Transcript Highlights:

• As a final note, we wanted to mention that if the Legislature wants to continue to prioritize faculty
• We encourage the Legislature to keep that in mind as the network moves into operation. Thank you.
• We encourage the legislature to keep that in mind as the network moves into operation. Thank you.
• Yes, so I think, going back to the $550 million that was appropriated by the Legislature and General
• And the legislature, if you had to come back to the legislature at that time and said, we have a problem

Transcript Highlights:

• Commerce must submit a biannual report to the legislature that includes a statewide overview of energy
• And the bill directs Commerce to submit a report to the governor and the legislature that includes an
• So when we compile those reports under CETA, it should provide the legislature a very good window into
• CETA, it should provide the legislature a very good window into resource adequacy over the next four
• But at some point, the legislature needs to look at and seriously review the policies that have been

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:

• Our policy staff is new, but over 70% of members in the legislature are new to the legislature since
• We want to remind you that that legislature was split.
• Earlier in the program, the legislature also provided an exception to small forest landowners.
• The legislature has also recognized the broader public interest in maintaining working forests.
• The legislature has an essential oversight role in Forest and Fish.

Summary: The committee held a work session on the history, implementation, and current challenges of Washington’s Forest and Fish law and related Habitat Conservation Plan. Testimony from tribal representatives Jim Peters and David Herrera, former Rep. Jim Buck, and mediator Tim Thompson described the original timber, fish, and wildlife negotiations as a broad, collaborative effort intended to balance salmon and habitat protection with a viable timber industry. DNR’s Sabur Jawad outlined the program’s statutory framework, the roles of DNR, Ecology, Fish and Wildlife, tribes, local governments, landowners, and the Forest Practices Board, and explained that changes to aquatic-resource rules can come through adaptive management, legislative direction, or court orders. He also described the permitting and enforcement system, the programmatic HCP, road maintenance and abandonment work, and the adaptive management process, including the long-running NP stream-buffer studies and resulting rulemaking timeline. Agency and stakeholder testimony emphasized accomplishments such as decades of HCP coverage, annual compliance monitoring, road and fish-barrier improvements, small forest landowner assistance programs, and the completion of numerous adaptive management studies. DNR’s Katie Allen said the program has strong successes but also faces resource-intensive implementation, rising costs, and watershed-wide pressures beyond forestry, and she pointed to a State Auditor review that produced 13 recommendations now being addressed through an action plan and a structured decision-making model. Washington Farm Forestry Association executive director Elaine O’Neill said small forest landowners supported the agreement expecting assistance and flexibility, but argued the balance has shifted toward more protection and less practical consideration of rural vitality and property rights. Washington Forest Protection Association executive director Jason Spadero said the agreement has produced measurable environmental gains and regulatory predictability, but criticized the recent NP rule and urged continued science-based, economically balanced management. In the final discussion, tribal representatives said the collaborative, consensus-based process still works in some areas, but that the principals need to be re-engaged more directly and periodically to restore accountability and trust. They said the adaptive management process and funding remain important, but expressed concern that consensus has broken down in some recent rulemaking and that side negotiations or outside pressure can undermine the original agreement. Members asked how to restore the collaborative model; Peters suggested renewed commitment from the principal parties and more regular high-level meetings, while Herrera echoed the need to implement the auditor’s recommendations. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken during the work session.

Transcript Highlights:

• As a reminder, since 2021, the original investment that the legislature made was $600 million into this
• There are some programs that the Legislature and the Governor have supported over the last couple of
• There are some programs that the legislature and the governor have supported over the last couple of
• for modification if the Legislature would like to make it a priority.
• We additionally recommend that the Legislature direct the department to provide the Legislature with

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee 5 on State Administration heard presentations from Go-Biz and the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation on the Governor’s budget proposals. Go-Biz described California Jobs First, the state’s 10-year economic development strategy, and emphasized support for small businesses, workforce development, and targeted investment in sectors such as ag tech, life sciences, semiconductors, and advanced manufacturing. Members raised concerns about federal policy changes, tariffs, tourism, housing, child care, and whether state incentives are truly additive; Go-Biz responded that it tracks federal actions closely, works with chambers and advocates, and uses programs like California Competes to target jobs that would not otherwise come to California. The committee then reviewed the proposal to restore the California Competes grant program with $60 million. Go-Biz said the grant would help businesses that cannot use the nonrefundable tax credit, and explained the program’s five-year contracts, milestone-based awards, and recapture provisions. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the grant could be effective but recommended stronger oversight and clearer eligibility criteria, while also noting the 30% cap in trailer bill language may be too restrictive given the smaller funding level. Public testimony supported the grant and suggested considering refundability or transferability for the tax credit to broaden access for smaller and startup businesses. Members also heard the CHIPS-related proposal for $25 million to support Natcast’s semiconductor design and collaboration facility in Sunnyvale. Go-Biz and public witnesses argued the state investment would help secure a major federal research facility, retain engineering talent, and leverage billions in broader investment, while the LAO recommended rejecting the item because of its dependence on uncertain federal funding and the state’s budget condition. The committee also considered a $17 million continuation of CA RISE, which supports employment social enterprises; Go-Biz and several grantees cited strong job placement and workforce outcomes, while the LAO recommended rejection absent a more rigorous evaluation, noting prior LA RISE evidence did not show long-term employment gains. Finally, the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation presented budget requests for IT security and rent increases, and a trailer bill to raise fees across several programs. DFPI said decades-old fee schedules, inflation, and new regulatory responsibilities have created a structural deficit and warned the department could face insolvency without adjustments. The LAO recommended approving the fee increases only on a three-year limited-term basis and asked for more detailed revenue plans for programs not covered by the proposal, so the Legislature can assess actual collections and market impacts before making the changes permanent.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is my second term in the legislature.
• This is my second term in the legislature.
• This is my second term in the legislature.
• </c> we've we've encouraged the legislature we've we've encouraged the legislature and<01:03:29.680><
• </c> group uh that encouraged the legislature group uh that encouraged the legislature to<01:05:14.680

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, so this is us coming to the legislature and asking for the okay to do this as we see staff time and
• But we want to make sure that we are getting clear authority from the legislature to do that.
• </c> so this is us coming to the legislature so this is us coming to the legislature and<00:04:15.200
• </c><00:05:11.759><c> to</c> clear authority from the legislature to clear authority from the legislature
• And this also is not something that we would be seeking to bring before the legislature because that's

Transcript Highlights:

• Chairman and Representative Furman, I would say that is the decision before the legislature.
• I intend to give an update to the legislature at the end of this month in writing.
• Several sessions ago, we worked with the legislature to establish a dedicated fund.
• We are legislatively required to provide The legislature a monthly Medicaid budget report.
• We are legislatively required to provide the legislature a monthly Medicaid budget report.

Committee: House Health and Welfare

Transcript Highlights:

• So that additional million dollars last year, Chairman, the committee, the legislature, you funded an
• "The legislature has been very kind in the last several years, the last three years specifically, to
• funding we've received... ...is because of the support that we received from the legislature and the
• We're also looking for personnel to properly manage our facilities that the legislature has afforded
• And then with FAPN, I know the legislature supported them last year.

Bills: S0048

Committee: Senate Appropriations Committee on Transportation, Tourism, and Economic Development

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Transportation, Tourism, and Economic Development heard the Governor’s proposed FY 2026-27 budget for the TED silo and presentations from Commerce, Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, Military Affairs, the State Guard, State, Transportation, and Emergency Management. The Governor’s office outlined a $117.4 billion overall budget, including $18.3 billion for TED agencies, with major allocations for FDOT, Commerce, emergency management, tourism, military affairs, and state operations. Agency heads emphasized priorities such as housing and disaster recovery, workforce and rural infrastructure, law enforcement recruitment, defense support, tourism marketing, aerospace and spaceport investment, election audits, historic preservation, road and bridge maintenance, aviation safety, and emergency preparedness systems. Members asked several questions about the use and effectiveness of funding. Visit Florida officials said the public-private match is essential and that they exceeded the required match last year. Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles discussed trooper pay, vehicle replacement, aviation support, and transparency tools such as vehicle camera systems, with senators praising the department’s recruitment efforts. Military Affairs and the State Guard described readiness, recruiting, facility construction, and support for domestic missions, including hurricane response and perimeter security at the Everglades detention site; questions focused on deployment tempo, staffing, and costs. The Department of State explained funding for automated election audits, a conservation lab, and historic preservation, and said its arts grant changes were intended to standardize scoring rather than cut programs. Transportation highlighted a $15.4 billion total budget, major work program funding, safety initiatives, seaport and aviation investments, and the elimination of Florida Rail Enterprise funding due to reduced documentary stamp revenues. The committee also heard and passed CS/SB 48 by Senator Gates, which requires local governments to allow accessory dwelling units on a voluntary basis, while preserving local authority over setbacks, construction, and permitting. An amendment removed reusable tenant screening reports and clarified that conforming ADUs are allowed by right without separate hearings. The Florida Restaurant and Lodging Association and several industry and business groups supported the bill, citing the need for long-term rental housing for workers. After debate, the committee adopted the amendment and reported the bill favorably by roll call vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• Two years ago, the legislature passed the Family Empowerment Scholarship Program.
• Two years ago, the legislature passed the Family Empowerment Scholarship Program.
• But, Nor frankly the legislature, because this is our law.
• It's not made by us, the Legislature. It's not made by our public school system.
• And secondly, the objection... ...We should report back to the Legislature.

Committee: Senate Appropriations

Summary: The Senate Appropriations Committee met with a quorum present and took up two bills. The first, SB 250 on rural communities by Senator Simon, was described as a broad rural development package creating an Office of Rural Prosperity, a Renaissance grant program, housing and transportation investments, added funding for rural education consortiums, and health care initiatives for rural areas. Senator Harrell asked about overlap between road funding programs, and the sponsor explained that eligible counties could receive both SCRAP and FARM funding. Several organizations waived in support or spoke in support, and the bill was reported favorably by unanimous vote. The committee then heard SB 318, the committee substitute for educational scholarship programs by President Gates. The bill was presented as a response to Auditor General findings about the rapid growth and administration of Florida’s school choice and scholarship programs. It would separate Family Empowerment Scholarship funding from the FEFP, require more frequent student enrollment verification, lower scholarship funding organization administrative fees, require return of overpayments, create a student ID system, establish a $250 million stabilization fund, require annual audits, and direct DOE to recommend future program administration through competitive procurement. Gates also offered five amendments, including technical changes to eligibility documentation and a substantive amendment requiring a DOE report on future administration and competitive selection; all five amendments were adopted. During debate and public testimony, senators and witnesses discussed accountability, software solutions, reimbursement delays, monthly attestations, and impacts on public schools and families. Supporters and opponents alike raised concerns about bureaucracy, fraud prevention, special education services, and whether the bill would help or burden parents. Gates said the bill aimed to fix tracking and payment problems without capping the program, and he noted the IEP timeline would be aligned with public school timelines. After debate, the committee reported CS for SB 318 favorably by unanimous vote, and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• We look forward to partnering with the Legislature, the administration, and stakeholders to address these
• And so we are also hoping to partner with the Legislature and the administration on addressing some of
• So we're trying to explore whether or not that might be something that the Legislature would consider
• “Where we landed is to do one-to-two, but we also look forward to working with the Legislature and the
• I would like to ask the Legislature provide oversight by reviewing and revising...

Summary: The joint Assembly and Senate business committees held a sunset review hearing on the California State Board of Pharmacy, with board leadership describing the board’s consumer-protection role and its priorities around access, enforcement, and updating pharmacy law. The board emphasized a proposed shift toward a standard-of-care model for pharmacists, arguing it would reduce rigid protocol requirements and improve access to services such as HIV PrEP/PEP, contraception, and naloxone. Board representatives also discussed pharmacy deserts, possible fee waivers for pharmacies in underserved areas, concerns about payer practices contributing to closures, continuing education audits, and a request to restore more flexibility in licensure decisions and probationary monitoring for applicants with certain criminal histories. A major focus of the hearing was the board’s ongoing compounding regulations, especially the treatment of sterile versus nonsterile compounding and substances such as glutathione and methylcobalamin. The board said the proposal was not a ban on those substances and described the rulemaking as grounded in federal law, USP standards, and public comment, noting the process had gone through multiple modified texts and hearings. Testimony from stakeholders was sharply divided: pharmacists, veterinarians, firefighters, naturopathic doctors, and patient advocates warned the rules were restricting access to compounded medications and harming patients and first responders, while the California Medical Association, psychiatric physicians, and PhRMA raised concerns that the board’s proposals could expand pharmacist authority beyond training, affect physician practice, or create safety risks. Other public comments addressed pharmacy technician ratios, remote processing, flavoring medications, hospital-specific regulation, budget and enforcement transparency, and whether the board should add members with community compounding or pharmacy technician expertise. Committee members also asked about the board’s oversight priorities and the rationale for its standard-of-care proposal. Board staff explained that consumer protection includes education, licensing, policy, and enforcement, with the highest-priority enforcement cases being those posing imminent public harm. After public testimony concluded, the chairs thanked participants and adjourned the sunset review hearing, announcing an immediate transition to the joint informational hearing on the Department of Cannabis Control.

Transcript Highlights:

• Additionally, in 2023, the legislature amended the PFIA sections related to Israel.
• We urge this legislature to focus on the ...are intended to divide Floridians.
• We urge this legislature to focus on things that really matter to Floridians.
• We filed 3,000 bills a year in this legislature and passed 200 to 300 of them.
• We filed 3,000 bills a year in this legislature and passed 2 to 300 of them.

Committee: Senate Governmental Oversight and Accountability

Summary: The Committee on Governmental Oversight and Accountability met with a quorum present and took up two bills and one presentation. Senate Bill 108, on administrative procedures, was presented by Senator Burgess on behalf of Senator Grall. The bill would require agencies to systematically review rules over five years old, submit annual regulatory plans and reports, and take action on reviewed rules; it also would speed publication of proposed rules after new rulemaking authority and expand transparency for incorporated materials and rule histories. Americans for Prosperity appeared in support, there was no debate, and the bill was reported favorably on a roll call vote. The committee then heard a presentation from State Board of Administration Executive Director Chris Spencer on implementation of statutory investment restrictions affecting state funds. He reviewed the SBA’s structure and fiduciary duties, said the agency must maximize financial return using only pecuniary factors, and described the Protecting Florida’s Investments Act restrictions involving Northern Ireland, Cuba, Venezuela, Israel, Sudan, Iran, and China. He noted recent changes, including expanded Iran restrictions after the October 7 attacks, the addition of China-related divestment requirements, and the SBA’s move to eliminate China and Hong Kong from its global equity benchmarks; he said the agency is ahead of schedule on required divestment and in compliance with the law. Senate Bill 100, on display of flags by governmental entities, was then presented by Chair Fine. The bill would prohibit political flags on government buildings and allow active-duty service members and veterans to use reasonable force to stop flag desecration. The committee heard extensive public testimony, with supporters arguing government buildings should not display political messages and opponents raising First Amendment, vagueness, and enforcement concerns, especially regarding LGBTQ-related flags and school settings. Senators also questioned the bill’s definitions and the reasonable-force provision. After debate, the committee voted to report SB 100 favorably, with Senators Arrington and Polsky voting no and Senators Brodeur, McClain, Rodriguez, Fine, and Chair DeSiglie voting yes. At the end of the meeting, Senator Rodriguez was recorded as voting yes on SB 108, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• We also would recommend that the legislature take steps to ensure that H.R. 1 implementation is done
• But I also want to convey that I believe the report was transmitted to the Legislature yesterday.
• Okay, usually when it's delayed by that much, we, and for transparency, not just for the Legislature
• This includes, we already talked about the $20 million that was authorized by the Legislature.
• We also urge the Legislature to prevent a hunger cliff by restoring benefits.

Transcript Highlights:

• We also would recommend that the legislature take steps to ensure that H.R. 1 implementation is done
• But I also want to convey that I believe the report was transmitted to the Legislature yesterday.
• Okay, usually when it's delayed by that much, we, and for transparency, not just for the Legislature,
• This includes, we already talked about the $20 million that was authorized by the Legislature.
• We also urge the Legislature to prevent a hunger cliff by restoring benefits.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Human Services opened its first hearing of the year with a discussion centered on CalFresh, the Department of Social Services, and related anti-poverty and immigrant services programs. Chair Jackson framed the hearing as a response to the “historic and enormous challenges” created by H.R. 1, emphasizing that the committee’s goal was to minimize harm to vulnerable Californians. No votes were taken in the hearing. The first major topic was the impact of H.R. 1 on CalFresh eligibility and administration. CDSS estimated major federal funding reductions, with hundreds of thousands of Californians potentially losing benefits under new time limits and work requirements for able-bodied adults without dependents, and additional losses among certain non-citizen groups. County welfare directors, eligibility workers, SEIU, and other advocates argued that counties are underfunded and understaffed to implement the new rules, and urged release of the previously authorized $20 million General Fund, a county match waiver, and an additional ongoing workforce investment. LAO and the Department of Finance said they were reviewing the administration’s proposals and emphasized the need to use existing data, automation, and statutory direction to reduce administrative burden and improve implementation. A second panel addressed county administrative backfill and the broader fiscal effects of H.R. 1. CDSS explained that the law shifts more administrative costs to the state and counties beginning in federal fiscal year 2027 and could also create future state benefit costs tied to payment error rates. County and food bank representatives warned that many counties will struggle to absorb the higher match and that penalties tied to payment error rates could worsen budget pressure. Members pressed Finance and CDSS for clearer timelines, written responses, and more detailed workload assumptions, while Finance said it was still analyzing the federal guidance and county resource needs. The final major topic was the California Food Assistance Program (CFAP) and possible state responses for people losing federal CalFresh eligibility. CDSS said CFAP remains limited by statute and by the federal structure it currently uses, but that the planned expansion to Californians age 55 and older regardless of immigration status remains on track for October 1, 2027, subject to funding. Immigrant advocates urged the state to fold newly excluded humanitarian immigrants into CFAP and to invest in outreach and administration, while Western Center on Law and Poverty proposed a broader state-funded anti-hunger response for people cut off by H.R. 1. LAO noted that the CFAP expansion is difficult to estimate and that further policy and technical work would be needed to assess costs and implementation options.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> product of the legislature. product of the legislature. uh<00:10:44.800><c> and</c><00:10:45.200
• <00:10:55.760><c> and</c> Legislature and legislature and, um, is that how one would remove a legislative
• </c> say members of the legis legislature say members of the legis legislature wanted<00:16:07.079><c
• </c> that the legislature could take action that the legislature could take action on<01:11:07.280><c
• I do I feedback to the legislature.

Transcript Highlights:

• Recognizing the need for a cohesive framework, the Massachusetts Legislature enacted Chapter 164 of the
• And we thank the committee and the legislature for your continued support in recognizing the unique and
• EMWIC is a not-for-profit entity of the state established by the Legislature in 1975 as a designated
• EMWIC is a not-for-profit entity of the state established by the legislature in 1975 as a designated
• fair, I guess To make the state legislature more fair, egalitarian, and transparent.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy

Summary: The committee heard testimony on a range of energy, utility, broadband, and municipal infrastructure bills. Representative Powell supported H 3466, which would create a task force to study public ownership of utilities and alternatives to investor-owned electric and gas systems. Representative Therber supported H 3574, which would use RGGI funds to reimburse cities and towns affected by power plant decommissioning, citing lost jobs, tax revenue, and service cuts in communities such as Somerset, Plymouth, Salem, and Everett. Several witnesses from municipal light plants and related organizations testified in support of mutual aid bills, including H 3486/S 2252 and H 3330/S 2277, saying the measures would clarify protections and liability coverage for MLP workers assisting in emergencies and non-emergency work. Jim Leiden of EMWIC opposed H 3514/S 2295, saying the proposed board and governance changes would reduce local control, add burdens, and weaken confidentiality protections. A committee member asked whether the mutual aid bills had been reviewed for municipal impacts, and the witnesses said they had done due diligence. The committee also heard extensive testimony on H 3551/S 2306, the smart meter opt-out bills. Supporters argued that smart meters emit harmful wireless radiation, that some residents have developed health problems or electromagnetic sensitivity, and that opt-outs should be available without fees or penalties; several witnesses urged notification, consent, and non-transmitting analog meter options. The committee also heard testimony from municipal officials and the Massachusetts Municipal Association in support of H 3462/S 2250, which would strengthen municipal authority to enforce timely removal of double utility poles, citing safety, accessibility, and construction-delay concerns. Derek Leffert of Gateway Fiber opposed H 3450, saying it would improperly shift broadband deployment costs to competitors. At the end of testimony, the chair closed the hearing by motion and vote, with members voting aye and no opposition recorded.

Transcript Highlights:

• I do love that about the legislature and watching senators hash out bills, especially the heated debates
• Okay, the legislature finds that Idaho Code 39-102...
• The legislature further finds that Idaho Code 39-120...
• The state is better served typically when the legislature has a hand in how monies are spent.
• And then we'll have to work with the legislature to cover those bills in the future.

Committee: Senate Resources and Environment

Transcript Highlights:

• Last year, the Legislature provided that. 19th and 20th Judicial Circuits.
• Preeminence funding is something that we have historically prioritized as a legislature.
• I know a few years ago we asked the Legislature asked KPMG to make recommendations to the Legislature
• I mean, I expect that it will be something that future legislatures look at in their budgets.
• Declining birth rates, which is something the legislature doesn't have any control over.

Transcript Highlights:

• And have the governor requested that the legislature information, but we can look and get back to you
• Transmitting it to the legislature? I'm not sure if I can.
• I defer to counsel for the Senate as to what the legislature can and can't do.
• Redistricting is, of course, one of the most impactful decisions our legislature could make.
• 4 passed, and then the legislature stole some of those rights.

Committee: Senate Rules

Summary: The Committee on Rules met with a quorum and heard a Governor’s Office presentation on a proposed congressional reapportionment map. The governor’s counsel argued that mid-cycle congressional redistricting is legally permissible, that race should not be considered at all in drawing districts, and that the Florida Fair Districts provisions are inconsistent with federal equal protection law and should be treated as non-severable. The presentation also discussed the pending U.S. Supreme Court case Louisiana v. Callais and the Florida Supreme Court’s Black Voters Matter decision as part of the legal rationale for the map. Jason Parada, who said he drew the map alone, described the map as based on 2020 census block data, with county-level population estimates used only as a guide to identify faster-growing areas. He said the plan keeps 48 counties and 382 municipalities whole, has compactness scores similar to the current benchmark map, and uses traditional geographic and political boundaries such as roads, railways, county lines, and municipal lines. He walked through regional changes, emphasizing a race-neutral redesign that significantly altered South Florida, including changes to districts in Palm Beach, Broward, Miami-Dade, and the Everglades, while leaving several northern districts largely unchanged. Members questioned the witnesses extensively about the legal theory, the use of partisan data, the role of race, population growth, and the timing and review of the map. The witnesses said partisan data was considered along with other traditional redistricting criteria, but race was not used. They also said they could not speak to who else reviewed the map beyond EOG staff and counsel. Several senators raised concerns about the map’s compactness, county and city splits, the apparent partisan effects, and the fact that the map was released shortly before the special session. No vote or final action on the map was taken during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• So were they just trying to appease the Legislature, or what?”
• So through the establishment of this receivership, we recommend the Legislature continue to exercise
• But despite this, the Legislature retains some key abilities that it should continue to do.
• So addressing that will be a priority for both the receivership and the Legislature.
• But we also recommend that the Legislature direct CDCR to reduce the request and CDCR's baseline.

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee heard presentations from the Office of the Inspector General (OIG), California Correctional Health Care Services (CCHCS), the California Advancing and Innovating Medi-Cal (CalAIM) program, and the Coleman mental health receivership. The hearing focused on correctional health care, reentry, aging incarcerated populations, and the state’s progress toward compliance in the Plata and Coleman receiverships. Members also discussed the OIG’s intake complaint workload and medical inspection findings, as well as broader questions about staffing, vacancies, and the cost of court oversight. The OIG requested $275,000 General Fund for two permanent positions in its intake processing unit, citing a sharp rise in complaints from 3,200 in 2022 to 7,860 in 2025. OIG officials said complaints are categorized by issue and prison, prioritized by urgency, and generally responded to within 30 days, but they do not track complaint “validity” rates. The medical inspection unit reported that in cycle seven, case review performance was generally adequate while policy compliance was often inadequate; the lowest-scoring areas included emergency services, medication management, and health care environment. Members asked for more detailed reporting on complaint types, priority levels, and systemic issues. CCHCS described rising health care costs driven by an aging prison population, staffing vacancies, and contract medical expenses. Officials said more than 80% of the budget is personal services, and they are using hiring events, social media outreach, and expanded classifications to reduce vacancies. CalAIM officials reported early implementation success in pre-release and reentry services, including 89% Medi-Cal activation at release, 87% assigned managed care plans, 88% reentry care plans, and 59% warm handoffs, with about 169,000 claims submitted and $14.7 million reimbursed. The LAO noted that the Plata medical receivership has increased per-person costs and that the state should continue oversight while seeking ways to reduce vacancies and expand federal reimbursement opportunities. For the Coleman mental health receivership, the receiver’s office requested $33.9 million from the Mental Health Special Deposit Fund, including $8.2 million for receiver office staffing and $25.3 million to make court-ordered bonus payments permanent. The LAO supported continued oversight but recommended additional steps to address vacancies, including greater out-of-state recruitment, expanded telemental health, and possible consolidation of mental health services. The LAO also recommended reducing the telemental health staffing request and monitoring its effects. Members questioned the long-term cost of receiverships, the pace of compliance, and whether more detailed benchmarks and staffing data should be provided. No formal votes were taken during the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Did the Legislature have things in mind when it put the bond together?
• Clearly, the Legislature and the Governor are really focused on that.
• We recommend the Legislature reject this proposal.
• In 2018, the Legislature directed us to go through a service-based budgeting process.
• In 2018, the legislature directed us to go through a service-based budgeting process.