director Henry Litman presenting updated materials. The discussion focused on a crosswalk between the adjusted FY 2025 Medicaid budget and the governor’s FY 2026 recommendation, plus handouts showing service additions, eligibility changes, dental rates, and other Medicaid changes since 2019. The department also said it would provide a clearer breakdown of the pharmacy cost-sharing item by general, federal, and other funds. Members asked detailed questions about the Medicaid enhancement tax, the 80% plan, and how funds are allocated between hospital payments, directed payments, and DSH uncompensated care. The department explained that the MET is being used more toward rates and directed payments to better align with federal matching rules, while DSH remains important for uncompensated care. They also noted that a pending Senate Bill 249 would keep the 80% structure and move to Senate Finance. On the trigger law, the department identified the governing provision as Chapter 342:12, Laws of 2018, and explained that if the federal match for Medicaid expansion falls below 90%, the state must notify legislative leaders and participants and the program would sunset after 180 days unless the legislature acts. The committee also reviewed current Medicaid expansion enrollment and program trends. Officials said enrollment was just under 59,000 as of March 3, with about 87,000 people enrolled over the past year and more than a quarter-million residents having used the program over its lifetime. They said enrollment has fallen from a post-pandemic high of nearly 97,000 and may eventually settle in the low 50,000s. Finally, the department discussed federal DSH funding risk, saying New Hampshire could face a significant reduction if Congress does not extend current protections, which is part of why the state has shifted more funding toward payment rates and directed payments.

Transcript Highlights:

• So on— For the lower, as your income level goes lower.
• The individuals at the very lowest income levels might be getting something close to an 80% discount,
• but at the highest income levels that might look more like a 20% discount.
• And this affordability fund is here to make health insurance affordable based on income level, so it
• So the level of discount is tied to income. Thank you for that. Mr. Chair, I think this...

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 7, the Apprenticeship Assistance Act, which would keep apprenticeship trust fund distributions at $2.5 million rather than reducing them and remove a reference to the tobacco settlement permanent fund. Labor, construction, business, and environmental groups testified in support, emphasizing workforce development, retention of workers in New Mexico, and expansion of apprenticeship opportunities. The bill was moved and adopted without opposition. Members then considered House Bill 66, as amended, to increase funding for health professional loan repayment and related workforce supports. The amendment struck an appropriation because the funding was already included in House Bill 2. Testimony from health care providers, chambers of commerce, social workers, and physical therapy advocates supported the bill as a way to address provider shortages and improve recruitment and retention. After questions about eligibility, repayment terms, and overlap with similar Senate bills, the committee voted to do pass the bill as amended. House Bill 96, creating a working group to study a possible New Mexico Space Commission, was also amended to strike an appropriation. Support came from the chamber, Virgin Galactic, and aerospace advocates, who said a commission could help coordinate economic development and workforce efforts in the space sector. Members asked about other states’ commissions, workforce pathways, and the working group’s timeline, and the sponsor agreed to add clearer dissolution language later. The committee then passed the bill as amended. The committee then took up House Bill 80, a committee substitute to redirect more of the oil and gas conservation tax to the reclamation fund for orphan well plugging and site remediation. Supporters from industry, environmental groups, tribal advocates, and chambers said the bill would better align the tax with its original purpose and provide stable funding for cleanup, while an opponent argued the bill shifts costs from industry to the public and should instead raise the tax or bonding requirements. After discussion of backlog, phase-in timing, and procurement reforms, the committee voted do pass. The committee also heard House Bill 4, as amended, which phases in a larger share of premium surtax revenue to the Health Care Affordability Fund over three years. Supporters said it would sustain BeWell enrollment and affordability programs, while opponents questioned the burden on private payers and the size of the general fund impact. The committee adopted the substitute and then passed it on a 10-7 vote. Finally, the committee approved House Bill 65, as amended, creating a Foster Care Plus pilot project for children in CYFD custody, with testimony both supporting the need for better services and cautioning that implementation should respect tribal law, cultural practices, and family reunification. The committee also tabled House Bill 68 at the sponsor’s request. The transcript then began discussion of House Bill 88, which would make minor changes to the land grant assistance fund, including capturing reverted payments that currently go back to the general fund.

Transcript Highlights:

• Just on the expenditure plan, I have a few high-level comments.
• We haven't seen levels this low in five years.
• Why take away the income qualification? Great questions.
• There's money there in the interest and income and rollover funds to do that.
• There's money there in the interest, income, and rollover funds to do that.

Summary: The subcommittee heard testimony on the governor’s proposed sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) tax credit, which would provide a $1 to $2 per gallon credit against the diesel excise tax for SAF sold for use in California from 2026 to 2036. The Department of Finance and CARB argued the credit would help decarbonize aviation, support refinery transitions, and keep fuel production and jobs in California. The Legislative Analyst’s Office recommended rejecting the proposal, saying it is a relatively expensive way to reduce greenhouse gases, could have uncertain or limited climate benefits, and would reduce diesel excise tax revenue that supports highways, local streets and roads, and other transportation programs. A major point of debate was whether the credit would simply shift limited feedstocks from renewable diesel to SAF rather than create new low-carbon fuel supply. Professor Aaron Smith and the LAO said that because feedstocks such as used cooking oil, tallow, and vegetable oils are limited and already used in other fuel markets, the policy could increase SAF at the expense of renewable diesel, with possible increases in fuel prices and little net emissions benefit. Administration and CARB staff disputed that outcome, saying additional waste-based feedstocks are available and that the policy would not meaningfully raise gasoline or diesel prices. Senators focused on feedstock availability, impacts on road funding, fairness to consumers, and whether the proposal was really aimed at preserving specific refineries such as Phillips 66. Public comment was sharply divided. Labor representatives, refinery workers, airlines, Boeing, airports, and some local residents supported the proposal, emphasizing jobs, refinery investment, and aviation’s need for a liquid-fuel decarbonization pathway. Environmental and transportation groups, including the Center for Biological Diversity, World Resources Institute, Earthjustice, California Environmental Voters, counties, cities, and trucking and asphalt associations, opposed it, citing weak net climate benefits, possible fuel-price impacts, and losses to transportation funding. No vote was taken; the chair announced all items would be held open for a future hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill does prohibit a participating utility from reducing the level of low-income energy assistance
• Avista serves a service area and a customer base that is well below median income.
• Ceded Low Income 120 blah passed in 2019 was well intended but had unintended consequences.
• pay more than 6% of income on energy costs every year.
• income on energy costs every year.

Summary: The committee first waived the five-day notice rule for several House bills, then took up public hearings on HB 2426, HB 1742, HB 2215, HB 2575, HB 1903, and HB 2606. HB 2426 would allow the Pollution Control Hearings Board, with party consent and board approval, to hear permit appeals in alternative smaller compositions to improve efficiency; the sponsor and supporters from Greater Grays Harbor and FutureWise said it would speed up reviews without harming environmental protections, while the bill was described as cost-neutral. HB 1742 would create a Center for Environmentally Sustainable Urban Design at Ecology to promote sustainable building and design competitions; the sponsor emphasized regenerative, biophilic design and a proposed showcase project, and the bill was presented as budget-neutral through outside funding, though the fiscal note was still pending. HB 2215 would tighten Climate Commitment Act compliance for certain newer fuel suppliers by lowering the emissions threshold for post-2023 suppliers, exempt lubricants, and add procurement and transparency requirements. The sponsor said the bill targets “paper distributors” and loopholes used to avoid coverage; Ecology supported closing the loophole but raised concerns about reporting thresholds, implementation, staffing, and rulemaking. Testimony was mixed: the propane association and Washington Oil Marketers Association were concerned about the two-tier threshold and urged stronger upstream enforcement instead, while Climate Solutions and Washington Conservation Action supported the bill as a way to prevent gaming and strengthen climate policy. HB 2575 would reduce several environmental and energy reporting obligations, including less frequent utility reporting under the Energy Independence Act and state energy strategy updates; Commerce and the sponsor said the changes would reduce duplicative reporting and save money, while preserving core protections and oversight. HB 1903 would establish a statewide low-income energy assistance program in the Department of Commerce, phased in by 2027, to supplement existing utility programs and target households with the greatest energy burden. The sponsor and many advocates described the bill as an affordability measure to address a large unmet need, while community action agencies, utilities, and rural representatives supported the goal but asked for clearer language on voluntary utility participation, funding sources, allocation formulas, and how the program would interact with existing utility and weatherization efforts. Several speakers stressed that the program should not replace local assistance and should be designed to avoid shifting costs onto ratepayers. HB 2606 would update the Office of Privacy and Data Protection’s duties and reporting requirements, including adding review of agency AI projects and aligning the office’s work with JLARC recommendations; the chief privacy officer testified in support, explaining that the bill would formalize AI risk review, human oversight, and existing privacy/security review processes, with no fiscal impact. No votes were taken on the bills during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• So these projects represent various levels of maturity in design.
• levels, you need to find additional funds to support those people.
• And other communities that have lower incomes might need that.
• First, you have a main incoming station. First, you have a main incoming station.
• Are they working in areas that are low income?

Committee: Joint Joint Transportation Committee

Summary: The committee first heard a presentation from WSDOT on balancing uncertainty in capital program estimates and cash flow management. WSDOT explained the differences between design-bid-build and design-build delivery, its tiered risk-assessment process by project size, and how it uses base estimates, inflation, and risk modeling to set budgets. Staff said design-bid-build estimates are generally accurate within about 1% across the program, while design-build projects carry much wider uncertainty and are better communicated as ranges; they cited a P85 budget approach and noted that large, complex projects can be affected by market competition and long procurement timelines. Members asked about the Columbia River Bridge cost growth and about value engineering, and WSDOT said it uses value engineering but has limited scope to cut costs because of project requirements and policy mandates. Troy Swing also discussed cash flow, noting that a few large projects can significantly affect biennial funding needs, and said a risk pool would not reduce overall program risk but could help manage timing if paired with appropriation and cash-flow controls. The committee then received the final presentation in the WSDOT Project Delivery and Innovative Practices study from HKA Global. The consultant said WSDOT’s estimating practices are generally robust and recommended improving transparency by presenting budget authorizations as ranges or estimate classes, better tracking estimate growth over time, and adjusting advertisement timing to avoid competing lettings. The report also discussed surety bonding, suggesting the legislature consider restoring authority for reduced bonding on select large design-build projects or using phased bonding and alternative securities. On indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contracting, the consultant said current job order contract rules are restrictive and recommended legislative changes to make such tools more usable, especially for smaller tasks and to help use unspent funds more flexibly. The committee also heard a follow-up presentation on transit-oriented development policy recommendations tied to HB 1491. The Urban Institute’s Yona Freemark said Washington has been a national leader on TOD but that housing construction, especially in the Puget Sound, has slowed sharply since 2022. He said rising construction costs, high financing costs, and local tax and rent conditions are making many TOD projects infeasible, and recommended that the state fill infrastructure funding gaps around stations, revisit MFTE affordability requirements, consider minimum rather than average density requirements near transit, and create a statewide system to track TOD outcomes such as affordability, gentrification, and transit access. Members questioned the study’s developer interviews, the role of rent control and crime, property tax assumptions, and parking needs; the presenter said the study included five private developers, that rent control was not part of the study scope, and that parking was included in the model assumptions. Finally, the committee began a presentation on regulating emissions from ocean-going vessels at berth. Staff and consultants described California-style at-berth rules, which require shore power or equivalent emissions controls so ships can shut off diesel auxiliary engines while docked. The study is examining vessel traffic, emissions reductions, implementation costs, labor and operational needs, and possible effects on port competitiveness and cargo diversion. No votes or formal actions were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• So it requires that either the money is counted as spending at the state level or at the local level.
• the money is counted as spending at the state level or at the local level.
• In terms of our debt level,... Tend to have very high reserve levels.
• of income tax or differing levels of sales tax, Or differing levels of income tax or differing levels
• We're not going to lower taxes on the upper-income... ...people and raise them on the lower-income people

Committee: Senate Budget and Fiscal Review

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> payments based on their monthly income. payments based on their monthly income.
• aspects</c><00:40:53.920><c> that</c> um income levels and other aspects that um income levels and other
• one and go after level two.
• one and go after level two.
• </c> uh and to hold a high level of quality. uh and to hold a high level of quality.

Summary: The committee met with a quorum, approved the previous meeting minutes, and heard a presentation from Austin Reid of the National Conference of State Legislatures on education-related provisions in the federal One Big Beautiful Bill Act (H.R. 1). Reid said the law is projected to increase the federal deficit over 10 years, with major savings coming from Medicaid, student loan changes, and SNAP. He focused on how those changes could affect schools, including possible effects on free and reduced-price meal certification, state funding formulas that use SNAP as a proxy for low-income status, and Medicaid-funded school services for students with disabilities. Reid also outlined the new federal scholarship tax credit, which gives a dollar-for-dollar credit for donations to qualifying scholarship-granting organizations. He said families up to 300% of area median income may benefit, the program begins in 2027, and states must opt in and designate eligible organizations. He noted unresolved questions about whether states can add their own criteria and said Treasury regulations will be important. He also described the expansion of 529 plans to cover more K-12 and postsecondary expenses. On higher education, Reid explained a new workforce Pell grant option for short-term programs, with states and governors playing a role in determining eligible programs. He said the programs must meet placement, completion, and earnings measures and that implementation is expected to be tight before the July 1, 2026 effective date. He also reviewed student loan changes, including lower institutional loan limits, prorated borrowing for part-time enrollment, new caps on graduate and Parent PLUS loans, and a new earnings-based accountability standard that could make some programs ineligible for student loans if graduates earn too little. No votes were taken beyond approval of the minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Madam Chair, is there a specific level of vegetation management that your model assumes?
• With that monopoly, they were able to subsidize service for low-income individuals.
• They're qualified at the federal level, and right now they claim $3.50.
• it through Vantage Point at the New Mexico level, and they can distribute the funds.
• But we feel that we can do at that level.

Committee: House Science, Technology & Telecommunications Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• You ordinarily think if two people have the same income, they're living at the same level.
• You ordinarily think if two people have the same income, they're living at the same level.
• You ordinarily think if two people have the same income, they're living at the same level.
• You ordinarily think if two people have the same income, they're living at the same level.
• You ordinarily think if two people have the same income, they're living at the same level.

Transcript Highlights:

• The data should be accessible at the granular level of census tracts.
• That's why for lower-income, moderate-income households who are more cost-conscious, they don't wash
• So I want to kind of bring it down to that level.
• We can't argue the pilot. lower income repairs.
• So I want to kind of bring it down to that level.

Summary: The committee heard several energy and water affordability bills, with extensive testimony on SB 254 by Senator Becker, SB 541 by Senator Becker, SB 453 by Senator Stern, SB 292 by Senator Caballero, and SB 473 by Senator Padilla. SB 254 was presented as a broad utility affordability package addressing short-term climate credits, a Power Fund, tighter scrutiny of rate increases and utility profits, wildfire spending, securitization of future utility costs, and streamlining. Supporters, including TURN and several environmental and public power groups, said it could lower bills and reduce long-term costs; opponents from investor-owned utilities, labor, business, and local government raised concerns about market impacts, insufficient analysis, and the breadth of the bill. The committee approved SB 254 on a 6-3 vote and placed it on call. SB 541 focused on load flexibility and using existing grid capacity more efficiently. Senator Becker described it as a transparency and planning measure to identify cost-effective load shifting and reduce peak demand, while supporters said it could improve resiliency and save money. Several CCAs and utilities opposed the bill in print or unless amended, arguing that some language implied a mandate and that the concept needed more cost-effectiveness analysis; the author said amendments would remove language dividing the state goal among retail suppliers and clarify that the bill is not a procurement mandate. The committee passed SB 541 as amended to Appropriations on a 9-1 vote and left it on call. SB 453 by Senator Stern would return unspent ratepayer-funded microgrid program dollars and was described as a way to keep the lights on and redirect unused funds. It drew support from local government and environmental groups, with PG&E expressing concern about how the bill would affect its ability to spend awarded funds. The committee passed SB 453 as amended to Appropriations on a 12-0 vote. SB 292 by Senator Caballero would require more granular outage and reliability reporting, including census-tract-level data, to better inform resilience planning after PSPS events; utilities opposed unless amended, citing duplicative reporting and regulatory overlap, but the bill passed 12-0 to Appropriations. SB 473 by Senator Padilla would require or expand water utility decoupling to promote conservation and affordability. Supporters, including water utilities, labor, business, and local government groups, argued decoupling stabilizes revenue, supports conservation, and can keep rates lower for low-use customers. The Public Advocates Office opposed, saying prior pilot data showed no conservation benefit and about $1 billion in added costs, and that the CPUC had already rejected similar requests. Committee members questioned the conservation and capital-investment effects of the different rate structures; the author and supporters argued decoupling helps utilities fund infrastructure while allowing lower fixed charges for low-use customers. The transcript ends during that discussion, before a final vote on SB 473 is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• of the Reagan administration's, uh, federal, uh, income tax.
• So similarly with a family of three with a median household income that receives a working family's tax
• one, level two, level three, we're talking about police officers we're talking about firefighters, we're
• Further, by decoupling our earned Income Tax Credit from the Federal Earned Income Tax Credit, it protects
• As Henry Ford, uh, realized more than 100 years ago, when you provide, uh, Or allow lower income people

Committee: Senate Senate Tax, Business & Transportation

Transcript Highlights:

• We don't have income taxes. Florida did a great thing. We don't have income taxes.
• , a county level, or even at the macro level, if someone wants to refinance their home?
• for lower incomes.
• If we tie the relief to the income level, we can more narrowly tailor our tax reforms to best serve the
• Where is that at the local level?

Committee: Senate Appropriations

Transcript Highlights:

• Those two children alone, to feed them at that income level, lunch is probably $1,000 per student.
• Putting this forward is levels.
• We've even this afternoon talked about programs that have family income levels of far less than that
• </c> programs that that have family income programs that that have family income levels<01:31:28.560>
• The income level continues to creep up.

Summary: The Education Funding Committee met in executive session on a bill concerning school meal access and reimbursement. The bill would address local school districts’ responsibility to provide meals during school hours, reimburse schools for meals served at no cost, and make an appropriation. The committee first moved to retain the bill, with supporters saying it was complex, had uncertain fiscal impacts, and should be considered alongside other related meals bills. Opponents argued the committee already had enough information, that the bill served a small number of students at relatively low cost, and that delaying action would harm children who need food to learn. The committee also heard from Tim Roar, a Keene school business administrator and co-designer of the bill, who explained that the proposal was intended to be an opt-in program for districts, with rulemaking to set participation requirements. He said the bill was meant to target aid to students between 175% and 200% of poverty, reduce bad meal debt, and avoid spending taxpayer money on families who could afford to pay. He estimated the state cost at about $250,000 in year one, with local taxpayer costs around $8,500 for Keene, and said some districts already have systems for online applications while others do not. Committee members questioned him about meal debt, online application software costs, and how districts handle students who reach debt limits. Roar said districts still feed students who are hungry, but use other resources and family outreach when meal debt is capped, and he argued that parents should be responsible for providing lunch when they can afford it. Other members pushed back, saying they had seen students go hungry and that teachers sometimes pay for lunches themselves. One member noted the bill would increase eligibility, make it easier to apply, strengthen personal responsibility, and was not a mandate. The discussion ended without a recorded final vote in the excerpt, though the retain motion remained the central action under debate.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:04:16.479><c> at</c> um a housing crisis and have incomes at um a housing crisis and have incomes
• </c> 30 and 50% of our area median income.
• Still, at that level, Minnesota Housing was saying no to three out of four projects.
• </c> the hands of the people that local level the hands of the people that local level which<00:57:27.760
• </c><00:59:14.799><c> will</c> that people from varied incomes will that people from varied incomes will

Committee: House Housing Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• The taxes that we have in the state on the property tax level are such that a lower income person could
• The taxes that we have in the state on the property tax level are such that a lower income person could
• The taxes that we have in the state on the property tax level are such that a lower income person could
• The taxes that we have in the state on the property tax level are such that a lower income person could
• The taxes that we have in the state on the property tax level are such that a lower income person could

Committee: House Ways and Means

Transcript Highlights:

• And it's even beyond the state level.
• level.
• level.
• , which excludes child support income.
• , which excludes child support income.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Human Services heard an informational hearing on child welfare, foster care, community care licensing, child support, and related budget issues. CDSS described the Governor’s proposed child and family services budget, emphasized a family-centered and kin-first approach, and reported that foster care entries and congregate care placements have declined over the past decade. Witnesses also highlighted the importance of extended foster care to age 21, while noting persistent racial disparities for Native American and Black children and the need for stronger prevention, family finding, and community-based supports. A major focus was the proposed tiered rate structure (TRS), which CDSS said would shift funding from placement-based rates to child-centered supports, including care and supervision, strength-building dollars, and immediate needs funding paired with high-fidelity wraparound services. CDSS and county representatives said implementation is on track, with foundational policy guidance expected by the end of the year, CANS/CFT timeliness targeted by year-end, and the CWS CARES system nearing go-live in October 2026. Counties and providers raised concerns about whether the rate model and wraparound capacity will be sufficient, especially for higher-acuity youth, and asked for more data, clearer guidance, and continued collaboration. County Welfare Directors Association representatives also requested continued emergency response funding and an extension of flexible family supports, arguing both are needed to stabilize front-end child welfare work and bridge to TRS. Providers from FFAs and STRTPs warned that insurance costs, provider closures, and the transition to TRS could threaten service capacity unless the state addresses long-term insurance and reimbursement issues. LAO noted the Governor’s budget contains no new child welfare augmentations and said the main General Fund change reflects the expiration of one-time funding. No votes were taken; members instead asked for follow-up data, technical assistance, and possible future legislative or trailer bill solutions, including on insurance and implementation timelines.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> covers through 2023 and high level covers through 2023 and high level take-home<00:48:06.560><c>
• </c> of color and people with lower incomes of color and people with lower incomes do<00:59:58.400><c
• So uh high level focus areas climate.
• </c> that uh both at state and federal level that uh both at state and federal level it's<01:32:02.080
• <01:34:17.199><c> both</c><01:34:17.520><c> from</c><01:34:18.560><c> um</c> levels both from um levels

Bills: HF3556

Committee: House Energy Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• New enrollment is down 32% compared to last year and at its lowest level in years.
• Again, based on health care spending... ...income of California families.
• I would say that, you know, we don’t know what’s going to happen at the federal level.
• They meet all the other income requirements and so on. Okay.
• level, as a result of the egregious changes to an investment in health care system.

Summary: The joint informational hearing of the Senate and Assembly Health Committees focused on the “cost of uncertainty” in health coverage, access, and affordability amid federal policy changes. Opening remarks from committee leaders and members emphasized that California’s gains under the Affordable Care Act and Health for All policies—high coverage rates, consumer protections, and lower uninsured rates—are now threatened by federal rollbacks, including the expiration of enhanced premium tax credits and H.R. 1. Members repeatedly cited rising premiums, skipped care, medical debt, and the risk of coverage losses, especially for low-income Californians, workers, seniors, and immigrant communities. The first panel featured federal policy and state implementation experts, including Don Joyce, Jessica Altman of Covered California, and Elizabeth Lansberg of HCAI’s Office of Health Care Affordability. Testimony described the ACA’s coverage expansions and the current federal threats: shorter open enrollment, more verification requirements, loss of enhanced subsidies, and changes affecting immigrants and preventive coverage. Covered California reported that average monthly premiums could nearly double without the subsidies, new enrollment is down sharply, and more consumers are shifting into bronze plans with higher deductibles. HCAI explained its affordability strategy through spending targets, consolidation review, and primary care investment, while members asked about the impact of federal cuts on provider taxes, uncompensated care, and whether California can sustain coverage without new revenue. The second panel, with UC Berkeley Labor Center’s Miranda Dietz and California Health Care Foundation’s Christoph Stremikis, broadened the discussion to statewide cost drivers and consumer impacts. They highlighted that more than half of Californians under 65 rely on job-based coverage, yet premiums, deductibles, and out-of-pocket costs have risen faster than wages. They also pointed to medical debt, administrative waste, market consolidation, and underinvestment in primary care as major drivers of unaffordability. Members asked about the 25% of health spending that does not improve patient care, the role of fraud versus administrative friction, the effect of cost growth targets on workers, and the need for preventive care and possible revenue solutions. The hearing then moved to a third panel on human impacts, beginning with testimony from a Central Valley promotora describing how families are choosing lower-tier coverage, struggling with diabetes care, and facing higher premiums after subsidy losses.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I've covered building-level compliance and will now cover the specifics of campus-level compliance
• compliance and will now cover the specifics of campus level compliance in district level decarbonization
• for projects that serve households with incomes services to low-income households, with priority for
• projects that serve households with incomes at or below 125% of the federal poverty level.
• Commerce must prioritize low-income households when awarding funds.

Bills: HB2330 , HB2338

Committee: House Capital Budget

Keywords: energy systems, capital funding, state campus, school infrastructure, sustainability, weatherization, energy efficiency, community projects, environment