Transcript Highlights:

• everybody else fights for too and take away from their needs to further fund water needs.
• everybody else fights for too and take away from their needs to further fund water needs.
• But when they did this study, there's more funding needs that I'm aware of?
• Is there more dollars needed out there that we're not funding that are being asked for?
• other state needs outside of the water community to fund water projects because we're going to have

Summary: The Water Topics Overview Committee met to receive interim status updates on several water-related studies and Department of Water Resources projects. The committee approved the March 26, 2026 minutes, observed a moment of silence for the late Representative Conmy, and then heard updates on the watershed management study and the stormwater/wastewater study. Staff reported that the committee had already received the testimony contemplated in the study plans, including input from state agencies, local governments, and out-of-state entities, and that any further action would be at the committee’s discretion. The Department of Water Resources then provided project and budget updates on NAWS and the Southwest Pipeline Project. Reese reported NAWS is expected to serve about 81,000 users, with a total projected cost of about $571 million and about $96 million remaining, while the Southwest Pipeline Project is estimated at $1.06 billion total with about $409 million remaining. Members asked about funding sources, capacity needs, and whether current and future construction is being designed for increased demand; department staff said current work is designed for ultimate capacity, but some future components may need redesign based on new requests. The committee also discussed local cost shares, Minot’s role in NAWS funding, and whether the system is adequate for peak demand. A major portion of the meeting focused on the department’s cash management, carryover, and long-term water funding outlook. The department said Resources Trust Fund revenues are tied to oil extraction taxes and are affected by stripper well exemptions and future oil price declines. Members expressed concern about large carryover balances and whether the state is obligating more money than can realistically be spent in a biennium. The department reported about $340.6 million in remaining carryover and said it is trying to reduce that through a two-tier pre-construction/construction process and closer project vetting. The department also summarized the Deloitte studies on regional governance and finance and on cost-share policy. Stakeholders generally favored keeping the current governance structures for NAWS and Southwest with improvements, while Red River stakeholders leaned toward a different option; the department said it will bring an implementation plan back in September. On cost share, Deloitte’s recommendations would reduce some percentages, prioritize projects differently, and use other measures to close a projected long-term funding gap. Members debated affordability, local burden, deferred maintenance, and whether statutory changes may be needed to allow the commission more flexibility in prioritizing and funding projects. No formal votes or final actions were taken beyond approving the minutes and receiving the updates.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'll start with the need versus the assessment. So our needs...
• And all of that funding comes into the affordable housing fund.
• And all of that funding comes into the affordable housing fund.
• Overall, farmworker housing needs to be flexible; funding needs to be flexible; and it needs to be developed
• to our region, who also desperately needs these funding allocations?

Summary: The committee held an outcomes review hearing on AB 457 and related farmworker and rural housing policy, with members and witnesses discussing whether recent streamlining laws are actually increasing production. Chair Haney, Assembly Members Soria and Pellerin, and others described the purpose of AB 457 and its predecessor bills AB 1783 and AB 3035: to make farmworker housing easier to build through ministerial approval and other reforms. Witnesses emphasized that farmworkers face severe overcrowding, high rents, long commutes, and limited access to housing in both rural and coastal agricultural regions. The first panel focused on practical barriers and local models. Napa County described its county-owned farmworker centers, which provide nightly lodging, meals, and services, funded by lodger fees, a grower assessment, and state support. Testimony stressed that these centers function as navigation hubs rather than permanent housing, and that stable, inflation-adjusted operating funding, language access, transportation, and local set-asides are critical. United Farm Workers urged that local farmworkers be prioritized over H-2A workers and warned against displacing long-term resident workers. Several witnesses said the biggest barriers remain infrastructure, land costs, local opposition, and insufficient subsidy rather than approval streamlining alone. The second and third panels addressed AB 457’s implementation and broader state funding issues. Santa Clara County said the bill could help on a county-owned Gilroy site, but financing remains the main obstacle. Self-Help Enterprises said AB 457’s expanded geography and project-size rules may help future sites, but rural projects still struggle with water, sewer, and environmental review costs, and with the state’s Super NOFA process, which tends to favor deeper-income projects that do not match farmworker household incomes. HCD reported that CERNA and other programs have increased farmworker housing production in recent years, but witnesses argued that rural regions still receive too little funding, that infrastructure dollars are too fragmented, and that more rural-specific set-asides, local funding incentives, and predictable allocations are needed. No votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• do not fund the actual needs of students, combined with significantly rising costs to meet their legal
• Our students need your help.
• We ask that you fully fund DSHS's request for the increase in staffing and system enhancements needed
• We ask for funding for Eastern Washington for this critical need. Thank you. Thank you.
• Housing is a basic need.

Summary: The House Appropriations Committee continued its public hearing on House Bill 2289, the fiscal biennial supplemental operating budget appropriations bill. The chair and vice chair explained the hearing process, limited testimony to one minute per person, and then heard extensive public comment from a wide range of advocates, local officials, service providers, and residents. No committee vote was taken during the hearing. Much of the testimony focused on opposition to proposed budget shifts involving Climate Commitment Act revenue, especially the proposed diversion of $569 million to other uses, including the Working Families Tax Credit. Environmental, public health, and local government witnesses argued those funds should remain dedicated to climate pollution reduction, wildfire resilience, clean transportation, natural climate solutions, and affordability programs. Several speakers also urged full funding for wildfire response and forest health, including the HB 1168 commitment, and opposed transfers from the Public Works Assistance Account. Other major topics included Medicaid and long-term care rates, with nursing home and assisted living providers warning that freezing or delaying rate rebasing would worsen staffing shortages and threaten access to care. Public health and health care advocates opposed cuts to foundational public health services, Apple Health expansion, and pharmacy benefit changes, while oral health advocates asked to preserve Medicaid dental funding and support Dentist Link. Testimony also supported or opposed funding for K-12 programs such as special education, the Ninth Grade Success Initiative, and homeless student stability; early learning and child care subsidies; disability services; public defense; housing and homelessness prevention; food assistance; higher education; and immigrant legal services. The committee concluded the hearing and adjourned after public testimony ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• and help them identify potential strategies for funding those needs.
• Those schools needed those funds.
• I'm here to emphasize a critical need to fully fund the Hold Harmless provision, a commitment that protects
• If this funding doesn't happen, New Mexico International School will need to cut roughly four staff members
• Fully funding the Hold Harmless at $12.8 million this year gives the Schools time they need to plan responsibly

Transcript Highlights:

• The number of people coming in the door saying, we need GGRF funding, it's the only revenue source.
• are currently in the GGRF fund, unless instead of siphoning them off for other programs, you need to
• I'd also like to echo the need to provide funding for the FARMER program. Thank you. Mr.
• for SB. stress the need to fulfill our funding commitments for SB 125 funding for transit.
• I'd also like to echo the need to provide funding for the Farmer program. Thank you.

Transcript Highlights:

• What this proposal funds is the people and programs needed to actually use it.”
• When we have all of the funding, it's so much easier to take care of everything that needs to be done
• We look at the funding currently available to the program, the proposed funding need within the region
• And for Prop 4, those needs will be to stay abreast of their funding needs.
• Increasing this year's Prop 4 for wildfire funding to $500 million to meet the urgent need for greater

Summary: The subcommittee heard an overview from the California Conservation Corps on its 50-year history, current operations, and budget proposals. Director J.P. Patton described the CCC’s work in conservation, disaster response, education, and workforce development, noting 26 facilities, about 3,000 Corps members annually, and a funding mix of roughly 55% General Fund and 45% reimbursements. Members praised the program and asked about revenue sources, recruitment, retention, and post-service tracking. The CCC said it has a 5,000-person waitlist, uses first-come, first-served admissions with minimal eligibility requirements, and is working to improve data on outcomes. The committee also discussed the Greenwood Residential Center, where the CCC seeks staffing and operating funds to reopen a rebuilt facility in El Dorado County; the LAO suggested considering fewer new members or a delayed opening to reduce General Fund pressure, but no vote was taken and the item was held open. The committee then considered a CCC wildfire readiness proposal to move hand crews to a seven-day operational schedule. CCC and Cal Fire representatives said the change is needed because wildfire is now year-round and because the current model leaves crews unavailable in many months due to staffing gaps. They said the proposal would improve reliability for Cal Fire, preserve training opportunities for Corps members, and better align the CCC with Cal Fire’s 66-hour workweek. The LAO supported the concept but recommended considering lower-cost alternatives, such as relief staffing or partial reimbursement. Members also discussed the decline in incarcerated fire crews, with Cal Fire explaining that reforms and eligibility changes have reduced the pool of incarcerated people who qualify for camp and fire work. One member raised the use of goats and grazing for fuel reduction, and staff responded that such methods can help with prevention but cannot replace hand crews for suppression. The item was held open. Cal Fire then presented its department overview, emphasizing its expanded workforce, year-round wildfire response, vegetation management, community preparedness, and partnerships with federal, local, tribal, and private entities. Members asked about contract counties such as Orange County, reforestation and seedling capacity, federal reimbursement, and the 66-hour workweek rollout. Cal Fire said it is still below the seedling capacity needed for post-fire reforestation and relies heavily on public-private partnerships. The committee also reviewed a proposal for permanent funding for defensible space inspections. Cal Fire said it needs 31 positions and ongoing General Fund support to replace temporary funding that expires in 2027 and to maintain a goal of 250,000 inspections per year. The LAO said the proposal has merit but suggested alternatives such as a different General Fund/GGRF mix, reinstating an SRA fee, or approving the positions on a one-time basis. Members generally supported the work but raised budget concerns, and the proposal was held open. Finally, Cal Fire began presenting a fixed-wing pilot and mechanics contract increase, explaining that its aviation fleet has grown and become more complex, requiring more pilots and maintainers for year-round operations. The department said labor market pressures have increased contractor costs and that the contract is needed to support continuous aerial firefighting readiness. The transcript cuts off before further discussion or any action on that item.

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, the people that are in these different water departments, these managers need funding to deal with
• But, you know, to me, we need to get back to a General Fund commitment to our men and women at Cal Fire
• We need to go bigger through block grants and funding multiple projects at a time, and we need to go
• of the wildlife coexistence and also mentioning that we also need funding for wolf management.
• of the wildlife coexistence and also mentioning that we also need funding for wolf management.

Transcript Highlights:

• First, we don't see an immediate need for this funding, as the existing special fund loan that it took
• not need to rely on General Fund appropriations moving forward.
• not need to rely on general fund appropriations moving forward.
• The remaining funds support counseling, academic services, and basic needs supports.
• This amount will also fund the scholarship at the 17.5% level of unmet need.

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Education heard updates on higher education issues, beginning with California State University’s turnaround plans for seven campuses with enrollment declines. CSU said overall enrollment is growing systemwide, but some campuses, especially in Northern California, face structural declines tied to demographics and community college pipelines. The plans focus on reengaging stopped-out and adult learners, expanding partnerships and guaranteed admissions, improving retention and student support, and reducing costs through program suspensions, hiring freezes, shared services, and procurement consolidation. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the strategies were reasonable but urged regular legislative updates, and the Department of Finance had no additional comments. Committee members emphasized the need for implementation oversight, written updates, and attention to student outreach, financial aid, and privacy concerns around AI tools used in recruitment. The committee then reviewed the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education’s request for a $10 million General Fund appropriation to repay litigation-related borrowing. Department of Consumer Affairs and bureau staff said the bureau has a long-standing structural deficit, has already cut positions and shifted some costs, and that the General Fund backfill would reduce future fee increases on institutions. The LAO opposed the request, arguing the bureau can cover near-term costs with its existing loan and that litigation costs should remain the responsibility of the regulated entities through fees. Finance supported the one-time backfill as a unique situation that would lower fee increases and avoid passing litigation costs on to schools and students. Members asked about preventing a repeat of the problem, and bureau staff said they are pursuing fee increases through the sunset review and have strengthened internal policies and disability accommodation practices. The subcommittee also heard a broad update on Cal Grant funding and student aid. The California Student Aid Commission, UC, CSU, and the community colleges described Cal Grant as essential to affordability, but the LAO noted spending has grown faster than historical averages and said the state likely lacks capacity for major expansion in the near term. The segments highlighted the importance of state aid in covering tuition and living costs, and raised concerns about federal changes to student loans and Pell Grants, especially the elimination of Grad PLUS for some graduate students and limits on part-time borrowing. Committee members pressed for data on students who are eligible but not served by current Cal Grant rules, including adult learners and students affected by age and merit restrictions, and asked for analysis of phased-in implementation of the Cal Grant Equity Framework. Finance said full implementation would cost hundreds of millions of dollars and that affordability remains part of the state’s multi-year compact with the segments. Finally, the committee began discussion of the Middle Class Scholarship Program. CSAC and the UC and CSU said the program is a key part of affordability and debt reduction, especially after the 2022 reforms that expanded awards to total cost of attendance and improved administration. They warned that cutting funding by more than half would reduce award coverage from 35% to 17.5% of cost of attendance and could affect enrollment and persistence, particularly for middle-income students who do not qualify for other need-based aid. The segments also noted that recent administrative changes have reduced award revisions and campus workload, but that data exchange and award volatility remain challenges.

Transcript Highlights:

• , the water infrastructure needs, kind of a summary of the Clean Water State Revolving Fund and Drinking
• , the water infrastructure needs, kind of a summary of the Clean Water State Revolving Fund and Drinking
• , the water infrastructure needs, kind of a summary of the Clean Water State Revolving Fund and Drinking
• </c> that funding. that funding.
• cash and bonding would both general fund cash and bonding would be<01:30:21.680><c> needed</c><01:30

Committee: Senate Capital Investment

Transcript Highlights:

• Rather than relying on temporary measures, districts need increased funding, specifically MSOC funding
• that students need funding today.
• We need to have a minimum fund balance policy in place.
• available for collective bargaining as we need to replenish these fund balances?
• as we need to replenish these fund balances?

Summary: The House Education Committee heard public testimony on three bills focused on school district finances and education ombuds confidentiality. House Bill 2593, an OSPI request, would require school districts to maintain minimum general fund balances beginning in the 2031 school year, with OSPI calculating district-specific amounts and adopting rules. It would also require monthly financial reporting starting in 2028-29 and allow OSPI to withhold apportionment for late reporting or require repayment plans if districts fall below the minimum. Supporters, including OSPI and the prime sponsor, said the bill is intended to prevent districts from reaching binding financial conditions and to provide earlier intervention; opponents from WASDA, rural districts, and school boards argued it would reduce local control, create cash-flow problems, and impose rigid limits that do not fit different district circumstances. Several witnesses also raised concerns about the proposed maximum fund balance and the impact on districts with enrollment volatility, federal impact aid, or special project savings needs. The committee also heard House Bill 2551, which would let school districts with estimated ending fund balances at or below 3% of revenues seek OSPI approval to sell real property before entering binding financial conditions, with proceeds used to restore solvency rather than being deposited into capital or debt service funds. The prime sponsor and Tacoma School District testified that the bill would give districts flexibility to avoid deeper fiscal distress, while OSPI said it supported the concept but suggested a higher threshold and broader minimum fund balance policy. Testimony in opposition or concern focused on the risk of selling appreciating assets, the possibility of one-time sales being used to solve ongoing budget problems, and the need for stronger state funding rather than asset liquidation. The committee also heard House Bill 2440, which would make identifying information in Office of Education Ombuds complaint records confidential, allow limited disclosure by consent or under legislative or gubernatorial subpoena, and require release of a complainant’s own records with redactions; the bill was supported by the ombuds office and its sponsor as a way to protect complainants and encourage reporting. No votes or executive actions were taken. The committee closed the public hearings after hearing testimony and recorded sign-ins, and the chair noted that the bills could be eligible for executive action beginning the following Monday.

Transcript Highlights:

• At our current funding levels, UC cannot fulfill all of the construction needs at the pace necessary
• At our current funding levels, UC cannot fulfill all of the construction needs at the pace necessary
• Like my colleagues, I want to really emphasize that we desperately need funding to go to students and
• UCSA is seeking support for emergency basic needs funding to staff centers, housing case management,
• We need to fully fund the compact.

Summary: The subcommittee heard opening remarks and updates from UC President James Milliken and CSU Chancellor Mildred Garcia on the state of higher education, including federal funding losses, civil rights/Title IX compliance, enrollment, housing, and budget needs. Both leaders emphasized the value of UC and CSU to California’s workforce, research, and economic mobility, while warning that federal grant cancellations, investigations, and changes to student aid are creating major financial and operational strain. UC reported losing or having at risk more than 1,600 grants and over $1 billion in research activity, while CSU said it had lost more than 200 grants totaling about $161 million, including minority-serving institution grants that affected student support programs. Both systems said they are investing in civil rights services and trying to limit the release of personally identifiable information in response to federal requests. The committee then reviewed the higher education student housing grant program. Finance and Legislative Analyst’s Office staff said the governor’s budget does not include major new changes but continues support for the program. CSU reported 12 approved projects that will add about 5,047 beds, with roughly 75% below market rate, and said it has about 68,000 beds systemwide, a 92% occupancy rate, and ongoing housing insecurity among students. UC said its housing projects have added more than 7,000 beds when reduced-rent and regular-rent units are combined, but nearly 10,000 students were on housing wait lists at the start of fall 2025. Both systems described rapid rehousing efforts, emergency beds, and partnerships with community colleges, and UC noted several joint housing projects, including at Riverside, Merced, and Santa Cruz. Members discussed whether future housing bonds and use of surplus school sites could help expand capacity. In the enrollment section, the LAO recommended maintaining UC’s 2026-27 resident undergraduate target, funding enrollment growth separately from base increases, pausing the nonresident reduction plan at the three highest-demand UC campuses, and holding UC enrollment flat in 2027-28. For CSU, the LAO recommended revising the 2026-27 enrollment expectation downward to reflect updated projections, while also funding enrollment growth separately and holding enrollment flat in 2027-28. CSU said it has rebounded from pandemic-era declines, is above its funded target by about 3,000 FTE, and is shifting about $89 million and 10,000 FTE from lower-demand campuses to higher-demand ones while developing turnaround plans for seven campuses with sustained enrollment declines, including Sonoma State. UC said it has already exceeded its compact enrollment goals and is planning continued growth, but that sustaining it depends on ongoing state support. Members raised concerns about campus-specific enrollment declines, nonresident caps at UC San Diego, and the need for stronger turnaround plans and teacher preparation pathways. The final section covered core operations and deferred payments: Finance said the governor proposes another one-year deferral of about $129.7 million for UC and $143.8 million for CSU, and the LAO recommended retiring the deferrals when one-time funds are available. CSU described rising compensation, financial aid, utilities, insurance, and deferred maintenance costs, and said it is pursuing cost-saving measures such as procurement alignment, campus integration, and shared administrative services.

Transcript Highlights:

• Are you aware that additional funding is needed?
• Care Court does have funding in it, but it needs to have a throughput requirement.
• We also need to... ...fund Prop. 36.
• And so we need to have sustainable funding for transit, and this is something And so we need to have
• It needs to be. $2 million in interest that we are paying out of the General Fund for that.

Committee: Senate Budget and Fiscal Review

Summary: The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee heard opening remarks on the Governor’s 2026-27 budget and presentations from the Department of Finance and the Legislative Analyst’s Office. Chair Laird described the proposal as roughly balanced with $23 billion in reserves, while Vice Chair Niello argued the revenue estimates were overly optimistic and warned of a structural deficit, calling for a deeper review of programs and concern over the state’s $20 billion unemployment insurance debt. Finance said the budget is balanced in the budget year but still leaves a roughly $2.9 billion deficit, with out-year gaps above $20 billion, and characterized the plan as largely a workload budget with limited new spending or cuts. The LAO said its office sees substantial downside risk to the revenue forecast, emphasized the volatility of stock-market-driven revenues, and urged the Legislature to begin addressing the structural deficit now rather than waiting until May. Members focused on the implications of federal policy changes, Medi-Cal, CalFresh, and the MCO tax, as well as the state’s reserve strategy. Senators Menjivar and Richardson raised concerns about health coverage reductions, county costs, hospital finances, and the lack of a broader revenue solution, while Finance said the state cannot fully backfill federal cuts and is still assessing the impacts. The LAO recommended rejecting the proposal to suspend the rainy day fund deposit and setting aside the proposed Proposition 98 settle-up rather than using it for spending. Finance defended both proposals as necessary to balance the budget year and said it plans to begin discussions with legislative leaders before the May Revision. The committee also discussed climate and transportation funding, including cap-and-trade/GGRF allocations for Cal Fire, interest earnings from the fund, zero-emission vehicle incentives, and AB 617 air quality investments. Senator Reyes questioned the focus on light-duty ZEV incentives instead of heavy-duty vehicles, and Finance said the proposal is intended to partially replace the federal consumer tax credit and that some heavy-duty funding remains from prior years. Senator Richardson also raised concerns about Olympics-related infrastructure, courthouse repairs, and displaced workers, while other members stressed homelessness funding and the need for more immediate action on out-year budget problems. No formal votes or actions were taken during the portion provided; the hearing was informational and moved into member questions after the presentations.

Transcript Highlights:

• The agency doesn't have the funding. How much? Yeah, how much is needed.
• We then need to use some of that contingency funding that the LBB referenced.
• enough or do you think it's gonna going to need the growth funding to be added to it, to make sure that
• So that funding is... is well, well needed and I appreciate that.
• So we need 50 cents of gr and 50 cents of federal funds.

Committee: House Appropriations - S/C on Article II

Transcript Highlights:

• General Fund for Bringing Families Home and $44.6 million General Fund for HDAP.
• with needs.
• Better align with needs.
• We need to provide mental health services to our students, and we have no funding to do that.
• CEQA harms low-income communities of color that need that funding the most and that need CEQA to have

Committee: House Budget

Transcript Highlights:

• Is it because as these things start to develop, they don't need as much funding?
• We need to make sure when these funds are allocated, there's accountability and transparency.
• But I think the state needs to do more to help fund some of these small cities.
• backfill the total amount needed for the counties who count on this funding.
• backfill the total amount needed for the counties who count on this funding.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Committee met to consider the final three-party agreement for the 2026-27 state budget and 19 implementing bills, including two budget bill juniors and 17 trailer bills. Committee leadership and administration officials described the budget as a balanced plan that reduces out-year structural deficits, maintains large reserves, and makes major investments in health care, education, housing, child care, public safety, and other core services while also responding to expected federal cuts and fiscal uncertainty. The Department of Finance outlined the package’s major components, including Medi-Cal adjustments, education funding increases, higher education changes, child care and human services updates, housing and homelessness funding, energy and transportation provisions, and tax and general government changes. Members asked questions about several provisions, including CSU enrollment targets and turnaround plans, the Prop. 98 settle-up mechanism, the plastics market development payment program, housing accountability measures, NextGen 9-1-1 implementation, and veteran services. Staff and administration witnesses explained that the higher education language is intended to improve campus-by-campus reporting and oversight, that Prop. 98 settle-up would be finalized later through the statutory certification process, and that NextGen 9-1-1 now includes one-time funding, quarterly reporting, an independent technical review, and a state audit. Members also discussed the HAP homelessness funding increase to $900 million and the balance between accountability and timely distribution of funds. The most extended exchange centered on comparisons between funding for veterans and Medi-Cal/immigrant health coverage. Republican members argued the budget spends far more on undocumented immigrant services than on veterans, while Democratic members and Finance staff responded that the comparison was misleading because many veterans’ services are federally funded and the state budget also includes dedicated veteran support. The chair and other members emphasized that the budget reflects difficult tradeoffs and that the package protects vulnerable populations, preserves health care access, and advances affordability. No final vote was described in the excerpt, but members indicated support for the overall package and said they would support it on the floor.

Transcript Highlights:

• Losing federal funding has slowed our reach to kūpuna who need help the most.
• The funding is needed to help ensure availability of child care and jobs. Mahalo.
• The funding is needed to help ensure availability of child care and jobs. Mahalo.
• This funding is critically needed.
• Those funds ensure critical resources... Those funds ensure critical resources reach those in need.

Summary: This joint informational briefing focused on Act 310 grants and aid, with committee members hearing one-minute testimony from organizations first in person and then by Zoom. At the outset, the chairs explained there would be no Q&A during the briefing and asked testifiers to focus on how federal cuts were affecting their work. The meeting was organized by registration number and included both neighbor island and Oʻahu applicants. Testimony centered on organizations seeking state support to offset federal funding losses or anticipated reductions. Health and social service providers described impacts from Medicaid, SNAP, ACA subsidy, Title X, and other federal changes, including Aloha Care, Community Clinic of Maui, Healthy Mothers Healthy Babies, West Hawaiʻi Community Health Center, Hawaiʻi Disability Rights Center, Hawaiʻi Youth Services Network, Alcoholic Rehabilitation Services of Hawaiʻi, and Kokua Kalihi Valley. Other groups highlighted losses affecting food security, housing, disaster preparedness, and climate resilience, including the Kohala Center, Feeding Hawaiʻi Together, Hawaiian Lending and Investments, Dynamic Community Solutions, and the Pacific Tsunami Museum. Several arts, youth, and education organizations also testified, including Hawaiʻi Literacy, Hawaiʻi Youth Symphony, Honolulu Theatre for the Youth, Sounding Joy Music Therapy, Big Brothers Big Sisters Hawaiʻi, Girl Scouts of Hawaiʻi, Kids Hurt Too Hawaiʻi, and US Vets, each requesting funding to preserve programs and staffing. No votes or formal committee actions were taken during the briefing. The only action was procedural: the chairs moved through the applicant list, limited testimony time, and then transitioned from neighbor island in-person testimony to Oʻahu and later Zoom participants.

Transcript Highlights:

• need it.
• VOCA funds.
• Please reauthorize this funding so others can get the support they need. Thank you.
• Probation departments need the funds.
• Probation departments need the funding as stable as possible to invest in ongoing programs and services

Summary: The committee heard a broad public safety budget hearing focused on youth justice funding, probation incentive grants, and disaster response and recovery. On the youth justice item, the Office of Youth and Community Restoration described a proposed change to the JJRBG funding formula that would shift resources away from a DJJ-based measure and toward county youth population, serious offenses, and step-down placements in less restrictive programs. Members asked about data on Native American youth; OYCR said statewide data are limited, but its SYTF data show about 1% of youth in secure youth treatment facilities were Native in 2024. The Department of Finance had no objections, and the item was discussed as a way to support alternatives to long-term incarceration. The committee then reviewed the community corrections performance incentive program for county probation departments. The Department of Finance proposed stabilizing the program with a maintenance payment, updating the performance baseline, and adding a growth factor; the LAO agreed the formula needed changes but recommended using 2022-23 data instead of 2021-23, using marginal rather than average cost assumptions, rejecting the growth payment and minimum guarantee, and adding stronger oversight through the BSCC. Finance said it was open to some technical changes but opposed a new BSCC audit framework, noting Judicial Council already surveys probation departments and that evidence-based practice use has increased over time. Members and staff indicated the proposal still needed further work. A major portion of the hearing focused on the January 2025 Southern California wildfires and state disaster response. A resident of Altadena gave emotional testimony about evacuation failures, loss of home, and the need for accountability. LAO and Cal OES outlined the disaster response and recovery system, including mutual aid, alert and warning, debris removal, FEMA and state funding streams, and the long timeline for reimbursement. Cal OES said it had pre-positioned resources, temporarily took over the county’s wireless emergency alert function for about three weeks, coordinated debris removal and recovery operations, and had already allocated more than $286 million in state funds. Officials also discussed the 100% federal cost share for emergency work for 180 days and the uncertainty created by changing federal processes and the cancellation of the BRIC resilience program. The committee also heard two smaller Cal OES items: a request to reappropriate about $22 million for the law enforcement mutual aid reimbursement program, which the LAO said should be placed in statute with clearer goals and reporting, and an update on Victims of Crime Act funding, where Cal OES said federal VOCA allocations have fallen sharply and that roughly $224 million would be needed to maintain current service levels if federal funding does not improve. Public comment included a request for funding to expand datacasting and emergency alert receivers for wildfire and earthquake warning.

Transcript Highlights:

• This $840,000 General Fund investment will provide the ongoing training and equipment needed to assist
• funding.
• fund, is what funds our basic operations in the parks.
• fund appropriations for operating adjustments, or we need to raise those fees, or some combination of
• So federal funds tend to fund very specific programs.

Committee: House Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• The funding is still intact for those positions. It's just the FTP that need to be updated.
• We need to go back to the drawing board and maybe use some reserve funds. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
• The first, for a special education high-needs fund, currently has a related policy bill, Senate Bill
• And we are not doing the special ed funding that we need.
• And we are not doing the special ed funding that we need.

Summary: The Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee first approved a technical correction to the Health and Welfare Division of Licensing and Certification budget, restoring 2 FTP that had been cut in error while leaving funding intact. The committee then adopted language extending the deadline for Medicaid’s state plan amendments and waivers related to the move to comprehensive managed care, after discussion of delays tied to the MMIS procurement and litigation. Both items received do-pass recommendations. The committee next considered Public School Support, beginning with a FY 2026 supplemental for the Division of Student Support to add $7.8 million in federal spending authority so schools can access full federal grant allocations. That supplemental passed. For FY 2027, members debated several competing motions on the Student Support Division budget, including proposals to reduce classified staff funding, add health insurance funding, and cut virtual school-related funding. After multiple failed motions, the committee ultimately approved a motion reducing the general fund by $14,751,600, including a $3 million reduction to virtual school discretionary funding, and adopted related language. Additional language was also approved to require reporting on virtual enrollments, shift English learner funding from central services to direct LEA distribution, modify technology curriculum contract requirements, require special education expenditure reporting, and reduce transportation funding by $7.5 million by undoing a prior statutory change. The committee then turned to the Idaho Digital Learning Academy. After extensive debate over alleged double-funding, rural access, and the absence of a policy bill, members rejected a larger $15 million reduction and then approved a smaller $13,500 reduction tied to the pending policy bill’s fiscal note. They also adopted language restricting PCIF access, requiring compliance reporting on DEI-related courses, and requesting a detailed report on IDLA expenditures, enrollments, and usage, including synchronous versus asynchronous instruction and course-level data by LEA. The meeting ended with notice that the committee would next take up the Secretary of State budget and trailer bills, with an additional 7:30 a.m. meeting before the Monday session.

Transcript Highlights:

• The number of people coming in the door saying, we need GGRF funding, it's the only revenue source.
• are currently in the GGRF fund, unless instead of siphoning them off for other programs, you need to
• I'd like to echo the comments of many of my predecessors who stress the need to fulfill our funding commitments
• These funds are needed to help us meet our mobility and air quality goals, particularly in the less densely
• I'd also like to echo the need to provide funding for the FARMER program. Thank you.

Summary: The meeting began with a budget subcommittee hearing on a proposed sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) tax credit trailer bill. Assembly Members Ávila Farías and another member spoke in support, emphasizing union jobs, refinery investments, and the need to decarbonize aviation. The Department of Finance said the Governor’s proposal would provide a $1 to $2 per gallon credit against the diesel excise tax for SAF sold in California from 2026 to 2036. The Legislative Analyst’s Office recommended rejecting the proposal, arguing it is a relatively expensive way to reduce emissions, has uncertain environmental benefits, could significantly reduce transportation revenues, and conflicts with the spirit of voter restrictions on transportation taxes. Committee members questioned whether the credit would mainly benefit out-of-state producers, whether firms would have diesel tax liability to use the credit, and whether the proposal would shift production away from renewable diesel and raise fuel prices. Administration and CARB staff said the credit is intended to support aviation decarbonization, preserve jobs, and help keep California on track toward its 2045 climate goals. LAO and UC Berkeley testimony countered that the policy could mostly subsidize existing technologies, that feedstock supply is limited, and that the net emissions benefit may be small relative to the cost. Members also asked about the effect on local streets and roads, SHOP, and trade corridor funding; Finance estimated a $165 million annual revenue impact would reduce those programs, while LAO said the reductions would mean fewer projects over time. No vote was taken, and the chair said the issue would remain open for further discussion. The committee then moved to a zero-emission vehicle incentive trailer bill proposing a one-time $200 million appropriation to CARB for a new point-of-sale incentive program focused on first-time buyers and leases of new and used light-duty ZEVs. Supporters said the program would help offset the loss of the federal EV tax credit, maintain momentum in California’s ZEV transition, and use a one-to-one match with participating automakers to double the state’s investment. LAO recommended rejection, saying the proposal does not meet the high budget bar this year, lacks enough program detail to evaluate, is unlikely to move sales significantly given the size of the appropriation, and could duplicate existing state and utility programs. Members asked about current incentives across light-, medium-, and heavy-duty sectors, the recent decline in ZEV sales, and whether the program would help lower-income buyers rather than subsidize purchases that would have happened anyway. CARB said the proposal is meant to fill a gap in the light-duty market, where sales fell sharply after the federal credit expired, and noted existing programs for other vehicle classes. The Department of Finance also addressed a separate question about the Motor Vehicle Account, saying a previously planned GGRF transfer was no longer needed because updated forecasts showed the fund had sufficient balances, though LAO said the account still has a structural long-term imbalance. The discussion ended before any vote or action on the ZEV proposal.