Transcript Highlights:

• The governor's budget does balance the budget in the budget year plus in the following year, and that's
• During the fiscal year 2025-26 budget process, the DMHC requested and received approval for $1.157 million
• Similar to the previous proposal, during the fiscal year 2025-26 budget process, the DMHC requested and
• So if we could get that information sooner than later as we go through the process to finalize the budget
• The system introduces new volatility into the budget and fiscal forecasting processes.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Health held a May Revision hearing covering several health-related budget proposals and broader concerns about the state’s budget structure. The Chair opened by praising some May Revision changes, such as added health IT funding, county administration support tied to Medi-Cal changes, a delay in Medi-Cal cuts for some lawfully present immigrants, and additional support for Covered California subsidies, while criticizing proposed increases in Medi-Cal premiums, changes to senior eligibility, the lack of a Medi-Cal dental solution, and other reductions affecting counties, mobile crisis units, workforce incentives, and physician shortages. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the state’s budget condition remains weak despite progress on the structural deficit, and the Department of Finance said the May Revision uses a mix of reductions, reforms, revenue proposals, and fund shifts to cut out-year deficits. The committee first heard Department of State Hospitals proposals, including adjustments to county bed billing authority, contract exemption language for online clinical/pharmacy subscriptions, reversion of unspent funds, a revised Metro Central Utility Plant replacement project, electronic health record implementation, and workforce development funded partly through Behavioral Health Services Act resources. DSH also described savings and realignments in incompetent-to-stand-trial and conditional release programs, including extending the independent placement panel program and shifting funds to support additional bed capacity and a mental health rehab center. Members asked about the use of BHSA funds for workforce programs, and the department said the proposal would replace General Fund support with BHSA reimbursements. The Emergency Medical Services Authority proposed funding for statewide behavioral health crisis response guidance and for enterprise system development, and the Department of Managed Health Care proposed modernization of its complaint system and claims-settlement data system to improve oversight and comply with AB 3275. The largest discussion centered on the administration’s BHSA spending plan under Proposition 1, including state-directed prevention, workforce, and other uses, plus General Fund offsets for existing programs. The LAO questioned whether some proposed offsets fit Proposition 1’s non-supplant and eligible-use requirements, while the administration argued the uses were consistent with the measure and that the state-directed share can be adjusted annually. The Commission for Behavioral Health’s proposals drew the most public and member concern. The administration proposed cutting the commission’s Innovation Partnership Fund from $20 million to $10 million and reducing the Community Advocacy Program by $6.7 million, while redirecting BHSA dollars to other state purposes and direct services. Commissioners, advocates, and several members argued the cuts would weaken community voice, reduce support for underserved populations, and disrupt grants already in process; they also objected to using BHSA funds to backfill General Fund commitments. Public commenters, including youth, disability, behavioral health, LGBTQ, tribal, veteran, immigrant, and community-based organization representatives, overwhelmingly opposed the cuts and urged preservation of prevention, advocacy, mobile crisis, and innovation funding. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• So each year, the LEAP committee holds a meeting to advance the budget format change process.
• budget structures.
• For other agencies, that process starts when agency personnel… For other agencies, that process starts
• Went through that process. It was a year-long process. We included fiscal staff agencies.
• budgets go into effect.

Keywords: 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Where does this process stand?
• ON AN OVERALL BUDGET AGREEMENT OR BUDGET BILLS FOR THIS YEAR TO CONSIDER.
• of this budget.
• process. >> Thank you, Mr.
• We've now, in this budget extender, $23.1 billion toward this year's budget.

Keywords: 993, senate, all

Summary: The Senate opened with routine business, including approval of the prior journal and several messages from the Assembly to discharge and substitute identical Senate bills. The chamber then took up a budget extender, Senate Print 10262/Assembly Bill 11295, which would appropriate $2.9 billion to keep state government operating through May 14 while budget negotiations continued. Senator O’Mara questioned the delay in reaching a full budget and criticized the lack of clarity on major policy issues, conference committees, school aid timing, and a proposed $1 billion utility ratepayer relief plan, arguing the state’s spending and affordability problems were worsening. Senator Serrano responded that negotiations were in the final stretch and that the extender was necessary to maintain government operations. The extender passed 59-1 after being restored to the non-controversial calendar. The Senate also considered a major election-law bill, Senate Print 88A, providing for automatic voter registration and pre-registration through DMV, Medicaid, and NYCHA-related transactions. Senator Walczyk’s proposed amendment to require voter ID was ruled nongermane, and his appeal was rejected. The bill prompted extended debate over whether the process would protect against non-citizen registration or instead remove barriers for eligible voters. Supporters, including Senator Gianaris, said it would streamline registration and help eligible but unregistered New Yorkers participate; Senator Zellner said it would strengthen the process. Opponents, including Senators Walczyk, Borrello, Helming, Rhoads, and Martins, warned it would shift responsibility away from bipartisan boards of elections, create administrative errors, and risk improper registration. The bill ultimately passed after being restored to the non-controversial calendar, with senators explaining votes along party lines. The chamber also adopted or advanced several resolutions and recognized guests. Senator Gallivan’s Police Week resolution drew remarks honoring fallen officers and law enforcement families, with Senators Chan, Rolison, Weik, Ryan, and Myrie speaking in support. Senator Sepúlveda’s resolution commemorating Dominicans in Albany was also discussed, with praise for the Dominican community’s contributions to New York and supportive remarks from Senator Chan. In addition, the Senate heard introductions for guests from Allen A.M.E. Church and the creators of the documentary “Teenage Wasteland.”

Transcript Highlights:

• The governor's budget does balance the budget in the budget year plus in the following year, and that's
• During the fiscal year 2025-26 budget process, the DMHC requested and received approval for $1.157 million
• Similar to the previous proposal, during the fiscal year 2025-26 budget process, the DMHC requested and
• So if we could get that information sooner than later as we go through the process to finalize the budget
• The system introduces new volatility into the budget and fiscal forecasting processes.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Health heard presentations on several May Revision proposals, beginning with an overview from the Legislative Analyst’s Office and the Department of Finance on the state’s budget condition and the administration’s efforts to reduce out-year deficits through a mix of revenue measures, fund shifts, and program reductions. The chair expressed support for some administration proposals, such as added health IT funding, county administration support, a delay in Medi-Cal cuts for some immigrants, and additional Covered California subsidy backfill, but also criticized proposed Medi-Cal premiums, changes to senior eligibility, the lack of a Medi-Cal dental solution, and other cuts affecting counties, workforce, and rural access. The LAO said the budget still relies heavily on reserves and borrowing and urged more reserves and caution on new commitments. The Department of State Hospitals presented several proposals, including reduced county bed billing authority, limited contract exemption authority for online clinical subscriptions, reversion of unspent prior-year funds, additional lease revenue authority for the Metro Central Utility Plant replacement, funding for electronic health record implementation, and a shift of workforce development costs to Behavioral Health Services Act funds. The department also described savings and realignments in its IST and CONREP programs, including making the Independent Placement Panel permanent and adjusting funding for jail-based competency treatment and conditional release services. Members questioned the BHSA workforce funding swap, and the administration said it was part of a broader General Fund offset strategy. The Emergency Medical Services Authority requested funding for statewide behavioral health crisis response guidance and for continued operation of its enterprise systems, and the Department of Managed Health Care sought funds to modernize its complaint system and claims settlement data systems. The largest debate centered on the administration’s proposed use of Behavioral Health Services Act revenues to offset General Fund spending and fund state-directed behavioral health programs. The Department of Finance said the proposal would support population-based prevention, workforce programs, mobile crisis services, and other state-directed uses, while the LAO said it was still reviewing whether the uses comply with Proposition 1 and whether the non-supplement and eligible-use requirements are met. The Commission for Behavioral Health strongly opposed proposed cuts to its Innovation Partnership Fund and community advocacy grants, arguing that both programs are central to community voice, culturally responsive services, and statewide innovation. Commissioners and many public commenters said the cuts would reduce grants to community-based organizations, tribal groups, veterans, LGBTQ communities, youth, and other underserved populations, and that the advocacy program helps communities participate in local planning and access services. The Department of Finance defended the reductions as a way to prioritize direct services and said the programs fit within Proposition 1, but members criticized the proposal as a midstream shift that would weaken community engagement and redirect funds away from prevention and advocacy.

Transcript Highlights:

• The budget process is actually worked out in the form of campaign donations.
• The budget process is actually worked out in the form of campaign donations.
• Floridians deserve a budget process that earns their trust and a budget that reflects their priorities
• Floridians deserve a budget process that earns their trust and a budget that reflects their priorities
• Floridians deserve a budget process that earns their trust and a budget that reflects their priorities

Summary: The House convened with prayer, a moment of silence for former Senator Donnell C. Childers, the Pledge of Allegiance, and recognition of Officer Antonio Richardson as law enforcement officer of the day. A quorum was announced, the journal was approved, and the Speaker said the chamber would take up 11 budget conference reports, with debate and final votes on each report. The first report considered was HB 7031E, the tax package, followed by HB 501E, the state budget appropriations bill. On HB 7031E, Chair Duggan explained that the conference report included a range of tax reductions and tax-related changes, including sales tax holidays, property tax and homestead-related provisions, reductions in certain taxes and fees, and new exemptions or administrative clarifications. He said the package also added items such as sales tax relief for certain university construction projects, a tennis admissions exemption, and changes to agricultural property tax treatment, and that the amendment reduced state and local tax revenues by $272.2 million. Members questioned the bill about the child care tax credit reduction from three years to one, the homestead exemption provision for certain diplomats and foreign service personnel, the absence of gas tax relief and combined reporting, and the inclusion of firearm accessories and tennis tickets in sales tax holidays. After structured debate, the House adopted the conference report and passed HB 7031E by a vote of 88-11. The House then began the conference report on HB 501E, the $114.5 billion budget for fiscal year 2026-2027, which was described as below the prior year’s spending level and leaving more than $14 billion in reserves. Subcommittee chairs outlined major allocations across education, higher education, IT, health care, transportation and economic development, justice, state administration, and agriculture/natural resources. Highlights included increased FEFP funding and veteran teacher raises, full funding for Bright Futures, major IT modernization projects, Medicaid and behavioral health funding, transportation and local infrastructure spending, correctional and law enforcement investments, fire station and emergency response funding, and large environmental and water-quality appropriations. Members asked detailed questions about school voucher fraud oversight, scholarship funding, teacher raises, preeminence funding, ADAP changes, SNAP data tools and error rates, Medicaid rate changes, prison wastewater monitoring, and other budget items, but the transcript ends during the budget questions before final action on HB 501E is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• It promotes impartiality and consistent oversight in the budget process while preserving the valuable
• and promotes transparency, accountability, and public confidence in the municipal budget process.
• So the town's people and through our budgetary process gives us our budget, and then we stay within those
• So the town's people and through our budgetary process gives us our budget, and then we stay within those
• and then we process gives us our budget and then we stay<04:29:16.000> within<04:29:16.399>

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• >> So, DEARD is not part of that budget review process. It doesn't come through DEARD.
• , the green fee process and the regular budget process.
• It's all in the budget process. >> Yeah.
• So, we do have the categories defined in our budget prep process, and we can share that with you, the
• Well, that's if it makes it through our budget process. Yeah.

Bills: SB1, SB4, SB6, SB9, SB16, SB17, SB20, SB22, SB28, SB29, SB36, SB41, SB45, SB77, SB85, SB87, SB96, SB98, SB110, SB126, SB139, SB143, SB164, SB167, SB171, SB186, SB188, SB195, SB197, SB198, SB204, SB205, SB206, SB207, SB209, SB210, SB211, SB217, SB219, SB220, SB225, SB231, SB237, SB238, SB241, SB244, SB246, SB247, SB272, SB294, SB315, SB346, SB364, SB366, SB367, SB386, SB392, SB403, SB415, SB427, SB431, SB437, SB457, SB459, SB469, SB471, SB478, SB484, SB489, SB502, SB503, SB507, SB508, SB510, SB516, SB517, SB518, SB519, SB521, SB535, SB543, SB550, SB564, SB568, SB570, SB575, SB577, SB578, SB590, SB607, SB616, SB621, SB634, SB644, SB647, SB649, SB652, SB655, SB656, SB663

Keywords: agricultural lands, foreign ownership, state agriculture policy, real estate regulation, land conservation, SB4, Royal Mausoleum, Mauna Ala, Office of Hawaiian Affairs, OHA, Department of Land and Natural Resources, DLNR, stewardship, Hawaiian affairs, cemetery, burial site, ancestral remains, cultural preservation, state land management, agency transfer

Transcript Highlights:

• So each year, the LEAP committee holds a meeting to advance the budget format change process.
• budget structures.
• So we are here today to present our proposed budget structure change, or the proposed budget format change
• And so, to give you just a little idea of what went through that process, it was a year-long process.
• budgets go into effect.

Summary: The committee met with a quorum, approved the June 18, 2025 minutes, and heard four proposed budget format changes. Washington State Parks requested a structural change to separate and better track its Stewardship Services Division, including cultural and natural resources, environmental planning, and Climate Commitment Act investments. DCYF proposed moving direct service functions now housed in program support into the child welfare program so operational costs and direct services would be reported separately; members asked how this would help avoid across-the-board reductions affecting direct services, and the agency said the change would improve transparency and prevent that problem. The Department of Transportation sought to create a new Ferries Program Support sub-program to consolidate four related projects and two existing sub-programs into one administrative/project support structure, while the Department of Veterans Affairs requested only a title change for Program 20 from Field Services to Veteran Services and Counseling and Wellness. The committee voted unanimously to approve all four changes. Kevin Feltis then gave an interim work plan and staffing update for LEAP. He said the office is continuing work on the rewritten capital budget application (BuildSUM), updating the transportation bond model, completing carry-forward levels for the 2027-29 biennium, publishing 2026 legislative budget notes, updating 2025 salary data, and participating in a LegiTech AI pilot for system development within the legislative network. He also noted LEAP’s role in supporting the new Joint Legislative Executive Committee on Budget Transparency and Fiscal Sustainability. Staffing remained steady at 11 FTEs, with no retirements or staffing changes in the past year, though one vacancy may be filled later and two retirements are anticipated over the next four to five years. The committee also discussed updates to the fiscal.wa.gov website. Planned work includes streamlining how budget data is updated when budgets are released, converting more than 100 reports from Microsoft Reporting Services to Power BI because support is ending, and evaluating whether the site’s search tool should be improved or replaced. Senators and representatives raised concerns about the number of clicks needed to reach capital and transportation project maps and about making public-facing budget information easier to find and understand. Staff said the website redesign was based on prior user testing and that they would look at ways to make maps and other top-level information more accessible. Finally, the committee elected new officers under its alternating-chair rule. Representative Gregerson was nominated and elected chair, and Senator King was nominated and elected vice chair. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, CSU is going to have significant budget reductions, and there is a process, as you’re well aware,
• the budget?”
• process.
• I'm going to assume we may have a follow-up hearing in the budget process on this to make sure that the
• So the way the budget is working is that the budget of the Maritime Academy...

Summary: The joint Assembly Higher Education and Budget Subcommittee hearing focused on the future of the California State University system, with opening remarks emphasizing CSU’s major role in California’s economy, workforce, and degree production. Chairs and members said the hearing was intended to inform 2026 budget decisions and to examine three main issues: declining enrollment at some campuses, cost controls and possible consolidation, and oversight of recent state investments at campuses such as Humboldt and Sonoma. The meeting was briefly delayed by microphone and sound problems before reconvening. The first panel featured CSU Academic Senate Chair Dr. Elizabeth Boyd and Cal State Student Association Vice President Katie Karam. Boyd urged the Legislature to protect academic freedom, strengthen faculty governance, provide stable ongoing funding, end unfunded mandates, support student food and housing security, fund flexible course schedules, improve transfer systems such as ASSIST, avoid over-centralizing academic programs, protect immigrant students, and expand intersegmental collaboration. Karam said students are feeling the effects of budget shortfalls through fewer course sections, reduced advising and services, longer time to degree, and tuition pressure, and she called for transparency, meaningful student involvement in budget decisions, and sustained state investment rather than cuts that harm the student experience. The second panel covered enrollment management and included CSU Chancellor’s Office and campus administrators from Chico State, Cal State L.A., and San Diego State. Dr. Delcy Perez said CSU Forward and the new systemwide enrollment plan are aimed at expanding access, aligning programs with workforce needs, and increasing resident enrollment; she reported systemwide enrollment gains and strong application numbers, including a direct-admissions pilot that expanded from Riverside to more campuses. Campus representatives described local recruitment and retention strategies, including early outreach to high school students, community college partnerships, guaranteed admission programs, and expanded advising and student support. San Diego State highlighted record enrollment and high demand, while Cal State L.A. described efforts to recover from impaction and rebuild enrollment. Members pressed CSU officials on the accuracy of enrollment data, the gap between funded targets and actual enrollment, and the system’s reallocation formula. CSU staff explained that campuses below target will see a 5% ongoing reallocation beginning in 2026-27, with one-time reserve funding also being directed to campuses that can grow, and that fiscal health reviews have been completed for 21 of 22 campuses. Legislators also asked about turnaround plans required by the budget act; CSU said those plans are being developed and will be shared in the spring after campus consultation. No formal votes were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• half of our state's budget.
• process.
• The base budget serves as the starting point for the budget development process.
• Overall, the HHS budget accounts for approximately 50% of the state's total base budget for fiscal year
• base budget.

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Health and Human Services heard a base budget overview for the 2025-26 fiscal year, which was presented as a $46.8 billion starting point for the silo. Staff explained that HHS accounts for about half of the state base budget and roughly 36% of general revenue, with AHCA and Medicaid making up the largest share. The committee then reviewed the PACE program for the elderly, including its eligibility, service model, growth in applications, slot funding and reversions, and the agency’s plan to move from the federal three-way agreement to a more detailed two-party contract to improve accountability, transparency, and reporting. Members raised concerns about unfilled slots, reversions, rural access, and the need for clearer return-on-investment data; the agency said it would follow up on some of those questions. The committee also heard from the Agency for Persons with Disabilities on its statewide dental program. APD described its history of appropriations, the failed January 2024 solicitation, and a new up-to-$11.5 million solicitation focused on preventive care, community partnerships, teledentistry, and coordination with other services. Members questioned overlap with Medicaid dental coverage, the effect of Medicaid unwinding on APD clients, and whether state dollars were duplicating federally supported services; APD said it tries to act as payer of last resort and that services would continue during procurement. Public testimony from an APD stakeholder and the Florida Dental Association emphasized Medicaid eligibility problems for waiver recipients, low reimbursement rates, limited access to anesthesia and hospital-based dental care, and concerns that proposed Medicaid changes could reduce access for special-needs patients. The Department of Veterans’ Affairs then presented on state veterans service officers and benefits assistance. FDVA highlighted its role in helping veterans access federal benefits, reporting about $27.9 billion in federal dollars flowing into Florida and a high return on state investment. The department said it has increased outreach, claims processing, and services, and has trained staff to identify mental health concerns through its Overwatch program. In response to questions, FDVA discussed plans to expand adult day health care at a new veterans nursing home and possibly at existing locations with additional state funding. At the end of the meeting, the committee completed its presentations and adjourned without objection.

Transcript Highlights:

• There are some budget requests in the current budget. requests in the current budget.
• This means that students deciding on enrollment in the spring, before you conclude the budget process
• CSAC, so your estimates that you submitted during the budget process in October pegged the number at
• To follow up on the Chair's question on the $2.5 million as well, I know that through the budget process
• drill processes and the inclusion of two of our requests in the Governor's proposed budget for 2025-

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And so we do look forward to continuing this conversation as we go through the budget process.
• The January budget proposed...
• The January budget proposed savings of $86 million associated with automating the process of terminating
• process as well.
• Please to present a budget for a department that does not include budget solutions per se.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Human Services held a hearing on the Governor’s May Revision, with no votes taken. The first major discussion focused on child care and early education, including proposed reductions tied to federal Child Care and Development Fund and Proposition 64 revenue changes, the shift of reductions from general child care to the California Alternative Payment Program, the end of funding for prospective pay implementation, a 2.01% cost-of-living adjustment, child care infrastructure grants, and a proposal to increase administrative funding for alternative payment agencies. The Legislative Analyst’s Office generally supported removing prospective pay funding and urged caution on the administrative-rate shift, while also recommending more justification for the slot reduction approach and more detail on infrastructure grant alignment. Committee members strongly objected to eliminating about 6,000 child care slots, arguing the Legislature should preserve and expand child care access. The Department of Education supported the preschool QRIS block grant increase and the COLA but raised concerns about rate alignment for three- and four-year-olds and the lack of funding to maintain enrollment growth. The committee then reviewed trailer bill language affecting child care, including codifying age-based reimbursement categories, expanding documentation for enhanced inclusion rates, clarifying CalWORKs child care eligibility, aligning health and safety standards with federal requirements, coordinating disaster-related infrastructure funding, and updating oversight language. Administration officials said the proposals were intended to support the single reimbursement rate structure, improve safety compliance, and coordinate disaster recovery funding. LAO said it had no major initial concerns with the trailer bill language but would continue reviewing it. The hearing then turned to CalFresh and nutrition programs. CDSS described projected caseload declines, a one-time augmentation for county administration to implement federal H.R. 1 changes, a proposed reassessment schedule for county administrative funding, and updated estimates that H.R. 1 could cut CalFresh funding by $2.3 billion to $3.7 billion annually and affect about 500,000 people. Members pressed the administration on the impact of H.R. 1, the “chilling effect” on immigrant households, county workload, and whether the state should backfill federal cuts, especially for families with children subject to new work requirements. The committee also discussed a one-time CalFood augmentation, state administrative expense funding, staffing for H.R. 1 implementation, and a small increase to the CACFP meal reimbursement rate. Finally, the committee began IHSS items, including the impact of reinstating the Medi-Cal asset limit, automatic IHSS termination tied to Medi-Cal loss, and related savings and caseload estimates, with the administration explaining that these proposals would reduce eligibility and that there is no broad substitute for IHSS for many recipients.

Transcript Highlights:

• It is kind of too close to call and that we would come before you every year in the budget process and
• What's important to understand is they're working on this budget reconciliation process which allows
• Just a reminder on slide 12, again, the budget reconciliation process. This is where.
• Budget reconciliation is different than the annual appropriations process.
• Chair, um, Senator, those programs, uh, aren't part of the budget reconciliation process, so you don't

Transcript Highlights:

• Subsequent budget acts.
• The 2022 Budget Act agreement established a new funding floor starting in this budget year 2025-2026
• This PAL process.
• It's a very bumpy process. process, and so my concern is that this has not gone through the, I guess,
• I can speak to some of the thought process for the original approvals in the 2020 Budget Act.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• budget.
• Real vision is in this budget.
• Members, what you have in front of you is the previous budget request and the current budget request.
• Members, what you have in front of you is the previous budget request and the current budget request.
• So we requested historical budget information, like I said, including the five-year budget history, a

Summary: The Agriculture and Natural Resources Budget Subcommittee met to hear member-led presentations on agency budget requests after prior meetings with the agencies. Representative Barnaby summarized the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services’ fiscal year 2025-26 request, highlighting major funding for the Rural and Family Lands Protection Program, Florida Forest Service wildfire and land management needs, citrus disease and research efforts, a new Conner Complex facility and lab, agricultural water and BMP projects, agricultural law enforcement staffing and equipment, maintenance and vehicle needs, and federal grant-related spending. No vote was taken on the department’s request during the meeting. Representative Bartleman presented the Department of Environmental Protection request and said the subcommittee supported it fully. The request emphasized Everglades restoration, water quality grants, springs, harmful algal bloom and red tide response, alternate water supplies, resilience and flood prevention, beach and coral reef restoration, land acquisition and state parks, and cleanup of petroleum, dry cleaning, and hazardous waste sites. Representative Alvarez asked DEP to provide a list of the most contaminated lakes, along with estimated costs, so the committee could prioritize cleanup efforts. Representative Black summarized the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission request, which included additional law enforcement funding in high-demand areas, oyster and reef restoration, habitat restoration, heavy equipment for land management and prescribed burning, a water survival training center, and red snapper data research. Representative Salzman then presented the Department of Citrus request, describing a lean agency budget focused on operations, PALM readiness, marketing and consumer awareness, greening-resistant plant material, and building repairs; the workgroup recommended fully funding the request. The meeting ended with members thanking the chair and staff for the more member-driven budget process, and the subcommittee adjourned without objection.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is a proposal in the Governor's budget for a study of California's curriculum adoption process.
• process that's building where the instructional materials are built off of the curriculum framework process
• foods, ultra-processed foods, and offer more minimally processed, more freshly prepared foods, as you
• foods, ultra-processed foods, and offer more minimally processed, more freshly prepared foods, as you
• They were actually funded in the state budget to do formative, impact, and process evaluation of our

Summary: The committee heard a series of budget proposals focused on education finance, with repeated questions about whether the state’s investments are coordinated, targeted to the highest-need students, and likely to produce measurable results. On the first item, the administration proposed $1 million for a study of California’s curriculum framework, standards, and instructional materials process, plus $250,000 for supplemental ELA/ELD guidance. CDE and Finance said the study would examine how other states organize standards, frameworks, and adoptions, while the chair and members questioned why California has gone so long without updating some standards, what the study would actually accomplish, and whether the proposal was too vague to justify the cost. The issue was held open. The committee then took up a proposed $25 million statewide literacy network within the system of support. CCEE and CDE said the network would coordinate multiple existing literacy leads, create a clearinghouse of evidence-based resources, and improve coherence across the state’s many literacy initiatives. Members pressed on how a one-time, five-year allocation could support a long-term system, how the work would reach distressed and rural districts, and whether the proposal would translate into classroom change rather than just another layer of coordination. The issue was also held open. Next, the committee reviewed a $500 million proposal to expand literacy coaches and reading specialists and to create a math coaches program. CDE described the existing literacy coach cohorts as producing positive reports from participating LEAs, while the LAO recommended modifications, especially for the math coach portion, including limiting eligibility to elementary schools, setting minimum grant amounts, directing funds to eligible school sites, and making eligibility automatic rather than application-based. Members focused on whether coaches were actually being placed at the schools with the greatest need and whether the state has a coherent long-term strategy for literacy and math investments. The committee also heard a $40 million proposal for training and implementation of K-2 reading difficulty screeners, which the LAO said was reasonable but could be reduced because $25 million had already been provided for training; CDE said the new funds were needed for full implementation, procurement, and sustainability. Finally, the committee heard a $10 million proposal for a developmentally appropriate TK multilingual learner screener, with CDE explaining why the preschool language-identification process is different from K-12 EL assessment and the chair asking staff to explore whether a single, more consistent approach could be developed. The meeting concluded with a presentation on universal school meals and kitchen infrastructure, including a $31.5 million backfill, an $84.1 million increase for projected meal growth, a COLA adjustment, and $150 million for kitchen upgrades and training to support freshly prepared meals.

Transcript Highlights:

• I I'm exe executive director of budget I I'm exe executive director of budget and<00:04:13.200><
• Do we need to be budgeting and saying these roads need to be done through that process, or can you touch
• It's not necessarily a budget.
• It's not necessarily a budget. Uh cycle. It's not necessarily a budget.
• items are in the budget. items are in the budget. >> Right. >> Right.

Keywords: 00:32 Call to Order and Roll Call 02:30 Road Fund Report 17:22 Approval of Minutes 18:07 High Growth Counties Projects 56:00 Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The Budget Review Subcommittee for Transportation met without a quorum at first, then later approved the July 15 minutes by voice vote after quorum was reached. The committee heard an update from the Transportation Cabinet on the road fund for FY 2024-25. Cabinet staff reported road fund revenue came in $38.5 million above the enacted estimate, with motor vehicle usage tax receipts setting an all-time high for the fifth straight year. Motor fuels tax revenue was below estimate and down from the prior year, while overall road fund collections totaled $1.86 billion, essentially flat year over year. Staff said the road fund ended FY25 with a $61.6 million surplus, which under the budget bill must be appropriated to state construction. Members discussed the gas tax formula, with Senator Higdon arguing it no longer works well because revenues fall when fuel prices fall, and the chair noting the committee may need to revisit the formula. The committee then received an update on High Growth County projects in the 2024 highway plan. KYTC said $16 million in HGC authorizations had been made, nine projects already had construction funds authorized or were otherwise underway, 12 more were scheduled to be let by the end of 2025 with estimated construction costs above $250 million, and one additional project was expected to be awarded through alternative delivery. The cabinet said it anticipated authorizing the full $450 million appropriated by the General Assembly. Members praised the effort and emphasized the need to get projects to market before the next budget cycle. Jason Sala of KYTC also explained why transportation projects take time, citing planning, design, right-of-way acquisition, and utility relocation as major steps that can delay delivery. He said these processes are complex and require coordination with property owners, utilities, consultants, contractors, and local governments. Eric Pelfrey then briefed the committee on professional and personal service contracts, saying they are used to expand cabinet capacity for design, inspections, right-of-way appraisal, safety, and related work. He reported that authorizations and payments for these contracts have trended upward over the past decade, and that the number of contracts has also increased. In response to questions, Pelfrey said design-build can speed some projects by overlapping steps, but it does not eliminate right-of-way or utility work when those are required; he said KYTC has been using alternative delivery more often, but project complexity still limits how quickly work can move.

Transcript Highlights:

• Your comment that the timing doesn't match up between the state's budget timeline, the state budget process
• So, given that the review of the plan is in process, the general budget condition of the state, and the
• process.
• Fund in the state budget.
• process.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Legislative Budget Office. Legislative Budget Office.
• c> the management budget budget division in the management budget budget division in the development
• Or it might happen through the annual budget process, or whatever it might be, where they say, "Well,
• Or it might happen through the annual budget process, or whatever it might be, where they say, "Well,
• process is good. process is good.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The Legislative Budget Caucus Public Commission met with a quorum present, approved the September 3, 2025 minutes, and then heard a presentation from Legislative Budget Office Director Christian Larson on proposed updates to the fiscal note uniform standards and procedures. The main changes clarified that agencies must still complete a fiscal note when a bill or section cannot be implemented because of federal law, with the note explaining the implementation issue and costing only the portions that can be implemented. A second change said technical comments about possible future litigation may be included in the narrative but not in the cost tables. Members discussed how these rules would apply when only part of a bill is unimplementable versus when an entire bill is, and whether requiring a note in those cases is the best use of agency time. The commission also approved a new procedure on funding-source assumptions for expanded programs, including assuming the current funding source unless the bill says otherwise and defaulting to the general fund if no source is identified. The updated standards and procedures were adopted by a 7-0 roll call vote, with Senator Wickland excused. The commission then received a second presentation from Director Larson on a possible analysis of the accuracy of fiscal estimates and budget items after enactment. He described this as a variance analysis comparing fiscal note estimates to actual fiscal impacts, intended to improve future estimates, inform the legislature, and increase accountability. He summarized practices in other states, noting that most variance reviews are ad hoc, while Utah and Tennessee have more formalized legislative reports; he also referenced an LBO pilot review done in 2022 based largely on Tennessee’s model. The presentation outlined possible report formats, including a single annual report, standalone briefs, or topic-specific reviews, and raised implementation questions such as who would select items for review, whether the analysis should be limited to fiscal notes, what statutory authority or data access would be needed, and what resources would be required from both agencies and the LBO. Members did not take action on the second presentation. Representative Anderson and Vice Chair Pratt commented that the proposal is complicated but potentially useful for improving future fiscal notes and transparency, and the chair indicated the discussion was for future consideration rather than an immediate decision.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is a proposal in the Governor's budget for a study of California's curriculum adoption process.
• process.
• process.
• Than the application process.
• They were funded in the state budget to conduct formative, impact, and process evaluations of our California

Keywords: 988, house, all