Transcript Highlights:

• components of this program that are specific to the availability of things like federal funding through
• for another $577 million in federal funds.
• Where does this program go in light of federal funding not being there, in light of the difficulty?
• Do we have the resources to fund those programs, fund those people and those programs at that dollar
• Federal funds, I would say that, you know, when we look at the scalability of the program, as the state

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Climate Crisis, Resources, Energy, and Transportation held an oversight hearing on home hardening and defensible space as wildfire mitigation strategies. The chair opened by stressing that California has reached a tipping point, with repeated community-scale wildfire losses, rising insurance costs, and growing utility wildfire mitigation expenses. The hearing was organized around four panels: what home hardening and defensible space are, community risk reduction and coordination, evaluation of current defensible space programs and proposed investments, and the future of home hardening and the California Wildfire Mitigation Program. The first panel featured IBHS, the Legislative Analyst’s Office, and local wildfire mitigation advocates. IBHS described wildfire spread through embers, flames, and radiant heat, emphasizing that structure separation, removing combustible materials within the first five feet of a home, and combining multiple mitigation measures significantly reduce loss. It highlighted its Wildfire Prepared Home and Wildfire Prepared Neighborhood standards, including an “essential” and “enhanced” level, and said California is ahead of other states but still needs scalable, standardized, and sustainably funded mitigation. The LAO outlined key policy questions for the Legislature, including the state’s role, intergovernmental coordination, cost-effectiveness, program design, measurement of success, long-term sustainability, and barriers to implementation. The chair and panelists discussed estimated costs, including roughly $15,000 for a basic retrofit and about $50,000 for more extensive ignition-resistant construction, and whether state funding should focus on the most cost-effective initial measures. The second panel focused on scaling adoption through local coordination, education, financing, and community-based programs. Megafire Action argued that home hardening is a market adoption problem and said the state should not try to pay for every home, but instead target high-leverage interventions across the “customer journey,” including education, financing, trusted certification, and neighborhood network effects. Ventura Regional Fire Safe Council described free home assessments, small retrofit grants, Firewise community support, and the importance of neighborhood-level action, local capacity, and cultural change. Marin Wildfire Prevention Authority described its locally funded model, grant program, public education efforts, and an Ember Ready program that helps residents navigate home hardening and Zone Zero compliance. The chair repeatedly emphasized the need for a coordinated statewide marketing campaign, stronger incentives, better insurance discounts, and more use of local, utility, federal, and private funding sources. The third and fourth panels addressed Cal Fire’s defensible space inspection program, the proposed defensible space financial assistance program, and broader state investments. Cal Fire said homes lacking compliant defensible space are far more likely to be damaged or destroyed and requested ongoing funding and staffing to stabilize inspections statewide; the LAO suggested the Legislature consider alternative funding sources such as GGRF or a reinstated SRA fee. Cal Fire and the State Fire Marshal explained that Zone Zero sets a minimum standard, local governments cannot go below it, and grant prioritization will favor jurisdictions that submit inspections. Cal Fire also said the new defensible space financial assistance program would focus on ember-resistant zone-zero work and, in the Southern California counties covered by the legislation, would assist about 3,125 homes at an estimated $8,000 per home. In the final panel, the State Fire Marshal described California’s layered strategy of parcel-level home hardening, defensible space, and neighborhood-scale mitigation, along with technical support, financial assistance, and incentives such as insurance discounts and builder marketing. The overall theme was that California must move from isolated efforts to a coordinated, science-based, and scalable statewide approach to reduce wildfire losses.

Transcript Highlights:

• Those partners could be Quiprup, which is a federal program where we have to provide a 15% match.
• That program is led by our federal partners, and the timing of projects getting construction funding
• Quipra, again, that federal program I just mentioned.
• It's not formula funded like Secretary Lede may be experiencing from his federal partners.
• Representative Wilder gets his question answered a little better, but it's not all federal funds.

Keywords: 965, house, all

Summary: The Ways and Means Committee held an informational hearing on the state capital outlay process, with Roger Husser and Matt Baker of the Division of Administration’s Office of Facilities Planning and Control (FPNC) presenting a detailed review of House Bill 2 and proposed improvements. They said FPNC administers about 54% of the bill, while other agencies administer the rest, and emphasized that the capital outlay program has improved significantly over the last few years, with project expenditures more than doubling due to better cash-flow management, staffing changes, and more efficient project administration. They also explained how the bill is structured by priorities, how the priority-one cash line of credit is capped and adjusted for construction inflation, and how the bill has grown into a much larger, longer-range plan than a true five-year program, especially on the non-state side. A major theme was that the bill contains too many dormant, legacy, and low-priority projects, which creates false expectations and ties up funding. Committee members pressed the presenters on culture change, third-party project management, staffing shortages, and the use of technology and statutory interpretation to speed projects without sacrificing compliance. Husser and Baker said they had reduced internal bureaucracy, used staff augmentation because of hiring difficulties, delegated smaller projects to agencies when appropriate, and improved cash-flow analysis so projects can move forward with less money up front. They also discussed overappropriations, dormant projects, and the need to reappropriate unused funds to projects that can actually spend them. The presenters offered several recommendations and considerations: limit the number and size of new projects, reduce scope creep, require more regular endorsement of long-running projects, consider caps on priority-five funding, impose time limits and reporting requirements on non-state grant projects, and possibly require non-state entities to escrow or otherwise demonstrate their match earlier. They also suggested bundling related projects together, expanding that approach beyond the current pilot, and improving transparency by showing full project funding history and the first year each project appeared in the bill. No votes were taken, and the meeting remained informational, with members generally supportive of the efficiency reforms while also raising concerns about false hope, dormant projects, and the need for clearer expectations and accountability.

Transcript Highlights:

• being but the federal funds is what's being but the federal funds is what's being reimbursed<01:52
• Everything else is federally funded.
• Otherwise, I'm relying on my federal funds and I honestly cannot tell my federally funded staff, you
• Otherwise, I'm relying on my federal Otherwise, I'm relying on my federal funds<02:15:04.480>
• and I honestly cannot tell my funds and I honestly cannot tell my federally<02:15:07.760> funded<

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee met to begin work on HB 742, which would require catastrophic special education aid to be drawn from the education trust fund, and more broadly to study special education aid/differentiated aid and related costing issues. The chair said the group was starting early because the issue has been debated for years without resolution, local districts are being forced to absorb prorated costs, and the committee wants to send the Department of Education and HHS Medicaid a clear request for data and recommendations before retained bills return in the fall. A committee clerk was also selected, with Representative Reverend volunteering to take notes for the meeting. Members reviewed background materials on special education enrollment, high-cost students, and possible funding formulas, including data on students in high-cost brackets and prior ideas such as category-based funding and caseload-based approaches. The chair also referenced research on other states, including Arkansas, which uses a different special education funding structure and audits IEPs. The committee emphasized that it was focused on the funding mechanics and costs, not on questioning whether services should be provided. Henry Lipman of HHS explained how Medicaid-to-schools currently works in New Hampshire. He said 172 school districts participate, but utilization dropped during the pandemic and remains below historical levels, in part because districts need the capacity to bill Medicaid. Under the current system, schools receive reimbursement based on half of the Medicaid fee schedule, with the school district effectively providing the state share. He said the federal government is requiring a shift by July 1, 2026, to a true certified public expenditure model based on actual costs, which should allow schools to recover 50% of their true costs and some administrative overhead. The department has received a roughly $2.5 million grant to hire a vendor and support districts through the transition, and an RFP and stakeholder meetings are underway. Committee members asked about how costs would be determined, whether the new system would use actual district-specific costs rather than averages, and how the department would support districts that do not currently participate. Lipman said the cost model would be based on each district’s own reasonable costs, subject to audit standards, and that the department expects to provide templates and technical assistance through the vendor because its staff is limited. He also said about one in four New Hampshire children are enrolled in Medicaid, that child enrollment has been relatively stable, and that continuous coverage rules should reduce churn. No votes or formal actions on HB 742 were taken during the meeting beyond organizing the subcommittee and beginning testimony and discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• and much of the talent development comes from federal funding.
• Figuring out a way to help fund that and other programs, I think will also help keep those people here
• And UC received about half of those NIH funds, or... ...over $2.5 billion in federal fiscal year 2024
• All training programs have data on this, essentially, and particularly if they're funded federally, but
• All training programs have data on this, essentially, and particularly if they're funded federally, but

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Biotechnology and Medical Technology met on August 19, 2025 to examine the effects of federal grant cuts, tariff uncertainty, and related policy changes on California’s biotech, medtech, and academic research ecosystem. The chair and panelists emphasized California’s outsized role in the industry, describing major clusters in the Bay Area, Los Angeles, and San Diego, and explaining how research, startup formation, manufacturing, and clinical trials are interconnected across the state. Speakers from Biocom California, California Life Sciences, Farma, UC, Stanford, CSU Biotech, and UCLA all argued that NIH and NSF funding are foundational to discovery, workforce training, and commercialization, and that disruptions are already chilling venture capital, startup formation, and hiring. Witnesses described several concrete impacts: suspended or terminated grants, reduced doctoral admissions, fewer training opportunities, canceled retreats and internships, and anxiety among graduate students and early-career researchers. UC reported hundreds of millions of dollars in suspended or terminated NIH and NSF funding, while Stanford said more than a thousand training and career-development grants nationwide have been frozen or ended, affecting multiple trainees per grant. CSU Biotech said 133 federal grants had been terminated, scaled back, or canceled, totaling about $140 million, including nearly $30 million from NIH and NSF. Industry representatives also warned that proposed antitrust limits on mergers and acquisitions could undermine the standard biotech exit path and further deter investment. Committee members asked about the duration of the disruption, the possibility of state action to offset federal losses, and whether California could better support workforce development, manufacturing, and R&D tax credits. Panelists urged the Legislature to preserve and expand state support for STEM education, internships, apprenticeship pathways, manufacturing incentives, and the R&D tax credit, and to consider infrastructure and housing as part of competitiveness. They also noted that tariffs are already raising costs for medtech components and building materials, and that China is increasingly competing for R&D, talent, and licensing deals. No formal votes or bill actions were taken at the hearing; the meeting was informational and focused on testimony and discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• This year the reinsurance program is funded through a state appropriation.
• some programs that of those but funded some programs that are,<00:42:46.240> you<00:42:46.400
• funding for STI cuts to um our federal funding for STI and<00:45:17.119> HIV<00:45:17.680>
• health department's about 50% federally health department's about 50% federally funded,<00:48:27.440
• program fund is going to make up less than 40% of the estimated loss of federal Medicaid funding.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, due to actions at the federal level, the funding for these providers has been severely threatened
• Um, and unfortunately these providers are in real danger of having critical federal funding pulled from
• Minnesota currently receives about $50 million in federal funds to support what are called continuums
• Um, and for many providers, this federal funding is the lion's share of their funding they receive.
• In our packets, members, there is the continuum of care program funding awards amounts.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• federal program it's also a Fally it's a federal program it's also State<00:04:45.479> driven<
• funding outside the Medicaid program.
• an universe of federal funding you rais an universe of federal funding you rais an important<00:
• <00:11:41.920> all funding outside the Medicaid Program all funding outside the Medicaid Program
• serve<00:19:45.280> the uh federal funds to better serve the uh federal funds to better serve

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The House Finance Division III held an informational hearing on Medicaid, Medicare, Choices for Independence, and related financing, while postponing nursing facility financing and the county cap discussion to a later date. DHHS officials Ann Landry, Jonathan Ballard, and Medicaid Director Henry Litman provided an overview of Medicaid’s role, noting it is a federal-state partnership with state-specific eligibility and benefits, and emphasizing that Medicaid is a major funding and programmatic support for other DHHS initiatives. They also distinguished Medicaid from Medicare and explained that Medicaid funding is not the same as grant funding, though some providers may also receive federal grants through other channels. The presentation focused on New Hampshire’s relatively small Medicaid program and why it differs from national averages. Officials said about 184,000 residents are covered, roughly one in seven Granite Staters compared with one in five nationally, and attributed the difference largely to the state’s higher per-capita income and older population. They highlighted that about 65% of Medicaid-enrolled adults in New Hampshire are working, that only 22% of births are covered by Medicaid versus 42% nationally, and that the state’s uninsured rate is lower than the national rate. Members asked about covered services, income limits, federal matching rates, and the names of optional eligibility groups; staff explained that New Hampshire offers the optional groups discussed, with matching rates varying by category, including 90% for Granite Advantage and certain other groups, and 65% for children above the required level. A substantial portion of the hearing covered eligibility rules and recent policy changes. Officials reviewed the history of Medicaid, including HCBS waivers, the CFI program, Katie Beckett, the Olmstead decision, the ACA, and the end of continuous enrollment after the public health emergency. They also discussed the 2023 legislative expansion of postpartum coverage from 60 days to 12 months and child eligibility changes. In response to questions, DHHS said it is tracking utilization and costs for the postpartum expansion and reported that many maternal deaths occur after the prior 60-day coverage period, often involving substance use disorder or suicide; they said the longer coverage is intended to improve access to treatment and prevention. The committee also walked through household-income examples, clarified that Medicaid eligibility is based on household income and categorical rules, and confirmed that Granite Advantage ends at 138% of the federal poverty level unless another categorical basis applies. No votes were taken, and the hearing remained informational.

Transcript Highlights:

• Now, our pre-K program wasn't always providing access to kids at 160% of the federal poverty line and
• They can apply for funding from KDE under this program and expand preschool access in their district.
• So, this program would require no new general fund appropriation, only this dedicated revenue stream
• to fund this program?
• >> So, to fund this program. >> I appreciate the question.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The subcommittee met without a quorum and first heard from Kentucky Department of Education officials on career and technical education funding. KDE explained that House Bill 499 created a CTE funding formula using 60% weighted full-time equivalent enrollment and 40% incentives, but House Bill 6’s budget language excluded area technology centers (ATCs) from that supplemental funding. KDE requested approval of an additional budget request of $14,789,352 in each fiscal year 2027 and 2028 to include ATCs in the formula and hold local districts harmless. Officials said ATCs serve students from 117 of Kentucky’s 171 districts and argued the change would reduce funding disparities and better reflect the return on investment from CTE programs, citing growth in dual credit and work-based learning participation. Members asked whether the issue would need to be revisited each budget cycle. KDE responded that the problem could be fixed by removing the notwithstanding language from the budget bill, which they said would allow ATCs to be included under the existing statute. Representative Klein supported the request, saying the current clause could lead to stagnation and that the committee should help the program continue to grow. No vote was taken on the CTE item during the portion of the meeting provided. The committee then heard a presentation from PreK for All on expanding preschool access in Kentucky. Advocates said the state’s preschool program has been funded since 1990 and currently serves about 14,200 children at roughly $84 million per year, but that many working families still fall into a coverage gap. They proposed expanding eligibility to 250% of the federal poverty line, which they said would add about 9,600 children at a cost of $40 million in year two, after a planning year. The proposal also included regulatory flexibility for classrooms and partnerships with private child care providers and nonprofits, with speakers emphasizing child care deserts in some counties and citing research that early learning improves kindergarten readiness and later outcomes. No action or vote was taken on the preschool proposal in the transcript provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• in<00:30:45.399> increased federal funding will result in increased federal funding will result
• Federal funding is critical to Minnesota.
• Federal funding is critical to Minnesota.
• federal Indian Health Service funding federal Indian Health Service funding and<00:50:55.440>
• Federal funding has been frozen Federal funding has been frozen dedicated<01:18:47.239> public

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• fund, and um general<00:13:08.120> fund,<00:13:08.600> and<00:13:08.760> federal.
• general fund, and federal. general fund, and federal.
• The TANF funds can be used to meet four federally defined purposes that you see here on this slide.
• > uh<00:29:23.120> services, Program funds employment uh services, Program funds employment
• program within our fixed federal program within our fixed federal allocation.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes from its September 24 meeting after a motion and second. It then heard a presentation from New Mexico Early Childhood Education and Care Secretary Elizabeth Gragensky on that state’s early childhood system and planned universal child care rollout. She described how New Mexico consolidated multiple prenatal-to-age-five programs into a cabinet-level department, expanded pre-K to a longer day, and uses a cost model to set reimbursement rates intended to cover true provider costs, including wages, benefits, occupancy, food, and reserves. She also said the state created an Early Childhood Trust Fund and secured a constitutional amendment to dedicate 0.60% of the land grant permanent fund to early care and education, with the department’s budget growing from about $400 million in 2021 to just under $1 billion this year. Gragensky said families can begin applying for universal child care on November 1, with participation voluntary for both families and providers. She reported that New Mexico is aiming to expand capacity by adding 1,000 registered home providers, 120 group homes, and about 55 more centers, supported in part by a $13 million low-interest loan fund and a request for an additional $20 million. She said the state has seen growth in early childhood professionals, including a 64% increase over the last three to four years, and pointed to reported outcomes such as a 21% increase in literacy and a 75% kindergarten readiness rate, while noting that some measures are new and baseline comparisons are still being developed. Members asked about the funding sources, provider profitability, workforce development, and measurable outcomes. Gragensky said the program is designed to support provider sustainability through rates tied to true cost and includes allowances for sick leave, vacation, benefits, and reserves. She also said maternal labor force participation is 10% higher than the national rate and attributed that in part to child care access. The committee then moved to a separate presentation by Department for Community Based Services Commissioner Lisa Dennis and Division of Family Support Director Roger McCann on anticipated cuts to TANF and SNAP, beginning with an overview of TANF as a federal block grant with a fixed annual Kentucky allocation of about $180.7 million.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we have Medicare, which is a federal program.
• available for these programs based on the current level of federal funds that we expect to receive later
• With respect to the state and local cybersecurity grant program, that is federal funding, so no concern
• With respect to the state and local cybersecurity grant program, that is federal funding, so no concern
• thought, and also because there is federal funds left over from the existing programs at the end of

Summary: Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 6 heard the Governor’s May Revision proposals for the judicial branch, the Board of State and Community Corrections, the Department of Justice, and the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. The Legislative Analyst’s Office opened with a warning that the state budget remains structurally imbalanced and urged the Legislature to avoid new ongoing spending unless offset by reductions elsewhere. In the judicial branch discussion, the Judicial Council highlighted language access funding, appellate court security, a backfill for the state court facilities construction fund, and an extension of the lactation room mandate; Finance supported most items but suggested reporting language on interpreter costs and reducing the General Fund backfill. Members raised concerns about judicial vacancies, long-term salary freezes, remote hearings, and the lack of progress on court staffing in some counties. For the Board of State and Community Corrections, the administration proposed $10 million one-time each for the Missing and Murdered Indigenous People grant program and a human trafficking vertical prosecution grant program. The LAO said both should be weighed against other priorities and suggested the Legislature consider whether the Tribal Nations Grant Fund could support MMIP work, while Finance said it preferred General Fund support and wanted more review before any fund swap. Members strongly supported MMIP funding and asked whether ongoing support would be considered. On the human trafficking grant, Finance said BSC was a good fit because of its grant administration experience and prior vertical prosecution work, while legislators asked why the program was not placed with the Office of Emergency Services as originally contemplated in prior legislation. The Department of Justice presented antitrust litigation funding, Medi-Cal Fraud and Elder Abuse staffing, completion of organized retail criminal enterprise cases, and trailer bill language for a continuous appropriation from the Victims of Consumer Fraud Restitution Fund. The LAO supported the antitrust account use but questioned the Unfair Competition Law Fund’s ability to cover the full request without General Fund repayment, and recommended against a continuous appropriation for the restitution fund in favor of a more limited mechanism with legislative oversight. Finance said the fund would remain solvent and defended the continuous appropriation as necessary to pay victims promptly. In the CDCR portion, the largest discussion centered on the Boston Consulting Group efficiency review and sharply reduced savings estimates; LAO said the department had not fully explained the proposed position eliminations or future $100 million savings target, while Finance said the work reflected deeper analysis and ongoing efforts to find savings. Members repeatedly pressed CDCR and Finance on the gap between earlier promised savings and the revised figures. CDCR also outlined population projections showing continued declines in prison and parole populations, while LAO again urged the state to close an additional prison to save ongoing costs. The department then walked through several May Revision items, including workers’ compensation funding, a Corcoran honor housing dorm, incarcerated firefighter pay implementation, an incarcerated menopause program, mental health receiver staffing, mental health resource teams and crisis intervention teams, medical classification staffing changes, and AI note-taking for the electronic health record. LAO generally recommended limiting-term funding and more reporting for many of these proposals, while Finance defended them as necessary ongoing investments or court-ordered obligations. Members questioned the cost of workers’ compensation, the need for more prison closures, the lack of funding for women’s facility violence prevention, and the timing and transparency of the BCG savings process. No votes were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• federal funds.
• , federal-funded, and private-funded?”
• federal funds in the executive with general fund, basically.
• federal funds in the executive with general fund, basically.
• also federal funding by 7.8%.

Bills: HB1

Keywords: feed bill, legislative appropriations, legislative branch, New Mexico Legislature, general fund, legislative council service, legislative finance committee, legislative education study committee, house chief clerk, senate chief clerk, per diem, mileage, session expenses, interim committees, district staff, capitol complex, capital outlay data system, legislative processing system, redistricting, census redistricting

Transcript Highlights:

• Federal funds. Normally, we don't spend a lot of money on maintenance with federal funds.
• What happens is if we utilize federal funds— that's a good point, John— we utilize federal funds on maintenance
• employees out of federal funding.
• Typically what happens is you'll receive a federal fund or a federal grant.
• Our local grant program, funded annually through tax distributions, cannot be mixed with any federal

Transcript Highlights:

• states could use Title IV-E federal states could use Title IV-E federal funding<00:03:42.560>
• Like from the Family First money, what programs do you all fund from that?
• Like from the Family First money, what programs do you all fund from that?
• Programs we fund specifically with Title IV dollars.
• So, that general funds for that program.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Attendance Roll Call 00:00:19 DCBS 00:01:58, 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Item A removes funding for the Federal Help America Vote Act and replaces a portion of those funds with
• federal funds are anticipated.
• Then we can move to page nine where you'll see a summary of federal funds received by the trustee programs
• There is a large decrease in federal fund availability in 26-27 due to the removal of one-time funding
• The next is a decrease of $15.4 million in federal funds.

Bills: SB1, SB 1

Keywords: appropriations, budget, state funding, education, healthcare, infrastructure, campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The school readiness program is funded at $156 million in general revenue and over $1 billion in federal
• the recurring initiatives that were funded with the non-recurring federal funds.
• VPK is a state-funded program, and the budget for the 2024-25 program year is $438 million.
• So we do have our Bureau of Federal Education Programs, and they help manage all of the federal funds
• This includes both state and federal funds awarded to Florida, such as Title I and other federal funds

Summary: The Pre-K through 12 Budget Subcommittee held its first interim meeting, took roll, and established a quorum. Members introduced themselves, many noting backgrounds in education, school boards, local government, or parenting, and Chair Jenna Persons-Mulicka outlined the committee’s goal of building the fiscal year 2025-26 Pre-K-12 budget. She also reviewed the fiscal year 2024-25 education budget, noting that the Pre-K-12 portion totals about $21 billion, with the Florida Education Finance Program (FEFP) as the largest driver, along with major funding for VPK, school readiness, and school recognition. She explained that federal COVID relief funds have ended and that recent school choice legislation has affected budget structure. Commissioner Manny Diaz and department leaders then gave overviews of their divisions. Diaz highlighted Florida’s education rankings, record graduation rate, progress monitoring, expanded school choice participation, charter school growth, and teacher salary investments, while emphasizing a focus on literacy, math, and early learning. Carrie Miller described the Division of Early Learning’s school readiness and VPK programs, their funding, eligibility, accountability systems, and the importance of kindergarten readiness. Paul Burns outlined the Division of Public Schools’ work on educator quality, literacy, standards, certification, family outreach, federal programs, and school improvement. Suzanne Pridgen reviewed finance and operations functions, including budget management, FEFP calculations, grants, procurement, transportation, and emergency management. Adam Emerson described parental choice programs, including scholarships, charter schools, schools of hope, virtual education, and home education. Darren Norris detailed the Office of Safe Schools’ responsibilities for risk assessments, compliance inspections, threat management, grants, and training created after the Marjory Stoneman Douglas tragedy. Members asked questions about several issues, including whether the Safe Schools office recommends changes to the school safety grant distribution formula, whether early learning eligibility should shift from federal poverty level to state median income, how scholarship payments are verified to avoid funding students who return to public school, and whether daily attendance systems could improve funding accuracy. Other questions addressed hurricane-related survey disruptions, VPK provider reimbursement rates and instructional hours, teacher salary increases, school start time costs, and how voucher schools handle IEP accommodations. Department officials generally said some issues remain under review, supported moving school readiness eligibility to SMI, noted that scholarship and enrollment data are cross-checked and adjusted when needed, and said progress monitoring now helps schools support mobile students. On school safety, officials said exemptions are allowed in statute for some items but not for classroom doors, and that district-specific conditions matter. No votes were taken and no formal actions were reported beyond receiving presentations and discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• mandated program with dedicated funding, broad stakeholder support, and overwhelming public need?
• California fallen so far behind on progress of a federally mandated program with dedicated funding, broad
• So there is a group that has been focused on this work in the last three years through federal funding
• And that's where we see real significant gaps in funding, both at the federal level as well as the state
• And that's where we see real significant gaps in funding, both at the federal level as well as the state

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The joint oversight hearing focused on AB 988 implementation and suicide prevention in California Indian communities. Members and the chairs emphasized that 988 was intended to create a behavioral health crisis system with “someone to call, someone to come, and somewhere to go,” and then turned to the disproportionate suicide burden facing Native youth and the need for culturally responsive outreach and services. Assemblymember Bauer-Kahan, the bill’s author, said the law has already saved lives but argued that key parts of the system—especially interoperability between 911 and 988, mobile crisis dispatch, and adequate funding—are not yet working as intended. The first panel of stakeholders and call center leaders largely said California’s 988 network is underfunded and not fully integrated. Speakers from the Steinberg Institute and 988 California said call, text, and chat demand has grown sharply, but staffing and funding have not kept pace, leaving text/chat answer rates far below the state’s goals and sending many contacts to out-of-state backup centers. They also said mobile crisis teams are not being dispatched through 988 statewide, and that the state’s current governance and funding structure is too fragmented. WellSpace Health and other providers described 988 as the “front door” to crisis care, urged more stable funding, and recommended broader use of the CCBHC model to support mobile crisis and behavioral health infrastructure. San Joaquin County offered a local success story, describing a countywide crisis continuum that links 988, mobile crisis, behavioral health access lines, and follow-up services through warm handoffs and coordinated outreach. County officials said the model has reduced reliance on emergency departments and involuntary holds, and they noted that local partnerships and repeated community meetings were key to implementation. Members asked about staffing, tribal outreach, and how to make the system more measurable and interoperable; panelists said staffing projections should be based on actual call volume and contact length, and that tribal-specific outreach has often depended on temporary grant funding. State officials from CalHHS and DHCS then described the five-year implementation plan, the roles of multiple agencies, and current performance data. They said California’s 988 system has handled more than 74,000 contacts in a recent month, with in-state answer rates of 87% for calls and lower rates for chats and texts, and that unanswered contacts are routed to backup centers. They highlighted training efforts, LGBTQ+ competency work after the end of the federal “Press 3” option, and efforts to improve reimbursement for mobile crisis services. No formal votes or committee actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• federal state actually implements the federal program program program uh<00:36:52.480> and<00
• the programs that the division implements outside of AML, and then federal funds for that is 23% and
• > other budget. federal funds uh 58% and other budget. federal funds uh 58% and other funds<00
• , 33% federal fund, and 29% other funds.
• and<01:22:52.960> 29% general fund 33% federal fund and 29% general fund 33% federal fund

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• federal funding that New Hampshire federal funding that New Hampshire receives<00:13:02.560>
• funds for needed veterans programs.
• <02:00:38.320> funding,<02:00:39.679> which federal funding, which federal funding, which
• The Department of federal funding.
• millions in federal funding. millions in federal funding.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• As a result of the actions, the federal administration is threatening to withhold millions in funding
• These are programs that are protected under both state and federal laws.
• Federally, Title VI and Title VI... intimidate institutions into abandoning these programs.
• These are programs that are protected under both state and federal laws.
• funding to sustain our high-quality program for the school year to come.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Racial Equity, Civil Rights, and Inclusion held an informational hearing on diversity, equity, and inclusion in Massachusetts; no bills were heard or voted on. Chairs Bud Williams and Liz Miranda opened by framing the hearing as a response to recent federal actions they said threatened DEI efforts, funding, and civil rights protections in education and other sectors. They said the committee would hear from experts, agencies, advocates, and businesses about the legality and benefits of DEI and the impact of federal actions on the Commonwealth. Secretary of Education Patrick Tutwiler testified virtually that Massachusetts is pushing back against federal efforts to restrict DEI, including guidance and certification demands directed at schools. He highlighted state investments in early education, child care, early college, career and technical education, and educator diversity, arguing these efforts help close opportunity gaps for Black and brown students, students with disabilities, English learners, and other underserved groups. In response to member questions, he said federal education dollars are core to services for students and that the state is prepared to fight funding cuts while monitoring impacts across K-12, early education, and higher education. Elizabeth Matos of the Attorney General’s Office said DEIA programs remain legal under state and federal law and described AG guidance issued to help institutions navigate federal confusion. She reviewed litigation the office has joined or won, including efforts involving withheld school funds, museums and libraries, the Minority Business Development Agency, Head Start, AmeriCorps, and other federal actions. Members asked about immigration-related fear and profiling, and Matos pointed to existing Know Your Rights guidance, said complaints to the Civil Rights Division have increased, and noted the office is seeing issues involving housing discrimination, employment, public accommodations, and threats to call ICE. She also said the office is open to further legislative ideas but did not discuss specifics. Evelyn Carter, a social psychologist, testified that diversity, equity, and inclusion are often misunderstood and defined the terms plainly, emphasizing that diversity is a group characteristic, equity addresses unequal starting points, and inclusion is about belonging and access. She argued that DEI matters because it creates guardrails against bias, helps make environments accessible, and addresses ongoing inequities. In response to questions, she suggested practical strategies such as using clear criteria and written records in decision-making, broadening who is considered part of one’s in-group, and pairing bias awareness with concrete behavior-change tools. The hearing also included testimony from Meredith Tewitt of the Massachusetts Commission on the Status of Women, who spoke about the importance of DEI for women, veterans, and people who rely on federal institutions, and urged lawmakers to continue supporting inclusion and access.