Transcript Highlights:

• To more than one tribe in a partnership model, and those were awarded at $2 million each.
• I see our relationships as a mutual partnership.
• This work is grounded in partnership with tribes and a deep respect for tribal sovereignty.
• We need to change the policy. And there's always arguments.
• We need to change the policy. We need to secure the firearms immediately.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I'll now go on to getting into policy level spending and savings items a bit more.
• Now, there are some exceptions and adjustments to that policy, but that is the general policy, and then
• Enrollment-based pay had been a policy instituted by the Biden administration.
• I'm the policy manager for civil So. For the record, my name is Kelly Olson.
• Protecting this program is sound fiscal policy.

Summary: The House Appropriations Committee held a public hearing on proposed substitute House Bill 2289, the House operating budget. Budget staff Mary Monroe gave a detailed overview of the proposal’s near general fund outlook, reserve levels, major revenue assumptions, and major spending and savings items. She highlighted assumed revenue from capital gains and a proposed “millionaires tax,” a transfer from the budget stabilization account, administrative reductions across agencies, and several major policy shifts, including changes affecting Working Connections Child Care, K-12 education, higher education, long-term care, behavioral health, wildfire response, and state employee compensation. Members then asked questions, including about the higher education building account/operating fee swap and its interaction with the capital budget and Climate Commitment Act funds. The committee also announced amendment deadlines for the budget process. The bulk of the meeting was public testimony, with many speakers generally supporting or opposing specific parts of the budget. Supportive testimony praised funding for wildfire prevention, public health, reproductive health, civil legal aid, the Poison Center, some higher education institutions, and certain disability and child welfare services. Many speakers urged restoration or protection of funding for K-12 education, especially transition to kindergarten, local effort assistance, bus depreciation, and Running Start; others opposed cuts to child care, early learning, public defense, long-term care, adult day and home care services, occupational/physical/speech therapy for Medicaid patients, and community and technical colleges. Several local government, health, and nonprofit representatives also asked the committee to preserve public works, homelessness, energy assistance, environmental justice, and recovery/diversion programs, while some business and public safety groups sought continued funding for organized retail crime prevention and related initiatives. No votes were taken during the hearing. The committee recessed briefly and later resumed with virtual testimony, where additional witnesses repeated concerns about education cuts, long-term care, health care access, disability services, dispute resolution, early childhood programs, and the need for ongoing or increased funding in those areas.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> there's a range of range of policy there's a range of range of policy options<00:17:20.720><c> that
• I serve as policy manager for the Minnesota Housing Partnership.
• I serve as policy manager for the Minnesota Housing Partnership.
• </c> in support of the tax credit policy in support of the tax credit policy amendments<01:13:22.159>
• </c> Uh so, we're talking about the policy Uh so, we're talking about the policy and<02:04:41.040><c>

Committee: Senate Housing and Homelessness Prevention

Transcript Highlights:

• We've also got Ryan Sears, who's head of policy and research for Neighborhood Partnership Housing Services
• I am the head of policy and research at Neighborhood Partnership Housing Services.
• I think it's a very dangerous territory policy-wise.
• I'm the head of policy and research at Neighborhood Partnership Housing Services, a SoCal-based affordable
• It is not intended to be a policy decision point.

Committee: House Housing and Community Development

Transcript Highlights:

• We know how to work in partnership. And that work will continue.
• Good morning, Mark Stivers, with the California Housing Partnership.
• And lastly, a robust policy function that has the necessary data and tools to advance housing policy
• You have our partnership as well, so I appreciate the time.
• Seeing this through, you have our partnership as well.

Summary: The joint hearing focused on Governor Newsom’s 2025 reorganization plan to split the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency into two new agencies: a Business and Consumer Services Agency and a California Housing and Homelessness Agency. Secretary Tamika Moss and department leaders from Consumer Affairs, Cannabis Control, DFPI, and Alcoholic Beverage Control said the business-side reorganization would sharpen consumer protection and regulatory oversight without increasing licensee fees or office-space needs. Members generally supported the concept, but several raised concerns about the timing relative to the budget process, the May Revision, and whether the new structure would add costs or disrupt legal and regulatory work. Public commenters from industry groups largely supported the business-side proposal. The second half of the hearing examined the proposed Housing and Homelessness Agency and a new Housing Development and Finance Committee intended to streamline affordable housing funding. Moss, HCD Director Gustavo Velasquez, and CalHFA’s Rebecca Franklin argued the reorganization would reduce fragmentation, speed approvals, improve compliance and asset management, and better coordinate housing, homelessness, and civil rights functions. They said CalHFA’s statutory and financial independence would remain intact, that the proposal would not affect existing homelessness programs administered by HCD, and that the plan would be phased in over several years, with the new agencies and committee expected to become operational by July 2026. Members pressed on whether the plan would truly create a one-stop shop, how it would interact with tax credits and bonds outside the Governor’s control, whether it would include a single application and unified inspections, and how it would address Los Angeles homelessness oversight and federal uncertainties such as tariffs and Section 8 changes. Developer witnesses strongly backed the housing proposal, describing the current system as slow, opaque, and costly. Margaret Miller of the John Stewart Company and Jeffrey Morgan of CHISPA gave examples of projects delayed or lost because multiple funding sources required separate applications, awards, and closings; both said a cabinet-level housing secretary and a consolidated funding process could save time and money and produce more units. Public advocates including Housing California, the California Housing Partnership, and the California Housing Consortium supported the concept but stressed that success would depend on implementation, adequate funding, transparency, and broader coordination with tax credit and bond programs. No formal votes were taken; the hearing was informational, and the committees heard testimony and questions on the proposal.

Transcript Highlights:

• one of our first private donations that we had, and ever since then we've had this public-private partnership
• We also have partnerships with Cherokee Nation, Wildlife, and Outdoor Oklahoma.
• We have long-term partnerships with those agencies to make sure that their shows are shown and people
• that policy to build out their collection.
• It is based on a collection development policy that is Approved at the most local level.

Committee: House A&B Education Subcommittee

Transcript Highlights:

• We've convened scholars and policy experts and interviewed community organizations to create policy recommendations
• You were talking about policy recommendations and a report.
• And strengthen policies... ...caused by profiling from law enforcement, and strengthen policies like
• We need more moral clarity and policy courage.
• We need more moral clarity and policy courage.

Summary: The Select Committee on Hate, Racism, and Xenophobia met to examine the scope of hate activity in California and hear from state agencies, commissions, and community organizations. The chair opened by framing hate as a persistent crisis affecting many protected groups, and Assembly Member Gonzalez briefly joined the committee. The first panel included the California Department of Justice and the California Commission on the State of Hate, both of which presented recent data and policy recommendations. The Department of Justice reported that in 2024 California saw 2,023 reported hate crime events, 2,568 hate crime offenses, and 2,491 victims, with anti-Black bias remaining the most common category, followed by anti-Jewish and anti-Latino bias. DOJ also said referrals for prosecution increased, and it described its hate-crimes guidance, rapid response protocol, and multilingual resources. The Commission on the State of Hate said hate is undercounted in law enforcement data and cited a survey suggesting about 2.6 million Californians experienced at least one hate act in a year, including more than half a million potentially criminal incidents. It recommended permanent data infrastructure, mandatory law enforcement training, and continued funding for community-based prevention and victim support. The committee then heard testimony from representatives of the NAACP, LULAC, Jewish Public Affairs Committee of California, CHIRLA, Asian Americans Advancing Justice Southern California, CARE, Equality California, and the Racial Equity Commission. Witnesses described systemic racism, anti-immigrant enforcement, antisemitism, Islamophobia, anti-Asian bias, and anti-LGBTQ+ hate, often linking these harms to political rhetoric, social media, and federal actions. They urged the Legislature to fund programs such as California vs. Hate, Stop the Hate, nonprofit security grants, language access, school and mental health supports, and legal assistance, while also protecting civil rights, due process, and free speech. No formal votes or committee actions were taken during the hearing, but members indicated they would request additional recommendations and continue the discussion in future hearings.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's a partnership, right? So really, the bill before you is an action plan.
• It's a partnership, right? What can we be doing to help this airport community?
• We brought it back to do some policy work on this and send it along.
• I'm the transmission policy lead at the Energy Policy Office and the Department of Commerce.
• Policies that make it harder for the port to respond to demand Policies that make it harder for the port

Bills: SB6124 , SB5652

Committee: Senate Environment, Energy & Technology

Keywords: appliance affordability, cost index, energy efficiency, consumer protection, Washington state, aviation, airport noise, air pollution, environmental justice, health disparities, public health, ultrafine particulate matter, black carbon, nitrogen dioxide, volatile organic compounds, asthma, heart disease, cancer, sleep disruption, hypertension

Transcript Highlights:

• It's a partnership with UC Davis and Casey Family Programs and Think of Us.
• It's a strategic partnership group. We've had Our initial meeting.
• It's a strategic partnership group. We've had our initial meeting.
• It's just a different policy decision.
• Laura Muther with the Lutheran Office of Public Policy, California.

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

Transcript Highlights:

• And then partnerships.
• And then partnerships.
• WPC is a public policy think tank.
• This is a policy problem.
• I'm the vice president for research at the Washington Policy Center.

Committee: Senate Agriculture & Natural Resources

Transcript Highlights:

• It also starts with... business and industry partnerships, building degree programs that are unique to
• My name is Jonas Titus, President of the VEDC Regional Partnership, and I'm here to testify in support
• The VEDC Regional Partnership is a public-private regional economic development organization that has
• partnerships within counties throughout the Texas Gulf Coast.
• It's, I think, a very good partnership.

Bills: SB530 , SB757 , SB769 , SB1085 , SB1241 , SB1242 , SB1409 , SB1878 , SB2138 , SB2314 , SB2231 , SB2361 , SB2431 , SJR59

Committees: Senate Education , Senate Education K-16

Transcript Highlights:

• We aim to cultivate this very dynamic partnership, providing a framework for advancing economic opportunity
• . as well as bilateral policy discussions and meaningful cultural engagement.
• Caucus, we intend to foster productive dialogue on key policy areas, touching crucial issues and critical
• fostering ongoing engagement, strengthening collaboration, and enhancing economic, cultural, and policy
• This caucus will be at the forefront of the Texas and U.K. partnership and international cooperation,

Bills: SJR36 , SJR2 , SB4 , SR45 , SR47 , SR63 , SR66 , SR70 , SR85 , SCR14 , SB10 , SB11 , SB10 , SB11

Transcript Highlights:

• Advocacy for the California Housing Partnership, and Marina S.
• My name is Tisha Watts with the California Housing Partnership.
• The California Housing Partnership respectfully asks for your aye vote. Good afternoon, Mr.
• And you've seen how these types of policy changes over your time here can be...
• And you've seen how these types of policy changes over your time here can be.

Bills: AB306 , AB750 , AB956 , AB1128 , AB2181

Committee: House Housing and Community Development

Keywords: Public Utilities Commission, diversity, geographic representation, regulatory authority, Governor appointments

Summary: The Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee met as a subcommittee and later established quorum to hear five housing-related bills. AB 306 (Schultz) would create a centralized statewide process for resolving disputes over differing local interpretations of the state building code; it drew no testimony in opposition and was ultimately concurred in. AB 750 (Quirk-Silva) would expand HCD’s Portfolio Reinvestment Program to help preserve and rehabilitate challenged affordable housing developments; supporters emphasized the loss of subsidized units and the need to preserve existing stock, and the bill passed unanimously. AB 2181 (Zbur) would limit use of speculative density-bonus assumptions in appraisals for hotel and motel ground leases, with supporters saying it protects workers and prevents inflated valuations; it also passed unanimously. The committee then heard AB 1128 (Marisicci), a gut-and-amend bill that, after Senate amendments, would apply mobile home rent stabilization to 10 mobile home parks in Torrance. Supporters, including the Mobile Home Residents Coalition, said the measure would provide predictable rent increases for seniors, veterans, people with disabilities, and working families. Opponents argued it would override local control and discourage investment and new park construction. Members debated the broader policy of rent control versus housing supply, and the bill passed on a 7-4 vote with one not voting. Finally, AB 956 (Quirk-Silva) clarified accessory dwelling unit law by allowing up to two detached ADUs, or one detached ADU plus one JADU, so long as existing size, height, setback, and safety requirements are met. Supporters described it as a modest clarification that would help families add housing on their own property, while one member objected that local agencies should retain more discretion. The bill passed unanimously. At the end of the hearing, members and staff offered extensive praise for Quirk-Silva’s housing work, noting that AB 956 was likely her last bill before the committee, and the committee adjourned after final roll-call votes were completed.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our office supports partnerships with a wide range of external partners.
• Our office supports partnerships with a wide range of external partners.
• Our office supports partnerships with a wide range of external partners.
• Our office supports partnerships with a wide range of external partners.
• </c><01:43:45.199><c> and</c> good choices in those Partnerships and good choices in those Partnerships

Transcript Highlights:

• And the best way to understand what those partnerships are is to listen to people who are in those partnerships
• So we start with a partnership of NDSU that we call them the subject matter experts.
• The beauty of this partnership is that we work together.
• We've heard this before as we talk about partnerships.
• Partnerships develop these pathways.

Summary: The committee met at NDSU and approved the April 9 minutes. The main purpose of the meeting was an informational presentation from NDSU President David Stewart and university leaders on the university’s priorities, including enrollment, student success, research, commercialization, and use of New Horizons funding. Stewart emphasized a “One NDSU” approach, thanked legislators for past support, and said the university will focus on recruitment and retention, a new strategic plan, and growing research and tech transfer while serving North Dakota’s workforce needs. University leaders said NDSU is using tuition waivers more strategically and will work to reduce them over time through scholarship optimization. Provost Sherry Vale described academic portfolio reviews, program closures or consolidations, strategic hiring, and workload policies aimed at aligning resources with demand. They also highlighted student outcomes, including high completion rates, strong employment placement, and NDSU’s role in producing a large share of the state’s engineers, nurses, and agriculture graduates. Several students testified about how NDSU’s mentoring, internships, research, and support services helped them succeed. The committee also heard from partners on New Horizons-related collaborations: Gateway to Science described K-12 STEM outreach in rural and tribal areas, and Sanford Research discussed joint research efforts, including COBRE-related work, obesity and GLP-1 studies, and a joint biostatistics hire. Later speakers highlighted Governor’s School and NDSU’s research and commercialization efforts, including growth in research expenditures and invention disclosures. No additional votes or formal actions were taken beyond approving the minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> active sector partnerships in the state. active sector partnerships in the state.
• the administration the policy of this the administration the policy of this body<01:04:34.240><c> if<
• </c> public policy disaster in other states. public policy disaster in other states.
• </c> enacted a broad range of public policies enacted a broad range of public policies to<02:52:42.160
• </c> establish the rules and policies establish the rules and policies regarding<03:17:21.120><c> a</

Bills: HB2118 , HB2473

Committee: House Economic Development & Technology

Summary: The committee heard several bills related to permitting and economic development. On HB 2603, relating to permits, the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development said it supported the measure with comments. Committee discussion focused on the fact that the state’s facilitated permit process appears to have been rarely or never used, the need to identify specific projects that would use it, and whether DBEDT would need dedicated staffing to administer it. DBEDT said it had found no projects under the current process, had no capacity to run the program as structured, and estimated it would need about 7 to 9 FTEs, including permitting, coordination, data, systems, and possibly legal support. The chair suggested exploring a staff assignment and comparing the concept to federal FAST-41-style expedited permitting. On HB 2140, relating to essential permitting positions, the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development again supported the bill with comments. Testimony and questioning centered on a pilot program to help counties pay competitively for permitting staff. A DBEDT representative said the issue of competitive pay affected both county and state permitting offices and that the bill was intended as a temporary pilot, though a more permanent solution would be preferable. When asked how counties would fund the salary support, the witness said that was not yet discussed with the counties and agreed to follow up. The committee also noted the bill applies to participating counties. On HB 2598, relating to the Hawaii Technology Development Corporation, the State Procurement Office and HTDC offered comments, and the Department of the Attorney General raised constitutional concerns. The AG said the bill’s residency-based certification requirements, when tied to procurement, could implicate the dormant Commerce Clause, and that the required 1% contribution tied to state contracts raised unconstitutional-conditions concerns. In questioning, the AG characterized these as legal risks rather than automatic lawsuits. The committee did not take a vote. The committee then heard HB 2141, relating to state enterprise zones. Taxation, DBEDT, HCDA, the University of Hawaii Cancer Center, and HTDC testified in support, while the Tax Foundation noted the program was intended to help economically depressed areas create jobs. HTDC said the bill would help preserve the Maui Research and Technology Center’s enterprise-zone status after rezoning. Committee discussion focused on whether the enterprise zone program is being used effectively, how the bill might attract businesses to areas where the state is investing, and whether the program’s labor requirements are too burdensome for new businesses. DBEDT explained that the program requires a 10% workforce increase in the first year, which must be sustained, and said it promotes the program through county coordinators and in-person outreach. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• So just, you know, pointing out that it can disincentivize the partnerships when we do it this way.
• I appreciated the comment about the definition of distressed hospitals and the partnership.
• So I think that's the address: the state policy.
• They need to be prepared to answer those questions so we can move on policy.
• Not to mention that policies come out of this building that increase the cost of that every day.

Summary: The committee heard AB 108, a budget bill junior that would amend the 2025 Budget Act to create a one-time $25 million General Fund grant program at HCAI for hospitals in immediate and significant financial distress, along with a technical change related to property tax deferments for eligible low-income seniors. Finance explained that eligible hospitals would need to show less than 10 days cash on hand, best efforts to exhaust other financing options, a payer mix of more than 50% government payers and uninsured patients, and nonprofit status, with expedited contracting and rulemaking exemptions so funds could be distributed quickly. Members repeatedly questioned whether $25 million was enough, how many hospitals would qualify, and whether the 10-day threshold was too narrow, while also raising broader concerns about hospital reimbursement rates, seismic compliance costs, federal policy changes, and the need for more up-to-date data and a longer-term solution. Several members and the LAO noted that the bill was intended as a short-term bridge to keep a very small number of hospitals open until July 1, while the larger distressed-hospital discussion would continue in the May Revision and next year’s budget. Some members argued the state should consider grants rather than loans more broadly, and others emphasized that hospitals serving Medi-Cal and uninsured patients, including safety-net facilities like MLK Community Hospital and Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, face structural pressures. Public comment was uniformly supportive of the bill, with the California Hospital Association, district hospital representatives, counties, and CHLA all backing the proposal and urging additional funding for distressed hospitals in the coming budget. The committee approved AB 108 on a roll call vote of 18-0 and held the roll open briefly to secure remaining votes before formally reporting the bill out.

Transcript Highlights:

• Yes, so these partnerships and the growth. Of this.
• Robert Singleton**, Senior Director of Policy and Public Affairs. And **Mr.
• I'm the Senior Director of Policy and Public Affairs at Chamber of Progress.
• I want to turn to the policy aspects of things.
• It's going to be a partnership.

Transcript Highlights:

• As we work together in this session to create systems and policies that address food insecurity and tackle
• It's the kind of systems-level policy change that's essential to make a real impact on the prevalence
• We welcome the growth of partnerships.
• And mobilize and advocate for changes to laws, policies, and systems perpetuating hunger and poverty.
• Together, we can invest in systems and policies that create real, lasting change to improve the lives

Summary: The meeting was a legislative press event focused on food insecurity and a broader state strategy to improve food access in Washington. Food Lifeline CEO Stephen Davis described rising hunger across western Washington, citing roughly one in eight residents and one in six children as food insecure, and warned that federal SNAP cuts and higher costs could worsen the problem. He emphasized the need for coordinated state, local, nonprofit, and industry action to strengthen food security and support the charitable food system. House Agriculture and Natural Resources Chair Rep. Lisa Reeves framed the issue as a state-level responsibility and highlighted a Food Fighters Caucus working on multiple bills. She pointed to proposals including a Washington version of a Farm Bill (HB 2616), a statewide food security strategy (HB 2238), a ban on force-feeding birds (HB 1735), support for local food infrastructure grants, farm-to-schools efforts, medically tailored meals (HB 2211), a farm-to-food-banks bill (HB 2463), food donation reporting, dynamic grocery pricing (HB 2481), and pesticide restrictions on PFAS (HB 2279). She also said the state was trying to offset federal policy changes that could reduce millions of meals and affect SNAP recipients. Rep. Darya Farivar focused on grocery access as infrastructure and described the closure of the Fred Meyer in her district as an example of fragile food access. She outlined a bill package centered on HB 2294, HB 2297, and HB 2313: removing anti-competitive covenants that block grocery stores from reopening, giving local governments tools to support existing and new stores in underserved areas, and allowing municipal or partnered grocery options when private stores disappear. Grocery worker Dan House, of UFCW 3000, testified in support of HB 2313, saying store closures hurt seniors, families, workers, and neighborhood stability. No votes were taken; the event ended with a call for continued support, collaboration, and public engagement on the bills and food security efforts.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> Johnson and I am the chief policy Johnson and I am the chief policy officer<00:02:31.920><c> with
• In terms of policy, I'll do quickly a policy recommendations moving forward. So that's our...
• In terms of policy, I'll do quickly a policy recommendations moving forward. So that's our...
• Policy recommendations.
• It's a policy issue.

Summary: The committee met without a quorum and began informally, with members noting this was the final information-gathering meeting on housing before a November meeting to discuss findings and report back to the LRC. The main presentation focused on the Lexington Affordable Housing Partnership, a public-private effort supported by a $10 million state allocation. Presenters described Fayette County’s housing shortage, citing a gap of more than 22,000 units, rising home prices, and the challenge of assembling land and capital for affordable projects. The partnership explained that five local banks created a $3 million capital investment fund to buy and hold land at no interest, with deed restrictions keeping the site at 80% or below area median income and allowing the banks to seek Community Reinvestment Act credit. The first project is a 12.5-acre former Transylvania University baseball field, planned for about 242 units, including detached homes, townhouses, garden-style apartments, and senior housing. Speakers said the project required extensive neighborhood engagement and zoning/development approvals, but that the planning phase is now largely complete and infrastructure work should begin soon. Financing details included roughly $64 million in additional funding through tax credit equity, market-rate loans, city support, Kentucky Housing Corporation resources, and donations from nonprofit partners. Developers said the multifamily bond applications are due to Kentucky Housing Corporation the next day, and they expect the land purchase to be repaid into the revolving fund once the property is entitled and closed, allowing the original $3 million to be redeployed for future projects. They estimated rental units could be filled within about six months of completion, while for-sale units would come online over 12 to 36 months. In discussion, members asked about regulatory barriers and project timelines. Presenters pointed to rising construction costs tied to new federal and state requirements, and one member highlighted the need to continue reviewing planning and zoning reforms to speed development plan approvals and reduce delays. The group also endorsed a possible statewide $20 million housing fund, a residential infrastructure fund, and efforts to avoid additional regulatory burdens on housing development.