Transcript Highlights:

• the application process.
• And so we're implementing a much. more rigorous budget process that actually takes place year-round and
• At least a budgeting or a planning process for how districts spend different pots of money at risk is
• about how to set budgets.
• We do budget planning with our budget directors at the school and district levels.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• budget ultimately.
• We can work together for the betterment of the process and the state budget, ultimately.
• moving the budget through the entire process.
• As the process, as we get to the end of the process, if that stays in the final budget, it will be communicated
• As the process, as we get to the end of the process, if that stays in the final budget, it will be communicated

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• process works.
• I chair the Budget Committee, which runs the unified budget process.
• For 2028, we're already starting to talk about the set conditions for our 2028 budget process.
• process.
• Of course, we're not here in 2027 moving our budget process to you and looking for your support in these

Transcript Highlights:

• The proposed budget totals $117.4 billion.
• process.
• The budget for these agencies is mostly trust-funded, meaning that their budgets are funded by dedicated
• [Continuation of presentation on the Floridians' First Budget] The budget would implement the gold and
• We're in the process of awarding that.

Summary: The committee first took up confirmation of five water management district appointees: Ted Everett and Jerome Pate to the Northwest Florida Water Management District, Michael Romano to the Big Cypress Basin Board of the South Florida Water Management District, and Paul Bissfam, John Hall, and Virginia Johns to the Southwest Florida Water Management District. Senator McClain moved confirmation, the roll was called, and the committee recommended all appointees favorably. Members then received the Governor’s Florida First budget presentations for environmental agencies. The environmental package totaled about $5.8 billion and emphasized Everglades restoration, water quality, resilience, land conservation, state parks, hazardous waste cleanup, wildlife management, wildfire response, and citrus support. DEP highlighted more than $1.4 billion for water resources, including $810 million for Everglades restoration, $202 million for Resilient Florida, $150 million for Florida Forever, $70 million for state parks, and $221 million for contamination cleanup. FWC, Agriculture, and Citrus funding priorities were also outlined. Members asked about Florida Forever funding, state park wastewater and septic needs, a reduction at the Florida Wildlife Research Institute, and beach renourishment funding for storm damage. The committee also heard the General Government portion of the budget, which totaled about $2.9 billion and covered DBPR, Lottery, Financial Services, Management Services, Revenue, PERC, and the Gaming Control Commission. DBPR requested funds for license processing, an animal abuse hotline, fleet replacement, and IT retention. FGCC sought new enforcement squads and an IT licensing/enforcement system. The Lottery proposed marketing, retail engagement, IT, and retention funding. DMS emphasized building modernization, fleet telematics, 911 and radio upgrades, cybersecurity, a local government cybersecurity grant program, and data interoperability. PERC described a sharp increase in labor cases and elections after SB 256 and requested staffing, election administration, and hearing officer pay increases. DFS highlighted My Safe Florida Home, fire marshal and first responder support, financial investigations, and gold and silver legal tender implementation. Revenue requested operational and IT funding and support for fiscally constrained counties. Questions focused on DBPR’s condo and HOA initiatives, cybersecurity grant reductions, and the My Safe Florida Home program’s abandoned grants and matching requirements. No additional votes were taken, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Yes, that's new, and it's kind of working through the budget process.
• process it's not a bill on you'll see it as the budget comes out how it develops very wise very wise
• In addition to our agency mission, we take the budget process seriously, which is why we're here today
• on budget, J.R.
• Monday morning, where we will continue going through the budget process.

Bills: SB 1

Keywords: campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards

Summary: The committee began with Article I budget items for the Secretary of State. LBB staff outlined recommendations that would reduce the agency’s appropriation by about $40.3 million, including changes to HAVA funding, removal of one-time business system replacement money, and a rider directing the agency to use Fund 5095 first. Secretary Jane Nelson and staff then defended several exceptional items, especially additional staffing for elections and business filings, a new website, digitization of records, cybersecurity tools, and renovation of the James Earl Rudder Building. Members focused heavily on election administration, cross-checking voter rolls, Harris County complaints, call-center response times, and whether online voter registration should be expanded. No votes were taken; the discussion was informational and budget-focused. The committee then heard the Office of the Governor and trustee programs. LBB presented a recommended $2.4 million decrease for the governor’s office proper and a much larger decrease in trustee programs driven by one-time funding and unexpended balances, while still preserving major border security funding and victim assistance funding. Governor’s staff emphasized Texas’ economic growth, the importance of border security, and efforts to seek federal reimbursement for the roughly $11 billion Texas has spent on border operations. Members discussed whether shifting National Guard deployment to federal control could reduce state costs, and they also reviewed the music incubator program, the Governor’s University Research Initiative, and the semiconductor innovation consortium. Staff highlighted a $5 million late-added request for grants to protect nonprofits from violence and terrorism. Again, the exchange was largely explanatory, with no formal action. Finally, the committee took up the Texas Facilities Commission and lease payments for revenue bonds. LBB recommended major reductions overall, including removal of border wall construction funding and capital complex bond funding, but added money for higher utility costs, renovation of the Rudder Building, and additional facilities staff. George Purcell also noted stable maintenance-and-renewal funding and new riders related to the Texas State Library and Archives Commission building, tenant communications, and space utilization. For lease payments, LBB recommended a smaller appropriation tied to revenue-bond costs allocated across agencies. The discussion was informational, with members asking about the Rudder Building renovation, border wall progress, and capital complex construction timelines; no votes were recorded.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is information gathering still in the budget process.
• We are still in the budget process and that information is being, you know, collected and gathered. cut
• We are still in the budget<00:05:00.720> process<00:05:01.120> and<00:05:01.440> that
• <00:05:01.680> information<00:05:02.080> is budget process and that information is
• They were asking questions about the budget process and trying to prepare for 27 and 28.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Cabinet for Health and Family Services 00:00:30 Kentucky Department of Education 00:27:10 Education and Labor Cabinet 00:31:35 Auditor of Public Accounts 00:36:55, 958, all

Summary: The committee met for a budget-only discussion with no bills scheduled for a vote. Members first welcomed a group of high school guests, then heard from the Cabinet for Health and Family Services on funding issues for child advocacy centers, domestic violence centers, rape crisis centers, and SNAP. DCBS Commissioner Lisa Dennis and budget director Misty Sammons said the victim-services programs were included in the current baseline budget, but it was too early in the budget process to know final funding levels. They said earlier reports of major cuts were based on a misunderstanding, that conversations with the agencies were ongoing, and that they would provide the committee with the agency’s base-budget information. A member also asked about domestic violence shelter funding, and the cabinet explained that prior one-time money had been used to replace lost federal Victims of Crime Act funds. On SNAP, the cabinet said Kentucky does not expect to need additional money for benefit costs because the payment error rate is about 4%, below the threshold that would trigger added state costs. However, they said the federal HR1 change shifting SNAP administrative costs from a 50/50 state-federal split to 75% state and 25% federal will require additional funding to operate the program. Members praised the eligibility and family support staff for keeping error rates low and asked to be notified quickly if more implementation support is needed. Representative Bojanowski asked whether a specific SNAP administrative cost figure was already in House Bill 500; the cabinet said it was not, and that such an item would be an additional budget request not included in the bill. The committee then heard from the Department for Medicaid Services. Commissioner Lisa Lee and Senior Deputy Commissioner Veronica Judy Cecil described Medicaid fraud-and-abuse monitoring, including a new CMS file and guidance on concurrent enrollment across states. They said DMS refers suspected fraud or abuse to the Attorney General’s office and that the relationship is working well. When asked about using AI, they said the department is not yet using AI but does use internal algorithms to flag potential fraud, waste, and abuse. Finally, Eric Lowry of the Cabinet for Health and Family Services discussed fiscal note processing, saying House Bill 2 is a complex Medicaid bill and that the cabinet is working to set up a meeting with the sponsor; he said the cabinet is responding and hopes to meet on Monday. The committee also briefly heard from the Kentucky Department of Education, where Matt Ross said the existing $7.4 million for school-based mental health services is already in the base budget and that no additional language is needed in House Bill 500 to distribute it, though KDE has requested additional funding to raise the overall appropriation to $18 million.

Transcript Highlights:

• That was about $176 million ahead of the numbers that you used in the budgeting process.
• But for the first time now, I have to That you used in the budgeting process.
• But those were the assumptions that we used in the executive budget process.
• But those were the assumptions that we used in the executive budget process.
• In the budget process, thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Summary: The Budget Section approved the March 18 minutes and received an OMB update showing the general fund is still ahead of the budgeted starting point, but revenues through May are now about $76 million below the legislative forecast, driven mainly by individual income tax and sales tax shortfalls. OMB also reported the budget stabilization fund is above its cap, meaning a transfer to the general fund is expected, and reviewed oil price/production assumptions, noting continued volatility. Members asked about the income tax netting process, the sales tax decline, oil price discounts/premiums, natural gas taxation, and when the executive branch would present its revenue forecast. The committee then acted on several Emergency Commission requests. It approved, as a group, requests for federal mine reclamation funds for the Public Service Commission, an additional criminal investigator FTE and funding for the Attorney General’s office, and a DPI transfer for bridge software costs. It separately approved DPI request 2164 for $500,000 to support the food vendor program after debate over whether the program’s savings were known and whether the money was simply a pass-through. OMB also reported on federal grants, fiscal irregularities, tobacco settlement proceeds, budget guidelines for agencies, FTE pool usage, vacancy savings, and the DAPL settlement, noting the settlement funds had been deposited and that a deficiency appropriation may be needed later to cover remaining accrued interest. Tax Commissioner Brian Kroshus presented on the primary residence credit program, saying participation has grown sharply and that the current biennium will likely need about $431 million, roughly $22 million above the appropriation. He explained how the credit interacts with homestead and disabled veteran benefits, how the 3% property tax cap works, and why county valuations and mill rates vary. The committee also received a Legacy Fund/Budget Stabilization Fund report showing strong returns, and DOT Director Ron Henke received approval for two Flex Fund highway projects on ND 49 and ND 31. Henke also explained remaining Highway 85 funding and said the department is exploring uses for leftover state dollars. Finally, the Department of Mineral Resources reported on abandoned well plugging and site restoration, noting North Dakota remains in relatively strong shape compared with other states, and DPI began a presentation on gap funding tied to the 3% levy cap, reporting 24 districts received $1.8 million in the first year and projecting higher future needs.

Transcript Highlights:

• statewide budget pressures.
• the total UC budget.
• So if you look at my budget, the budget I get to allocate is about...
• So looking at deferrals, how does the budgeting process work with deferrals for the UC system?
• in the budget.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance held an extended hearing focused primarily on University of California budget issues, enrollment, housing, and Title IX. Chair David Alvarez opened by noting the governor’s proposed 8% ongoing General Fund reduction to UC, the deferral of compact funding, and the College of the Law budget item, while emphasizing that no votes would be taken that day. Public commenters, including UC Davis employees and lecturers, urged restoration of UC funding and opposed the hiring freeze, saying cuts would worsen staffing shortages, reduce research capacity, and harm students and patients. On UC core operations, the Department of Finance said the governor’s budget maintains the compact but defers $240.8 million in ongoing support and continues a planned 7.95% reduction, while the LAO recommended rejecting the deferrals and instead making any changes in the budget year. UC San Diego’s chancellor and UC Office of the President argued the cuts and deferrals would create major campus shortfalls, force hiring freezes, larger class sizes, fewer course offerings, delayed projects, and possible layoffs. Committee members questioned whether cuts could be shifted away from students and toward administration, discussed UCOP reserves and bond debt, and noted that UC’s budget structure makes the campus-level impact larger than the headline reduction. The committee also reviewed enrollment trends and nonresident replacement. The LAO said UC resident enrollment has grown and recommended revisiting 2026-27 targets and pausing the nonresident replacement plan if state funding does not improve. UC said it has exceeded California undergraduate enrollment and nonresident replacement goals, but warned that continued growth without funding would force enrollment reductions and harm quality. Members discussed the role of nonresident and international students, tuition rates, and the value of UC as a pathway for California students and a source of talent for the state. A separate housing item covered the state’s Higher Education Student Housing Grant Program. UC reported that recent bond savings could support additional affordable beds at UC Davis and UC Santa Barbara, but the LAO and Finance noted the Legislature would need to decide how to use the $6.2 million in savings from the original projects. The committee also heard a Title IX update from UC’s systemwide civil rights office, which described campus Title IX structures, training, and policy enforcement, and said the system has been working to improve confidentiality guidance and streamline complaint processes after survey feedback showed confusion and lengthy procedures.

Transcript Highlights:

• modified through the budget process.
• was not modified through the budget was not modified through the budget process.<00:08:09.599>
• budget process for the were part of the budget process for the next<00:16:56.800> fiscal<00:16
• Candidly, the budget process has caused a lot of employees within the Department of Corrections to be
• We've just gone through a long budget process which is not over yet.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Fiscal Committee met on June 20, 2025 and first approved the May 16 minutes and the non-removed items on the consent calendar. It then took up a Health and Human Services item for $5 million in additional nursing facility payments (FIS 25158). HHS explained the transfer was for private and county nursing facilities and was the third and final transfer in FY25, funded through federal matching dollars, county cap funds, and general funds. Members asked about the size of the transfer, whether it signaled future shortfalls, and how projections were developed; HHS said the request reflected updated estimates and that they did not expect similarly large transfers going forward. The committee adopted the item. The committee also considered an ARPA-related item to remove a line from a funding request because the issue had been resolved and the positions/funds were no longer needed. Members approved the item with that line removed. Commissioner Caswell then answered questions about ARPA spending authority, saying remaining projects must be expended by December 31, 2026 and that the item was intended to preserve authority for ongoing capital projects; any unspent funds would revert to the federal government. Members noted the recurring nature of these ARPA adjustments and the need to keep tracking deadlines. The Department of Corrections presented several items, including a $10 million request tied to staffing shortages and overtime costs, plus additional corrections-related funding items. Interim commissioner John Skipa said 18 employees had received preliminary layoff notices pending final budget approval. He and staff said the overtime need was driven by staffing shortages, later collective bargaining pay increases, and double-time compensation for uniform officers forced into overtime; they also said one housing unit section had been closed to reduce staffing pressure. In response to questions about morale and operational risk, Skipa said the department was under strain, that leadership was in transition, and that staffing or budget reductions could create litigation risk. The committee also heard about the Site Evaluation Committee’s budget shortfall, which was attributed to fewer new facility applications but continued casework and public engagement, and approved that item. Finally, members discussed a YDC claims administration item, questioning the role and cost of the Verald Dana consultant; staff said the firm handles intake and processing of claims for the Attorney General’s office and had been involved since the claims process was created. Several items were adopted after brief discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Still, there is a process to have that site open.
• Why haven't we started the automating process?
• And our budget allows us to accomplish those goals.
• , which may need to be considered this budget cycle.
• So budget year plus two shows 75%, and then budget year... The 100% would be that.

Summary: The committee heard an extensive Department of Social Services presentation on child care budget issues, including the Governor’s proposed 2026-27 budget, federal CCDF changes, Prop. 64 revenue adjustments, and a one-time $11.5 million disaster-related infrastructure grant for licensed child care facilities affected by 2025 declared disasters. DSS said federal formula updates and lower Prop. 64 revenues would reduce funding and could result in about 4,176 CCTR slots being reduced, but the department said it was working to avoid impacts to currently enrolled children. The LAO supported aligning general child care funding with lower revenues and asked for more detail on the disaster grant. Members pressed DSS and Finance on why reductions were not being backfilled and why so many awarded slots remain uncontracted or unused; DSS said delays are largely due to providers building new infrastructure, licensing, staffing, and enrollment challenges, and that some unspent funds revert to the General Fund. The committee also discussed whether some contract dollars should be shifted to vouchers and whether more flexibility should be allowed for infrastructure and expansion costs. A second panel focused on the state’s commitment to expand child care and on rate reform. DSS reported that nearly 125,000 new slots have been awarded since 2021-22, but speakers from Stanislaus County Office of Education, Parent Voices California, and the California Budget and Policy Center argued that unmet need remains large and that the system still leaves many families without access. Stanislaus County described a large local shortage of infant and toddler care and said reimbursement disparities between child care programs and state preschool create disincentives for providers. Parent Voices gave testimony about the burdens and instability families face when trying to access care, especially for survivors and low-income parents, and called for a universal, publicly funded system. The Budget Center said only about 16% of eligible children were enrolled in 2024, urged expansion across the mixed delivery system rather than concentrating investment in TK, and called for faster rate reform and new revenue. LAO estimated that bringing certain CCTR adjustment factors up to CSPP levels would cost $88 million to $131 million ongoing. Members and witnesses discussed the single rate structure, automation needs, and the need for deadlines and a ramp-up plan; DSS said the goal is to eliminate disparities, but that policy decisions are still needed before automation can proceed. The committee then reviewed several trailer bill proposals. DSS outlined a 2026-27 COLA proposal that would apply a 2.41% increase through cost-of-care-plus payments, though the department said it had inadvertently excluded CalWORKs Child Care and the Emergency Child Care Bridge Program and would revise the proposal; LAO recommended making the COLA methodology uniform across programs. DSS also proposed replacing the market rate survey with the federally approved alternative methodology on a triennial schedule, limiting temporary absences in family child care homes to 20% of monthly hours, defining excessive unexplained absences as more than 30 days in a year, and aligning family fee deductions with new federal requirements so providers receive the full voucher value. Members generally supported the temporary absence change and asked about implementation timing for the family fee deduction, with DSS saying it was in contact with Riverside County. The committee also heard a brief update on the Early Childhood Policy Council reappropriation, which would extend unused funds through June 30, 2028 because prior costs came in higher than expected.

Transcript Highlights:

• of professionalization and the clearance process so they can actually compete for these jobs, right?
• of professionalization and the clearance process so they can actually compete for these jobs, right?
• of professionalization and the clearance process so they can actually compete for these jobs, right?
• So the concept of RIM, or renew, improve, modernize, is in the budget, has been appropriated that way
• So the concept of RIM, or renew, improve, modernize, is in the budget, has been appropriated that way

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Higher Education met on March 14, 2025, and heard five University of Hawaii-related bills. SB 741 would create an external audit committee for the UH system and Board of Regents; UH and UHPA opposed it, saying existing internal and external audits already provide robust oversight, and the committee later recommended deferring the bill indefinitely as duplicative. SB 1252 SD2 would create a dementia training program for health care providers; the Alzheimer’s Association and other supporters said broader training is needed across the care workforce, while the university discussed using JABSOM as a coordinator. The committee deferred the bill to March 19 for an HD1 reflecting JABSOM’s suggestions and removing the appropriations/FTE language. SB 1502 SD1 would fund faculty positions, student programs, and facilities at UH Manoa and West Oahu for defense-sector workforce development. UH and Chamber of Commerce Hawaii supported the measure, describing a pipeline for students into intelligence, cybersecurity, and related fields, while one individual opposed it as too closely tied to military contracting and urged investment in other sectors instead. The committee amended the bill to remove FTE references and advanced it; the vote to pass with amendments was adopted, with several members voting aye and some excused. SB 1530 would require performance-based allocation of UH general funds and efficiency reporting. UH and the Attorney General’s office raised concerns, saying the bill’s metrics would apply across the entire general fund budget and were not practical as drafted; the committee also noted opposition from the Budget and Finance Department and individuals. SB 1624 SD1 would restrict RIM funds to renewing, improving, or modernizing existing facilities and require annual reports. UH opposed the bill and explained that RIM is a lump-sum approach used to address deferred maintenance and capital needs, with Board of Regents approval and quarterly reporting already in place; the Attorney General suggested constitutional amendments. The transcript ends during discussion of SB 1624, with no final action shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• spending's going, and then what this budget reconciliation process is and how that differs from the
• annual appropriations process that Congress is supposed to go through and then what that budget reconciliation
• So the process starts.
• process, so.
• The Senate And they're very transparent because this budget reconciliation process essentially says it's

Transcript Highlights:

• This relates back to the budget as well.
• We've streamlined the process.
• Due to FY26 budget constraints, this audit process has already experienced delays.
• budget.
• budget.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Ways and Means held a public FY27 budget hearing at Barnstable Town Hall, with opening remarks emphasizing the Cape and Islands’ seasonal infrastructure, housing, transportation, workforce, and digital needs. The hearing began with testimony from the Executive Office of Labor and Workforce Development, which outlined the Healey-Driscoll administration’s budget priorities for job training, apprenticeship, youth employment, reentry programs, and unemployment insurance modernization. The secretary highlighted proposed funding for the Workforce Competitiveness Trust Fund, Career Technical Initiative, YouthWorks, reentry workforce development, and services for young adults with disabilities, along with a proposal to streamline youth work permits. Members also discussed the unemployment trust fund, the COVID assessment on employers, rising unemployment, and the need to improve DUA customer service and claims processing. Committee members asked about job seeker barriers such as child care, housing, transportation, and out-migration of young workers, as well as how to keep Cape Cod graduates and seasonal workers in the region. The administration said its strategy is to pair training with broader affordability investments and to expose students to career pathways earlier, including through middle school, early childhood STEM, YouthWorks, pre-apprenticeships, and Building Pathways. Senators and representatives also raised concerns about regional funding disparities, especially for Hampshire Franklin MassHire, and the administration said it is reviewing MassHire funding and service equity through a policy committee and statewide workforce board. On unemployment assistance, officials reported major improvements in wait times and claims processing, but said they are still working through backlogs and staffing challenges while maintaining program integrity. The committee then heard testimony from the Executive Office of Economic Development. The secretary described House 2 as a fiscally restrained budget with no new taxes or fees, while preserving core programs and using the Mass Leads Act tools to support competitiveness. EOED’s proposal included funding for the Community One Stop for Growth, rural economic development, social enterprise operating grants, regional economic development organizations, the Workforce Investment Trust Fund, Community Workforce Partnerships, Pathmaker, advanced manufacturing training, life sciences, innovation vouchers, AI initiatives, small business assistance, and tourism and live theater support. The Office of Consumer Affairs and Business Regulation also testified on its FY27 request, focusing on consumer protection, licensing, banking, insurance, and public safety regulation. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• governor's supplemental budget. governor's supplemental budget.
• <00:24:51.840> neutral budget, Minsure has one budget neutral budget, Minsure has one budget
• . process. process.
• . processes. processes.
• tax that's budget neutral. tax that's budget neutral.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• robust process in the enrollment process robust process in the enrollment process to<00:35:50.960
• Okay, Okay, Okay, budget<01:07:08.400> neutral<01:07:08.720> just budget neutral just budget
• It's budget neutral. guidelines. It's budget neutral.
• Um, I would say the governor's budget development process is really iterative.
• the governor's budget, and it was already out—not out to the public, but the process for releasing the

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm going to just give a brief snapshot of the budget to So, digging into our budget as a whole, just
• Our budget is about $10.6 billion.
• And so that means there will likely be significant budget impacts to the state budget as the days go
• With a 2 to 3% budget, it is almost all other organizations could not operate on an administrative budget
• whole process.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• So in this process of bringing about this budget resolution, don't forget the voter mandate.
• process.
• This budget reconciliation process here is about trying to clean up two messes: the border.
• First, it is out of order for a budget reconciliation process such as this.
• Once again, the scope of the instruction in this budget reconciliation process is for one specific item

Transcript Highlights:

• The actual number will be trued up for the tentative budget whenever we go through the TRIM process going
• Question for you, might have for the other water management districts too, but when the budget process
• Chair, and I have the same question as well, kind of about the budget process and how those projects
• But question about the budget process, same as the others, and planning for your new projects.
• Same question that I asked the other management districts on the budget process and selecting and planning

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment, and General Government heard budget presentations from all five water management districts for FY 2026-2027: Northwest Florida, Suwannee River, St. Johns River, Southwest Florida, and South Florida. Each district described its preliminary budget, major funding sources, staffing levels, and how most of its spending is tied to the four core missions of water supply, water quality, natural systems, and flood protection. Several directors noted budget reductions from the prior year largely because major projects were completed or because grant/appropriation funding is not yet fully reflected in preliminary budgets. Committee members repeatedly asked how districts project operations and maintenance costs, how projects are selected, and what share of staff and spending is devoted to core missions versus administration or regulatory work. Northwest Florida Water Management District said its preliminary budget is $93.4 million, down about 15%, with 97% of spending tied to core responsibilities and a request for additional regulatory services funding. Suwannee River Water Management District presented a $70.4 million budget, emphasized its rural/agricultural character and spring protection work, and highlighted the Water First North Florida reclaimed-water recharge project; members also discussed its need for an additional FTE to handle consumptive use permit reviews tied to a new lower Santa Fe rule. St. Johns River Water Management District presented a $181 million budget, highlighted major water supply, water quality, flood protection, and land management projects such as Taylor Creek Reservoir, Water First North Florida, Black Creek, Crane Creek, and Lake Jessup restoration, and said about 93% of its budget supports core missions. Southwest Florida Water Management District presented a $227.6 million budget, with major spending on alternative water supply, water control structure repairs, watershed projects, and land management; officials said 93.4% of the budget supports core missions and discussed rising construction costs for aging infrastructure. South Florida Water Management District presented the largest budget at $1.05 billion, focused on Everglades restoration, flood control, water supply, and ecosystem recovery; the director described major reservoirs and treatment projects, the EAA Reservoir, and ongoing efforts to improve water quality and restore flows to the Everglades and Florida Bay. The committee took no formal votes on the district budgets and adjourned after the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• You think this would help as we're going down the road here with that budgeting process, that we would
• And those dates are because of building the budget, pre-budget, post-budget, and during the interim,
• But this is on the budgeting side.
• But this is on the budgeting side.
• It is a really important process.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee opened with roll call and a review of special-session procedure: bills would be heard in filing order, with related school-lunch bills grouped together, and any bill advancing would require a motion, second, and majority vote to be introduced. Members also discussed that the committee was functioning much like a delayed-bills committee, with final referral to either Appropriations or Policy depending on the bill’s fiscal impact. The first major proposal was Senator Schibley’s bill to create a narrow, statewide Bank of North Dakota bridge-loan program for struggling nonprofit medical facilities, prompted by Jacobson Memorial Hospital’s financial crisis. He argued the hospital and surrounding EMS services could close without short-term help, while committee members questioned the added language, the population cap, the $10 million fund with $5 million per applicant limit, and whether the program could open the door to future requests. Representative Headland then presented two cleanup bills from the prior property-tax session: one to fix notice and tax-certification issues for local taxing districts, and another to correct how the primary residence credit is applied so taxpayers receive the full benefit rather than counties retaining part of the reimbursement. Members asked about township hearing timing, the estimated $10–15 million annual impact, and whether the credit issue could be fixed retroactively; Headland said the bill was intended to correct the problem going forward. Three school-lunch bills drew extensive discussion. Representative Vetter proposed a small administrative appropriation to add an FTE to help eligible families enroll in the existing free/reduced lunch program, saying the goal was to ensure needy children are signed up and that the state should not subsidize meals for wealthy families. Representative Nathe offered a broader bill mirroring the pending initiated measure but placing the program in statute instead of the Constitution, moving implementation up a year, and funding it with a one-time $65 million from the strategic investment fund; he said this would preserve legislative flexibility and avoid constitutional entrenchment. Representative Dressler proposed raising the state-funded eligibility threshold from 225% to 300% of poverty, arguing it would expand access while still preserving federal reimbursements and encouraging better enrollment systems. Members debated costs, future budget pressure, whether the bills set a precedent for responding to ballot measures, and whether the program should include breakfast and other operational details. Other proposals included Senator Powers’ bill to create a hyperbaric oxygen board and support rural access to hyperbaric chambers for wounds, concussions, PTSD, and other conditions; Representative Tolman’s reporting-requirements bill to force new or expanded programs to justify purpose, alternatives, evaluation methods, and full implementation costs; Representative Frelich’s bill addressing the ongoing redistricting litigation and what happens if the Supreme Court or lower courts alter the current map; and a bill requested by the Public Service Commission and ITD for FERC litigation support and ADA website/document compliance. The committee also heard a rural-health eligibility bill from Representative Twait aimed at steering federal rural health dollars toward rural providers, with questions focused on whether the mileage limits would exclude some communities. One Holocaust education item was deferred until the sponsor could be located.

Transcript Highlights:

• The state's overall budget condition is tight.
• As it relates to CSU's core operations, for the governor's budget in 2026, the governor's budget provides
• As it relates to CSU's core operations, for the governor's budget in 2026, the governor's budget provides
• In addition, the Governor's budget maintains ongoing General Fund amounts adopted in the 2025 Budget
• the 2025-26 and the 2026-27 budget year.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance held an oversight hearing on the California State University system covering enrollment, core operations, Title IX/civil rights, and basic needs. The Department of Finance said the Governor’s 2026-27 budget does not change CSU enrollment targets from the prior year and proposes a 5% ongoing General Fund increase for core operations as the final year of the compact. The Legislative Analyst’s Office recommended a lower resident undergraduate enrollment target than the Governor’s proposal, separate funding for enrollment growth rather than folding it into base, a smaller or no base increase tied more closely to inflation, earmarking some base funds for capital renewal, retiring deferred payments, and avoiding new multi-year compact commitments. CSU said enrollment has rebounded for three straight years, but growth is uneven across campuses, with several Northern California campuses still facing structural declines tied to demographics and community college pipelines. CSU described a multi-year reallocation plan shifting about 10,000 FTE and $89 million in ongoing funding toward higher-demand campuses, plus $40 million in one-time support, and said seven campuses submitted turnaround plans aimed at recovering enrollment over the next several years. The system highlighted strategies such as dual enrollment, guaranteed admission pathways with community colleges, outreach to high school students, retention and advising efforts, and new degree models for working adults and military-connected students. Members raised questions about how campus targets are set, whether the May Board of Trustees discussion will address a systemwide enrollment framework, and how CSU will manage future deficits if projected out-year funding does not materialize. On core operations and facilities, CSU said it faces about $320 million in mandatory cost increases in 2026-27 and is pursuing shared services, procurement consolidation, campus administrative sharing, and program redesigns to reduce costs. CSU and the LAO emphasized the system’s large deferred maintenance backlog, estimated at $8.6 billion, and discussed whether CSU’s bond/debt capacity is sufficient to address it; CSU requested up to $1.1 billion for deferred maintenance, while the administration did not propose new funding. The committee also heard CSU’s annual Title IX and civil rights update: CSU said it has implemented 15 of 16 State Auditor recommendations, has dedicated Title IX coordinators at every campus, is using a systemwide case management dashboard, and is piloting centralized investigations at five campuses. Finally, on basic needs, the Governor maintained current funding levels for food assistance/basic needs, rapid rehousing, and mental health. CSU reported heavy use of food pantries, CalFresh support, emergency housing, and counseling services, while warning that federal changes to CalFresh and related funding could make it harder to serve students in need.