Transcript Highlights:

• </c> it's great to kick off uh Human Services it's great to kick off uh Human Services for<00:02:10.200
• </c> presentation on the Human Services presentation on the Human Services budget<00:15:15.079><c> so
• </c> with the health and human services with the health and human services committee<00:21:19.640><c>
• </c> and transparency of government services and transparency of government services and<00:35:37.160
• It includes SUD services, mental health services, gambling, and tobacco.

Committee: Senate Human Services

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> required and critical nursing services required and critical nursing services that<00:03:59.120>
• c> then require nursing Services I would then require nursing Services I would very<00:04:32.919><c>
• Senator Rasmusson, Home and Community-Based Services standards, out-of-home respite care services for
• , including 24-hour daily services to unit-based services that are provided a few hours a week.
• , including 24-hour daily services to unit-based services that are provided a few hours a week.

Committee: Senate Human Services

Transcript Highlights:

• So those funding for those services, as well as all other long-term care services, are in the budget,
• What is the total amount of funding for ALF services? For the ALF services? For the ALFs?
• There was also an emphasis on making sure that there were residential services and outpatient services
• The service is very important. The service is excellent. We want to provide the service.
• Bernard. providing mental services if you're aware yeah absolutely we do have Medicaid school services

Summary: The Health Care Budget Subcommittee held a panel discussion on Florida’s mental health and substance abuse system, with representatives from DCF, AHCA, two managing entities, and two providers describing how the state’s behavioral health network is funded and operated. Members focused on the implementation of prior legislative investments, especially the $50 million in recurring funding from Representative Maney’s bill and the earlier $126 million community behavioral health appropriation. Witnesses said the newer funds were used mainly for crisis beds, discharge planning, outpatient services, regional collaboratives, and a USF Marchman Act report, while the larger behavioral health appropriation supported CAT, FACT, FIT, forensic teams, residential and outpatient services, and crisis care, with most dollars going directly to services and only a small share to administration. A major theme was access to crisis care and the role of mobile response teams, 988, and central receiving facilities in diverting people from Baker Act admissions and reducing readmissions. DCF and providers said mobile response teams have expanded, are being used to de-escalate crises and connect people to care, and have shown strong diversion results and reductions in Baker Acts in some regions. Members also asked about waitlists, children in crisis, and how to handle people without housing or support; providers said discharge planning is individualized but often constrained by homelessness, transportation, and a lack of safe placements, and several witnesses identified housing as one of the biggest barriers to recovery and stability. The committee also examined provider sustainability, reimbursement, and funding gaps. Witnesses described delays caused by contract timing, cost allocation rules, and Medicaid reimbursement rates that do not always keep pace with labor and operating costs, especially for smaller providers and rural networks. DCF and AHCA said managing entities can provide advances, retroactive rate adjustments, and technical assistance, and that Medicaid managed care plans have network standards and complaint/dispute processes. Members raised concerns about a reported $7 million loss in federal non-sustainable funds, provider closures, and whether there is a formal ombudsman process for disputes; DCF said the federal reductions were known and tied to one-time funds, and that the department generally handles provider issues informally while working with managing entities to preserve continuity of care.

Transcript Highlights:

• Safe services for individuals.
• Urgent care and emergency services.
• services, similar to many of the services that are provided in schools through telehealth programs that
• That would be a year past the date of service for any services provided in July, but they would have
• Any services provided today, for example, they have time to submit all of those claims, but for any services

Transcript Highlights:

• services.
• services.
• More IMD services.
• Crisis services also connect individuals with other needed services.
• housing services.

Committee: Joint Tribal and State Relations Committee

Summary: The meeting focused on Turtle Mountain’s public health and behavioral health priorities, especially access to rural health transformation funding and a long-running data use agreement with the state. Tribal public health leaders described how, during COVID, a temporary data-sharing arrangement allowed them to do their own contact tracing and case management, and they argued that a similar agreement is now needed to respond more quickly to very high syphilis rates and other infectious disease concerns. Committee members generally expressed support and said they would follow up with state officials, while tribal representatives emphasized that they already have the staff and infrastructure to use timely data effectively. A major portion of the meeting was devoted to the Turtle Mountain Recovery Center and the broader issue of the IMD exclusion and residential treatment capacity. Tribal leaders described the center’s opening, its five levels of care, its 16-bed limit, and its efforts to become financially sustainable through billing, grants, and partnerships. They shared success stories and argued for an IMD waiver or similar flexibility so the center could expand to 32 beds and better meet local need. Committee members discussed the policy barriers to expanding residential treatment, including federal approval timelines, state funding choices, and the need to preserve a continuum of care that includes outpatient and community-based services. The committee then heard a detailed presentation from Hector Hernandez-Dogato of the National Health Law Program on the history and mechanics of the IMD exclusion and Section 1115 waivers. He explained that the exclusion limits Medicaid payment for services in facilities with more than 16 beds, but noted existing exceptions and alternatives such as state plan options, managed care arrangements, telehealth, and community-based services. He also reviewed mixed results from states that have used IMD waivers, warning that they do not automatically improve overdose deaths, emergency room use, or access to community care, and may risk reinforcing institutionalization if not paired with strong upstream services. The committee discussed a draft bill to appropriate $49,000 and one FTE for HHS to pursue an IMD waiver, with members suggesting the bill may need to explicitly include serious mental illness as well as substance use disorder and asking for department input at a future meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• services staff.
• services staff. to pay over time for social services staff.
• And we're purchasing their services? They are performing the services for the state.
• Number eight, DFA Revenue Services with Veteran Cleaning Service for janitorial services in the Ragland
• And number 22 is UAPB, janitorial services for commercial cleaning services for dormitories. Mr.

Committee: All JOINT BUDGET COMMITTEE

Transcript Highlights:

• where we have gaps in services.
• So to the person, there might be services that they receive or services that have been sustained.
• of Social Services and health care services and others are experiencing now, and you'll get to hear
• the Department of Social Services; that is, for our In-Home Supportive Services system.
• the Department of Social Services; that is, for our In-Home Supportive Services system.

Summary: The Budget Subcommittee on Health and Human Services heard a series of budget items focused first on the California Department of Aging and then on the Department of Social Services. For Aging, the director reported the state is at the midpoint of the Master Plan for Aging, with about 300 initiatives launched and roughly three-quarters completed, nearly $1 billion invested, and expanded local planning, research, and stakeholder engagement. The committee also discussed HICAP modernization, which would add ongoing funding from the Special HICAP Fund to expand Medicare counseling capacity, and senior meal programs, including support for virtual congregate/to-go meals and the use of prior one-time nutrition investments. The chair raised concerns about federal H.R. 1 and its downstream effects on older adults, food assistance, and other safety-net programs, and the department said its direct budget was not affected but that other programs serving older adults could be under pressure. The committee then reviewed multiple CDSS proposals. These included implementing the federal Medicaid Access Rule by creating a statewide grievance process and critical incident reporting system for IHSS and other home- and community-based services; housing and homelessness programs such as CalWORKs Housing Support, Housing and Disability Advocacy, Home Safe, and Bringing Families Home, where the department described strong outcomes but warned that one-time funding is expiring and services are scaling back; and permanent position authority for the Housing and Homelessness Division. Members also heard about the facility management system modernization for Community Care Licensing, home care services branch solvency and regulation work, child care centers in multifamily housing, the Seizure Emergency Response Act, licensing during emergencies and disasters, the Family Preparedness Plan Act, and social services automation projects including CalSAWS, the enterprise data pipeline, and CalWORKs child support notices. The LAO and Department of Finance generally had no additional comments or were still reviewing several requests. A notable exchange occurred on the Community Care Licensing item, where Senator Grove pressed the department about the Autumn Oaks facility in Tulare County, citing dozens of complaints and severe conditions affecting seniors. The department said it had worked with the county and ombudsman on relocation, was reviewing what went wrong, and had authority to pursue administrative action even after a license surrender. The hearing ended with a stakeholder presentation from the California Association of Area Agencies on Aging supporting a $62.3 million Older Californians Act request, followed by public comment from advocates for housing, Meals on Wheels, HICAP, Home Safe, and H-DAP. The subcommittee adjourned without taking votes, and all items were held open.

Transcript Highlights:

• service.
• service.
• Whereas a third-service municipal or third-service city service or others might not have that same laser
• service.
• they designate service areas for ambulance services, ensure that a central ambulance service covers

Summary: The committee was called to order, a quorum was established, and the minutes from the prior meeting were approved. The first major presentation came from Montana Public Employees Retirement System executive director William Hollahan, who gave an overview of Montana’s Volunteer Firefighters’ Compensation Act plan. He explained that the plan covers volunteer firefighters in unincorporated areas, is funded by 5% of state fire insurance premium taxes, and currently serves 228 departments with about 2,936 active members and 1,242 retirees. He described eligibility rules, annual training and reporting requirements, benefit levels for partial and full pensions, disability, death, medical, and funeral benefits, and said the plan is actuarially sound with roughly $60 million in assets and a funded ratio slightly above 100%. Committee members asked about prior-service credit, whether EMS personnel are included, the effect on recruitment and retention, and whether expanding coverage would require a funding analysis; Hollahan said prior service is not credited, EMS is not currently included, and any expansion would need financial review. Tim Walleen of Workforce Safety and Insurance then presented a draft North Dakota workers’ compensation solution for volunteer firefighters and volunteer EMS personnel. He explained that volunteer responders are already covered by workers’ comp for medical and wage-loss benefits, but the proposal would set a minimum annual wage of $30,000 for calculating wage-loss benefits for qualifying volunteers, with the benefit paid at two-thirds of that amount. Representative Porter suggested tying the volunteer definition to existing code rather than a fixed dollar amount, and Walleen agreed. Questions focused on whether search and rescue or other volunteer emergency services could be included, whether departments would face new paperwork, and whether volunteer organizations can already elect coverage; Walleen said there would be no additional paperwork and that volunteer coverage is already available. The committee also heard from volunteer fire service representatives and the state fire marshal. An Oakes-area firefighter, Mr. Olson, testified that small departments are struggling with retention, communication, and administrative burdens, especially around separate bookkeeping and funding rules for donated or fundraising money, and he said departments need clearer guidance from the state. State Fire Marshal Dr. Matthew Clark introduced himself and outlined a broader effort to improve education, support, and coordination for fire departments, including a planned 10% audit of certificates of existence beginning in 2027, more outreach through his office, and better assistance with training, reporting, and grant access. He said his office is authorized under current law to provide these services, but the role has been vague and underused. Finally, Arnagard Rural Fire District Chief Rick Schreiber testified in favor of new recruitment and retention ideas, including retirement-style benefits, health insurance, tax incentives, scholarships, grants, and more remote or regional training. He said volunteer departments are losing members, that local tax and donation funds are already stretched, and that any new retirement or incentive program should be sustainable and likely involve a mix of state and local support.

Transcript Highlights:

• And the parents that accepted services, the voluntary services, the ones that accepted the services were
• And the parents that accepted services, the voluntary services, the ones that accepted the services were
• The families that need the services the most will not engage in services.
• The families that need the services the most will not engage in services.
• The families that need the services the most will not engage in services.

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 2511, which would define “imminent physical harm” in the child welfare context as a substantial risk of serious harm arising from home conditions, caregiver conduct, neglect, substance abuse, unsafe environments, or other circumstances likely to cause significant injury. Representative Tom Dent, the sponsor, said the bill was intended to give caseworkers clearer tools to protect children while still recognizing the importance of keeping families together. Supporters, including some foster parents, kinship caregivers, advocates, and individuals with lived experience, argued that the current standard is too vague and has contributed to child fatalities and near-fatalities, especially in cases involving fentanyl exposure, chronic neglect, and abuse. They said clearer language would help courts and caseworkers intervene earlier and more consistently. Opponents, including legal aid, public defense, and child welfare policy groups, argued the bill is legally problematic, could conflict with existing statutes and ICWA-informed language, and would not address root causes such as service gaps, training, and inconsistent implementation. DCYF testified “other,” saying the bill could add clarity but that the language needed refinement; the sponsor said he was open to working on changes. No vote was taken on the bill during the hearing. The committee then heard House Bill 2660, which would allow courts at shelter care hearings to order parents of children under age five to comply with safety-related conditions, evaluations, or services when the child is returned home, with referrals required within seven days and participation not treated as an admission of abuse or neglect. The sponsor, Representative Ortiz-Self, said the bill is aimed at critical incidents and would give caseworkers and courts more ability to require safeguards for very young children when families are not voluntarily engaging in services. DCYF and the Office of the Family and Children’s Ombuds supported the bill, saying it could help prevent tragedies by allowing earlier court-ordered services and safety conditions. Some advocates and parents also supported it, describing cases where removal or court intervention helped protect children. Opponents, including public defense and some family-support organizations, raised constitutional and due process concerns, argued that services are not the same as immediate safety, and warned the bill could shift problems without fixing underlying service shortages. The sponsor and DCYF discussed the need for follow-up on language and implementation, but no committee action or vote was taken in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> that's real those are real Services that's real those are real Services going<00:02:39.800><c> out
• </c><00:09:18.320><c> they</c> their children get the services they their children get the services they
• I am co-president and CEO of Services for Opportunity Partners, a provider of disability services.
• </c> 39.6% increase to our social services 39.6% increase to our social services Levy<01:06:22.359><c
• </c><01:07:18.000><c> and</c> inequities and access to services and inequities and access to services

Committees: Senate Health and Human Services , Senate Human Services

Transcript Highlights:

• SERVICES THAT ARE COVERED FOR BOTH MEDICARE AND MEDICAID SERVICES INCLUDE ACUTE CARE SERVICES, ALL DAY
• ALL SERVICES ARE PROVIDED BY THE PACE SERVICE ORGANIZATION TO PROVIDE EFFECTIVE CARE COORDINATION AND
• , SOCIAL SERVICES, BEHAVIORAL SERVICES, THERAPEUTIC SERVICES, RESIDENTIAL SERVICES, AND MEDICAL SERVICES
• AND THERE IS BASICALLY NO COVERAGE FOR ADULT DENTAL SERVICES BESIDE EMERGENCY DENTAL SERVICES.
• SERVICE ORGANIZATION SERVICE OFFICERS NEED TO SUPPORT VETERANS. BOTTOM LEFT IS OUR HOPE NAVIGATORS.

Transcript Highlights:

• It adds $70,000 to the contract, and it's for professional service fees for pharmacist services.
• for DCFS clients in specific service areas.
• So what is warranty service? Testing and comprehensive warranty service and support.
• So what is warranty service?
• This is for medical monitoring services.

Committee: All ALC-REVIEW

Transcript Highlights:

• , mental health services, ...for safety net services for children and families, mental health services
• , mental health services, parenting support, services for children with special needs.
• , mental health services, parenting support, services for children with special needs.
• Whether it's medical services, food services, support services, grants are being cut regularly.
• Thank your husband for his service, and thank you for your service as a military spouse.

Summary: The House took up the special order calendar for a proposed constitutional amendment on property taxes, CS/HJR 1F, which would create a new homestead exemption for non-school taxes, lower the annual assessment cap on non-homestead property, and restrict how counties and municipalities may use ad valorem tax revenue. The sponsor, Rep. Overdorf, said the measure would give homeowners tax relief and argued local governments could adjust spending or use other revenue sources. Opponents repeatedly questioned the ballot language, the lack of a fiscal estimate or backfill, and the potential impact on local services, public safety, and debt obligations. The House adopted the special order report and then debated the resolution and a series of amendments. Several amendments were offered to carve out or protect specific services from the tax changes. Rep. Bartleman’s amendment to protect Children’s Services Councils and Children’s Trusts was supported by members who said those entities fund early learning, mental health, aftercare, and other services for children and working families, but it failed 25-74. Rep. Cross offered an amendment to include water management districts in allowable ad valorem uses, warning of impacts on flood control, water quality, Everglades restoration, and water supply; that amendment also failed. Rep. Eskamani offered an amendment requiring the Legislature to backfill public safety funding if local revenues fall, arguing police and fire services, staffing, and response times would be at risk; it failed 25-71. The chamber then rejected Rep. Woodson’s amendment to require state backfill for senior services, with supporters citing Meals on Wheels, transportation, adult day care, and other local senior programs, and opponents saying the proposal was outside the bill’s scope. Finally, Rep. Gant offered an amendment to protect veteran services, saying local governments fund housing, mental health, transition, and family support programs for veterans; debate emphasized the importance of honoring veterans and avoiding cuts to those services. The transcript cuts off during debate on that amendment, before a final vote is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• where we have gaps in services.
• So to the person, there might be services that they receive or services that have been sustained.
• Some of their services in-house; they may choose to contract out for services.
• the Department of Social Services—that is, for our In-Home Supportive Services system.
• the Department of Social Services—that is, for our In-Home Supportive Services system.

Summary: The Budget Subcommittee on Health and Human Services heard an overview from the California Department of Aging on the state’s Master Plan for Aging, including progress at the five-year midpoint, local aging and disability action plans, HCBS gap analysis, workforce work, and stakeholder engagement. The Legislative Analyst’s Office noted the department’s budget was relatively flat but flagged federal H.R. 1 pressure on nutrition-related programs. Members discussed how H.R. 1 and broader federal and state budget pressures could affect older adults through other programs, even where the Department of Aging itself had no direct cut. The committee also heard a stakeholder request from the California Association of Area Agencies on Aging for $62.3 million to support Older Californians Act services, with Finance cautioning that any added ongoing spending would worsen out-year deficits. The committee then reviewed several Department of Aging proposals, including HICAP modernization to add paid counselors and reduce reliance on volunteers, and senior meal program oversight for virtual congregate/to-go meals under AB 1476. Members also discussed the status of area agencies on aging in Ventura, Santa Barbara, and San Luis Obispo counties, including a new RFP process in the Central Coast and the need to protect service continuity during transitions. Finance clarified that remaining modernizing Older Californians Act nutrition funds can still be used through June 2029. The Department of Social Services presented a series of items. These included new federal Medicaid Access Rule implementation for IHSS grievance and critical incident systems; housing and homelessness programs for CalWORKs Housing Support, HDAP, Home Safe, and Bringing Families Home, with testimony that one-time funds are expiring and service levels will likely decline; permanent position authority for housing and homelessness administration; a facility management system to replace aging licensing systems; home care services branch solvency and regulations; child care centers in multifamily housing; the Seizure Emergency Response Act; licensing during emergencies and disasters; and the Family Preparedness Plan Act. The committee also heard a detailed exchange about the Autumn Oaks facility in Tulare County, where Senator Grove raised concerns about 53 complaints and the handling of unsafe conditions; CDSS said it is reviewing the matter and has authority to take administrative action even after a license surrender. No votes were taken, and items were held open.

Transcript Highlights:

• What is the cost for the in-jail service? The jail-based restoration service? Yeah.
• So this is crisis residential services. So the department requested 250. services.
• a similar type of duty, and you look at service utilization, that service did pop.
• support services.
• services.

Committee: House Budget

Transcript Highlights:

• It adds $70,000 to the contract, and it's for professional service fees for pharmacist services.
• This is a new $1 million contract for intensive in-home services for DCFS clients in specific service
• So what is warranty service?
• This is for medical monitoring services.
• Number 25, UA with Starlight Building Services.

Committee: All ALC-REVIEW

Summary: The committee first considered an $88,000 used tire program contract for District 4 with LTR Intermediate Holdings. Senators raised concerns that the tire district’s revised business plan had not yet been approved and that the contract could worsen cash flow before funding was confirmed. Questions were also raised about procurement language in the RFP that excluded bidders under corrective action plans. After discussion, a motion was made and approved to hold the contract until next month so the tire board could appear and answer questions. Members then reviewed a large slate of methods of finance, alternative delivery projects, and discretionary grants. These included capital projects at ASU Mid-South, Arkansas Tech, Ozarka, UA Fayetteville, UA Little Rock, UAMS, and UCA; a new UCA multi-purpose arena project estimated at $75.5 million; and DHS and Department of Health grants for aging services, substance abuse prevention, mental health, nutrition, hearing-loss follow-up, HIV services, and rural hospital quality improvement. All of these items were reviewed without objection. The committee also heard a ratification request from UAMS for a Family and Medical Leave Act outsourcing contract with FMLA Source. UAMS said an amendment had been prepared but never submitted for review, and payments continued after expiration; members expressed frustration and asked UAMS to review whether other contracts had similarly lapsed. The committee then reviewed numerous construction-related, intergovernmental, out-of-state, and in-state contracts, including airport economic impact study work, parking guidance technology at the University of Arkansas, veteran nursing services, and multiple DHS service contracts. Most items were reviewed without objection, and the meeting adjourned after reports of routine contract amendments and minor contracts were presented for information.

Transcript Highlights:

• Home care services.
• Focused as a government agency on doing the service, you forget to tell folks where the services are
• And it seems like they're losing their current services, or may lose their service, because not every
• The problem with the services is that, much like any fee-for-service, the costs began to balloon pretty
• fee-for-service.

Summary: The Health Care Budget Subcommittee met to organize the new term, take roll, and hear introductory presentations from the six agencies under its jurisdiction: the Agency for Health Care Administration, Agency for Persons with Disabilities, Department of Children and Families, Department of Elder Affairs, Department of Health, and Department of Veterans’ Affairs. The chair outlined the committee process, including assigning members to review agencies and make budget recommendations. Each agency head gave a high-level overview of their budget, staffing, major programs, and priorities, with recurring themes including Medicaid, long-term care, disability services, child welfare, mental health, aging services, public health, and veterans’ health care. Several agency leaders highlighted recent initiatives and funding priorities. AHCA emphasized Medicaid managed care, provider regulation, Hope Florida, hospital-at-home, and cancer-related efforts; APD discussed iBudget services, Hope Florida, a managed-care pilot, online applications, and forensic care costs; DCF focused on child protection, foster care, adult protective services, food/cash/medical assistance, mental health, and opioid treatment; Elder Affairs highlighted Alzheimer’s services, community-based senior care, guardianship, ombudsman services, and disaster outreach; DOH covered cancer innovation, maternal telehealth, cybersecurity, HIV/hepatitis/syphilis screening, and school nursing; and Veterans Affairs described benefits and health care access for veterans, long-term care, and federal reimbursement. Several speakers also raised concerns about rising costs, provider rates, disaster response, and access to services. The committee heard two public comments from disability advocates about Medicaid redeterminations affecting iBudget waiver recipients and provider payment delays. In response, AHCA and APD said they were coordinating on data sharing, early outreach, escalation processes, and efforts to reduce disenrollments and make recertification smoother. Members then asked questions about provider rates, opioid settlement spending, managed care quality measures, pediatric rare disease grants, group home transparency, senior outreach, ABA services moving into managed care, annual Medicaid recertification, veterans’ service utilization, waiting lists for elder services, and prevention spending. No formal votes were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• It adds $70,000 to the contract, and it's for professional service fees for pharmacist services.
• for DCFS clients in specific service areas.
• So what is warranty service? Testing and comprehensive warranty service and support.
• So what is warranty service?
• This is for medical monitoring services.

Committee: All ALC-REVIEW

Summary: The subcommittee first considered a used tire program contract for Arkansas District 4, an $88,000 one-year contract with LTR Intermediate Holdings. Senators raised concerns that the tire district’s revised business plan had not yet been approved and that the contract could leave the district unable to pay. Questions also focused on solicitation language that excluded bidders under corrective action plans. On motion, the committee held the contract until next month and encouraged the tire board to appear. Members then reviewed and, without objection, moved forward a series of methods of finance, alternative delivery projects, and discretionary grants. These included multiple university and college projects such as renovations, roof replacements, a new UCA multipurpose arena, and a revised financing package for UA Fayetteville’s Maple Hill residence hall. The committee also reviewed DHS and Department of Health grants for aging services, substance abuse prevention, mental health, nutrition outreach, hearing-loss follow-up, HIV services, maternal health, and rural hospital quality improvement. The committee next handled contract items, including a UAMS ratification for FMLA Source after an amendment was not submitted for review and payments continued past expiration; UAMS said it had retrained staff and would review for other missed contracts. Members also reviewed numerous construction, intergovernmental, out-of-state, and in-state contracts across state agencies and universities. Questions were raised about an out-of-state aeronautics study, a U of A Fayetteville parking guidance system, and a Veterans Affairs nursing contract. Most items were reviewed without objection, and the meeting adjourned after informational reports on contract amendments and minor contracts.

Transcript Highlights:

• IHSS is a medical service, and it is not our intent to interrupt services for recipients.
• the services.
• Gray's to get services. We want others like you to get services.
• County Human Services Agency.
• which are navigation services, and then the caregiving services.

Summary: The joint informational hearing focused on the impact of H.R. 1 on older Californians and related county administration issues. Chair Jackson and Chair Addis opened by emphasizing California’s rapidly aging population and the need to protect seniors’ access to food, health care, housing, and in-home support services. Testimony from the Department of Social Services, Department of Health Care Services, and Department of Aging described how H.R. 1 would expand work and reporting requirements in CalFresh and Medi-Cal, increase redeterminations, and create new eligibility barriers. Witnesses and advocates warned that these changes could lead to large coverage losses, especially for adults ages 55 to 64, people experiencing homelessness, caregivers, and some immigrant groups, while also increasing administrative burden on counties. The LAO noted that many provisions do not directly apply to Californians 65 and older, but highlighted indirect effects and some direct impacts, including a new home equity limit for certain long-term care recipients and narrower immigration eligibility rules. Committee members pressed the administration and counties on how exemptions would be identified and implemented, whether data systems could automatically protect eligible people, and how outreach would reach older adults, women, LGBTQ seniors, and people with limited digital access. DHCS and CDSS said they are working to use existing data, cross-program information sharing, and human-centered communications to maximize exemptions and reduce churn, including text outreach, print and radio campaigns, and navigator support. Members also raised concerns about the need for legal aid and county eligibility workers to help people navigate complex rules, and requested updated analyses on the number of people likely to lose both Medi-Cal and CalFresh and the broader human and system impacts. No votes were taken. The second major topic was the administration’s proposal to shift some future IHSS costs to counties by establishing a statewide baseline for average authorized hours per case. CDSS said the proposal is intended to improve consistency in assessments and not reduce services, while counties and labor groups strongly opposed it, arguing that rising hours reflect real increases in need, an aging and higher-acuity caseload, and state-mandated assessment tools rather than county error. County representatives said the proposal would strain already limited local revenues, worsen the effects of H.R. 1, and could force cuts to other safety-net services. Committee members questioned the proposal’s timing and impact, but the hearing ended without action, with the chairs asking for continued updates, additional analysis, and more information before May Revision.

Transcript Highlights:

• Number nine, DHS Division of Aging and Adults and Behavioral Health Services with ATA Services.
• Number 9, DHS Division of Aging and Adults and Behavioral Health Services with ATA Services.
• Number 15, DHS with SHC Services.
• Senator Rice, Number 22, Shared Services. Someone with Shared Services here?"
• Janitorial Services. This is for janitorial services at the Department of Health.

Committee: All ALC-REVIEW