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.
• Chairman and Senator Dwyer, this is the starting point for the executive budget process.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And so that will be part of what we gather on the front end of the budget process, and we'll have that
• And so that will be part of what we gather on the front end of the budget process, and we'll have that
• rather than an executive process.
• The person that you created the criteria, that's part of their budgeting process.
• And they are in the process of drafting their report from that process.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The FY26 operating budget.
• The FY25 budget was 61,262 overall.
• Last year, thank God y'all did budget them.
• So we're not traveling because also one of the budget crises or budget issues that came up is per diems
• How does that process work?

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• budgeting process is you're going to start with the prior year's budget.
• process.
• process.
• process.
• process.

Summary: The State Administration Budget Subcommittee met for an introductory overview of the agencies under its jurisdiction and their current-year budgets. Chair Vicki Lopez welcomed members and staff, and each member briefly introduced themselves and identified areas of interest, with recurring themes including fiscal restraint, insurance regulation, revenue administration, condominium issues, and government efficiency. The chair then outlined the subcommittee’s overall budget, about $3.1 billion, and noted major recent policy areas affecting the budget such as condominium legislation and emergency communications funding. Agency heads then presented high-level summaries of their missions and budgets. The Department of Revenue described property tax oversight, tax administration, and child support enforcement; the Department of Management Services reviewed state purchasing, telecommunications, fleet, state insurance, retirement, and digital services; DBPR highlighted licensing, enforcement, condominiums, and building code work; DFS covered insurance consumer services, risk management, unclaimed property, fire marshal functions, and criminal investigations; the Gaming Control Commission discussed pari-mutuel and tribal gaming oversight and enforcement; OIR explained insurer solvency and rate review; the Lottery emphasized education funding and record sales; OFR described regulation of banking, securities, lending, and money services; DOAH outlined administrative and workers’ compensation adjudication; PSC covered utility rate regulation and consumer complaints; PERC described labor relations and career service appeals; and FCHR summarized discrimination complaint investigations and outreach. Several members asked questions about utility returns, insurance regulation staffing, DMS’s state employee health plan deficit and prescription drug formulary management, agency recommendations for reducing regulatory burden, and state facilities usage. Responses generally emphasized that utility rates and insurer filings are determined through evidentiary and actuarial processes, that OIR has reduced vacancies but still seeks specialized staff and a Tampa office expansion, and that DMS acknowledged rising health plan costs and said the issue likely requires broader budget-level discussion. The chair also pressed multiple presenters to stay focused on agency operations and budgets rather than broader policy issues. No votes or formal actions were taken in the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• role in providing oversight through that process and through the annual budget process.
• see budget deficits in upcoming years.
• see budget deficits in upcoming years.
• process should be looked into.
• process.

Summary: The subcommittee held an informational budget hearing covering several GovOps, CDT, CPPA, and DGS items. GovOps reported that most deliverables under the Governor’s generative AI executive order have been completed, including guidelines, procurement tools, community-impact guidance, and a new project delivery lifecycle for Gen AI projects; one workforce-related deliverable remains. Members and public commenters raised concerns about privacy, labor impacts, and how the state will explain and oversee Gen AI use. The committee also heard a proposal to create a California Education Interagency Council with $5 million ongoing and 16 positions to coordinate workforce and education systems; LAO questioned duplication and recommended limited-term funding, while supporters said a neutral convening body is needed to improve coordination and student outcomes. GoServe presented the College Corps budget proposals, describing the program as a paid service and career-development opportunity for undergraduate students that helps reduce college costs while supporting communities through tutoring, food insecurity work, climate and disaster response, and other service. The administration sought one-time and ongoing funding to expand the program to more campuses and students, while LAO objected to the high administrative costs and recommended rejection. Several students and alumni testified that College Corps provided financial support, professional experience, and career pathways. The committee also heard a $5 million proposal for a Belonging Campaign to address loneliness and social isolation through research, outreach, and local grants; LAO said the proposal lacked clear goals and measures, while supporters said the effort is needed for youth, seniors, and community resilience. The Department of Technology updated the Middle Mile Broadband Initiative, saying construction is underway on the statewide open-access network and the project remains on track for the 2026 deadline, though LAO noted a required business plan had not yet been submitted. The California Privacy Protection Agency presented its Delete Act implementation request for the DROP platform, which will let consumers request deletion of personal information held by data brokers; LAO flagged oversight concerns because CDT is both developing the system and involved in project support. Public commenters from business groups urged caution on CPPA’s rulemakings, warning of compliance costs and job impacts. The Department of General Services then discussed implementation of Proposition 2 school facilities bonds, requesting staffing and administrative funding to manage the new bond program and continue school facility work. Officials said the program can also help districts affected by the January wildfires, including interim site funding and expedited assistance. Finally, DGS requested authority and positions to operate Building 18 for labor-agency tenants relocating from older Capitol Mall space; SEIU Local 1000 criticized the state’s four-day return-to-office policy and said telework has improved productivity and retention. No formal votes were taken; the hearing concluded after public testimony and member questions on each item.

Transcript Highlights:

• I just want to tell you a little bit about the process from getting to the county budget all the way
• A huge piece of the process in McKenzie County and understanding our budget is centrally assessed properties
• And I think the process, we have a good process currently. Mr. Chairman. Senator Patton.
• budget?
• We go through the budget process, calculate the taxes, statements go out in December, and then we know

Summary: The subcommittee of the Tax Reform and Relief Committee met to begin its study of the feasibility and desirability of revising the content of the real estate tax statement to improve property tax transparency. Legislative Council staff reviewed the study directive under House Bill 1176 and the statutory requirements for tax statements, including required line items such as true and full value, mill levy, legislative tax relief, primary residence credit, and the Legacy Fund portion of that credit. The Tax Department then explained how the current uniform statement is prescribed and approved, and noted that changes are typically driven by statute and implemented collaboratively with counties and vendors. County officials from the North Dakota Association of Counties described the full annual tax cycle, from county budgeting and valuation notices to budget hearing notices, levy certification, cap calculations, and final tax statement mailing. They emphasized that counties and auditors do extensive coordination with taxing districts and neighboring counties, and that the process is labor-intensive and often manual. Members discussed the limited public response to budget notices and tax statements, the difficulty of explaining the legislative tax relief line, the 3% cap and valuation issues, and whether more frequent assessments or different timing would improve understanding. Several members and witnesses noted that many taxpayers only engage when they receive their final bill, and that clarity may be more important than adding more detail. NDACO also presented a rough cost survey from eight counties, estimating an average tax statement cost of about 74 cents and a statewide total near $600,000 for printing and mailing tax statements alone, with outsourcing generally cheaper than in-house printing. Witnesses noted that House Bill 1176 added other mailings and notices, increasing county workload and cost beyond the statement itself. The committee then heard from software vendors, who explained how their systems handle tax billing, budget notices, valuation notices, primary residence credit processing, and tax levy calculations, and they identified the 1600/1685 primary residence credit and discount interaction as a current programming challenge. No votes were taken; the meeting was informational and focused on gathering testimony and identifying issues for possible future recommendations or bill drafts.

Transcript Highlights:

• process the FIS the legislative budget process the FIS the legislative budget office<00:03:35.799
• that comes to the the phal process that comes to the legislative<00:10:47.760> budget<00:10:48.040
• That's the general process.
• That's the general process.
• Those are produced by the Legislative Budget Office, where we oversee the fiscal process, reviewing assumptions

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee 4 will come to order.
• Given that budget negotiations and considerations of our January proposals are still in process, this
• More policy in the budget.
• This should go through the policy process.
• We very much appreciate the Senate's budget plan.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The subcommittee heard May Revision proposals focused on housing, homelessness, and related administrative changes, and took no votes, holding items open for later action. Item 1 would realign staff positions and resources as part of the Governor’s housing and homelessness reorganization, including shifting two Cal ICH positions to HCD, moving one Cal ICH position for communications/external affairs, and authorizing a chief deputy director at the new Housing Development Finance Committee. Administration witnesses said the changes were technical and net zero-cost, while the LAO recommended approval but asked for clarification on funding for the chief deputy. Several senators questioned whether the staffing shifts would weaken Cal ICH’s homelessness work and whether adding communications capacity was appropriate without new housing funding. Item 2 proposed creating a $100 million Disaster Rebuilding Fund at CalHFA, with $56 million General Fund and $44 million in existing National Mortgage Settlement funds, to support disaster-impacted homeowners through tools such as loan loss guarantees and interest rate buy-downs. CalHFA said the fund would help homeowners bridge the gap between insurance proceeds and rebuilding costs and would work through approved lenders. The LAO raised concerns about the lack of alternatives in the proposal, the broad discretion left to CalHFA in program design, and the General Fund cost. Senators pressed for more detail on eligibility, equity safeguards, lender oversight, and how many homeowners would actually benefit, with some warning the proposal was too open-ended and could miss the most vulnerable households. Item 3 addressed trailer bill language for HAP Round 7, including a proposed $500 million General Fund allocation tied to new accountability measures, pro-housing designation requirements for 14 large cities and 11 counties, local match requirements, streamlined system performance metrics, and recapture/reallocation of unspent funds. HCD said the proposal would avoid a new application process by treating Round 7 as additional disbursements of Round 6 and would provide technical assistance to jurisdictions. The LAO and several senators questioned the timing, the burden of pro-housing designation and local match requirements, the vagueness of some standards, and whether the proposal would delay rather than speed up funding. Members also debated whether the trailer bill preserved or weakened existing homelessness accountability metrics and whether the approach was too complicated given local budget pressures and ongoing homelessness needs.

Transcript Highlights:

• the budget, the LFC budget.
• So, the budget The FY 27 budget represents the agency's work to address student needs.
• the public engagement process.
• That process was very involved.
• Kind of the full-blown process where all schools are really looking at all of those budgets on a quarterly

Transcript Highlights:

• We are about to release, informed by our work here with you and across the budget process, a second roadmap
• We are about to release, informed by our work here with you and across the budget process, a second roadmap
• We are about to release, informed by our work here with you and across the budget process, a second roadmap
• We are about to release, informed by our work here with you and across the budget process, a second roadmap
• Uh, you know, we're in a six-phase budget reconciliation process, where we're just about to enter the

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• You've got the capital budget statutes, the overview of the capital budget process, we throw in a docket
• /c><00:06:10.240> a<00:06:10.400> docket<00:06:11.080> for budget process we throw
• in a docket for budget process we throw in a docket for the<00:06:11.520> capital<00:06:12.240
• capital budget during the process of building the operating budget.
• That is what the capital budget process does.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The Public Works and Highways committee held a capital budget orientation led by Legislative Budget Assistant Office staff, who walked members through the budget materials, the capital budget process, and the committee’s compare sheet. The presentation explained that agencies begin developing capital requests nearly a year in advance, submit them by May 1, and that the governor’s recommended capital budget is a reduced version of the much larger agency wish list. Members were told the agencies initially requested about $1.1 billion in projects, the catalog was trimmed to just over $400 million in general fund projects, and the governor’s recommendation in the pink book totals about $143 million in general fund capital appropriations. The committee also reviewed the prior capital budget and related statutes and committee procedures. Several specific projects drew discussion. The Department of Education’s CTE projects were explained as having been shifted into the operating budget in the prior cycle and now returning to the capital budget recommendation; members asked whether there was a backup CTE project and whether local approval had been secured for the named project. The Cannon Mountain tramway request was highlighted as a $20 million recommendation, with the presenter explaining that an earlier $18 million appropriation would be lapsed back to the general fund to help balance the budget. The Department of Corrections’ new prison project was also discussed; members were told the state has already appropriated $50 million for planning and site evaluation, but the governor’s current capital budget does not include a new prison construction appropriation because the project is not yet ready for that phase and may need to be funded differently, possibly through a separate, staggered appropriation. State Treasurer Monica Mezzapelli then presented on debt affordability and the state’s borrowing capacity. She said the state’s credit position has improved, with the debt-to-revenue ratio falling from 8.2% in 2015 to 3.8% in 2024, and explained that RSA 6-C limits debt authorization to 10% of unrestricted prior-year revenue. She noted that the Treasury’s planning assumes $60 million in annual bond issuance, with the prison-related $40 million now expected to be issued in 2026 rather than 2025 because the project is not ready to spend the funds. She said the state can still borrow more, but additional debt service must be paid from operating funds, and recommended keeping capital bonding in the $120 million to $130 million range to preserve affordability and the state’s credit rating. Members asked for clarification on the CTE funding shift, the prison schedule, and the meaning of the large agency request totals. The chair and treasurer discussed the governor’s $143 million recommendation versus the committee’s usual target range, and the treasurer said $130 million would be more comfortable than $140 million, with $135 million described as a possible compromise. No formal votes or committee actions were taken in the portion provided; the meeting was informational and ended with the presenters offering to answer follow-up questions as agencies come before the committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• So that's included in this budget, budget, budget. Um, on page seven.
• So that's included in this budget budget budget um<00:55:02.880> on<00:55:03.119> page<
• budget.
• And um one is um our budget budget.
• wasn't originally part of the budget. wasn't originally part of the budget.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Seeing none, you have a budget.
• You have a budget. Thank you.
• Sorry to hold up the process.
• process for the FY25 budget year.
• Since the FY25 budget, as you can see, our base budget has seen a small increase of 3.7%.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Certainly... ...we have not budgeted for that $500,000 in our budget.
• We agree that corrective action is needed to rectify the sheriffs' budget process, to make the sheriffs
• process. ...will be made whole during the supplementary budget process at the end of the fiscal year
• The ANF budget, as you will see, we start that process usually in August and September, and we submit
• And as we start on this process of having the conversation around budget, I was wondering if you might

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Ways and Means held its sixth public hearing on the Governor’s H-2 budget proposal for fiscal year 2026, focused on public safety and judiciary agencies, at the Foxborough Community Center. After opening remarks and local welcomes, the committee heard first from the Executive Office of Public Safety and Security, led by Secretary Gina Kwan, who outlined a $1.72 billion budget, up $69.8 million from FY26. She said the proposal emphasizes core operations, readiness, and partnerships with municipalities, and highlighted work on firearms-law implementation, State Police reform, DOC reentry efforts, hate-crimes prevention, emergency response, and planning for major events including the World Cup. Members also raised concerns about DNA backlog reporting, State Police academy boxing and training standards, ICE communication, disaster relief funding, crime lab staffing, EMS placement, and diversity in public safety leadership. Several exchanges focused on specific operational issues. Secretary Kwan and her team said the State Police are tracking the influx of forensic work from local sheriffs, that the boxing program remains suspended pending an IACP review and likely will not return in its prior form, and that EOPS has no direct communication with ICE but supports law-enforcement coordination where appropriate. On disaster preparedness, officials said the new disaster relief fund is being developed with MEMA and A&F, currently capitalized at $14 million with another $14 million expected, though members urged a more permanent funding source. On the crime lab, staff said the roughly $4.5 million increase is intended to cover core operations and a structural funding gap rather than expand services. The secretary also said EOPS is not ready to absorb OEMS from DPH at this time, though she would keep an open mind. The committee then heard from district attorneys, led by Suffolk County DA Kevin Hayden, who said the Massachusetts District Attorneys Association is seeking a 10% increase in operating budgets, including about $16.7 million for staffing salaries, to recruit and retain prosecutors, advocates, and support staff. He said the request reflects rising workload and the need to keep the criminal justice system functioning efficiently and fairly. The hearing was recessed briefly after the district attorneys’ opening remarks, with additional testimony expected to continue afterward.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Senate Budget Subcommittee No. 1 on Education will come to order.
• That's the one we're requesting the provisional language to allow us to adjust our budget in the budget
• The May Revision includes budget bill language.
• And... 2025 Budget Act until June 30, 2027.
• The trailer bill language sets forth these processes.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Education heard May Revision proposals covering higher education, including the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education, the University of California, California Community Colleges, the California Student Aid Commission, UC College of the Law, San Francisco, and trailer bill reporting changes. For the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education, the administration proposed a one-time $10 million General Fund backfill to repay a special fund loan taken to cover litigation costs, plus provisional language to adjust for a pending legal expense and to repay the loan without interest. The LAO opposed shifting costs to the General Fund and raised legal concerns about an interest-free loan under Proposition 26. Senators asked about whether the $10 million would cover the litigation and about the estimated $245,000 in interest savings. For UC, the May Revision maintained the Governor’s ongoing support and included budget language requiring campuses to grow by 2,968 California undergraduates in 2026-27. UC also sought $1.5 million in one-time General Fund support for the First Star foster youth program. UC described strong outcomes for the UCLA program, while the LAO recommended rejecting the new spending because UC already has overlapping outreach programs, including the Early Academic Outreach Program, and because the need for new state funding was not clear. Senators debated whether the proposal duplicated existing services and discussed the program’s reported college-going and completion rates. The committee also heard a request for $1 million ongoing General Fund for UC College of the Law, San Francisco, to maintain campus safety services; the college described its shared-campus model and public-interest mission, while the LAO noted the college was also raising tuition and that the proposal would maintain, rather than expand, current security spending. The committee then reviewed community college proposals. Finance outlined a larger May Revision package centered on a 4.31% SCFF COLA, enrollment growth funding, categorical COLAs, a one-time Adult Learner Demonstration Project allocation, deferred maintenance, and other ongoing and one-time items. The Chancellor’s Office supported the package but asked for more enrollment growth funding, a higher growth rate, and additional policy changes. The LAO recommended at least funding the statutory 2.87% COLA, then considering whether to redirect remaining funds to enrollment growth, categorical COLAs, or one-time priorities; it recommended rejecting the Adult Learner Demonstration Project. Senators questioned the use of the discretionary COLA to cover paid pregnancy disability leave, the impact on hold harmless and basic aid districts, and whether the state should instead create a separate categorical. The Chancellor’s Office and Finance said the COLA approach was intended to provide flexibility, though Finance said it was open to further discussion about districts that would not receive direct funding. For student aid, Finance described May Revision changes to Cal Grant and the Middle Class Scholarship, including a one-time reduction tied to lower estimated costs and a later true-up, as well as proposals for the Golden State Teacher Grant Program and implementation of the federal Workforce Pell program. CSAC supported the financial aid investments but urged more time and clearer implementation planning for Workforce Pell, noting the need for state approval processes, data linkages, and likely ongoing administrative workload. The LAO recommended rejecting additional Golden State Teacher Grant funding and cautioned that the Workforce Pell trailer bill and one-time funding were premature given the new federal rules and unclear workload. Senators also raised concerns about the Middle Class Scholarship reduction, the need to support students facing higher living costs, and the decline in CADA/DREAM Act applications, with CSAC saying the drop did not reflect reduced need and that outreach should be strengthened. The final item was a set of technical trailer bill changes to shift some UC, CSU, and community college reporting from annual to biennial and consolidate reports; Finance said there were no programmatic changes.

Transcript Highlights:

• With respect to the department's budget, the proposed budget for fiscal year 26-27 With respect to the
• department's budget, the proposed budget for fiscal year 26-27 totals $3.2 billion, including state
• The proposed budget includes four permanent positions and two one-year limited-term positions in budget
• a runway and a planning process.
• Increase demands on capacity, but we don't, you know, practically speaking, through the budget process

Summary: The subcommittee heard presentations from the Department of State Hospitals (DSH), the Commission for Behavioral Health, and the Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) on budget proposals and implementation updates. DSH outlined its proposed 2026-27 budget, including funding for patient operating expenses, IST solutions savings, conditional release program costs, LPS bed allocation changes, electrical infrastructure projects at Napa and Patton, SB 380 transitional housing feasibility work, and expanded dental services at Metropolitan and Patton. DSH also reported that it has met court-ordered IST treatment benchmarks in the Stiavedi v. Clinton case, with average time to initiate treatment down to about five days and pending placements reduced to roughly 250, while noting that Proposition 36 could increase referrals and SB 1323 may divert some individuals earlier into community-based treatment. Members asked about rising outside hospitalization costs, Medicare enrollment, the timing and structure of capital projects, and whether IST solution funds are being fully used; DSH said the savings reflect slower-than-expected ramp-up of community programs and that the Central California FACT replacement program is still on track for January 2027 activation. The Commission for Behavioral Health described its role under the Behavioral Health Services Act (BHSA), including data, evaluation, grantmaking, technical assistance, and transparency work. It highlighted the new statewide Innovation Partnership Fund, a five-year, $20 million-per-year program with small and large grant categories; the first RFA drew strong interest, with more than 400 questions and over 1,000 bidders’ conference participants. The Commission also discussed a proposed extension to spend down about $4.1 million remaining for the Alcove Youth Drop-in Center grants so sites can finish implementation and Stanford can complete the final evaluation. Members asked about grant duration, whether projects can be renewed, what qualifies as innovation, and whether the fund could support service delivery rather than awareness campaigns or training; the Commission said awards are expected to be three-year contracts and that proposals must be new or meaningfully expanded approaches that support BHSA priority populations. DHCS reviewed major behavioral health changes under CalAIM and BH Connect, including peer support, mobile crisis, contingency management, traditional health care practices for tribal members, updated specialty mental health access criteria, and new substance use treatment standards based on ASAM’s fourth edition. DHCS reported strong contingency management results, with more than 13,000 members served and 95% testing negative for stimulant use during treatment, and said 21 Indian health care providers have been approved to offer traditional health care practices. It also described BH Connect initiatives such as the $1.9 billion access reform and outcomes incentive program, workforce investments, evidence-based practice expansion, IMD participation by four counties, and transitional rent services. On BHSA implementation, DHCS said it is not tracking individual county contract cuts but is monitoring county plans and statewide outcomes, while stakeholders raised concerns about local prevention and service gaps. DHCS also outlined its H.R. 1 implementation strategy, including outreach, streamlined renewals, exemptions for disabled, substance use, and medically frail individuals, and proposed clinic navigator and outreach funding; it said it has not yet produced a focused estimate of H.R. 1 impacts on behavioral health populations. The discussion ended with DHCS noting that B-CHIP bond funding has supported 437 infrastructure projects, creating 546 new or expanded facilities and more than 9,500 residential beds across the state.

Transcript Highlights:

• level or the 2027-29 budget cycle.
• So each year, the LEAP committee holds a meeting to advance the budget format change process.
• The LEAP committee holds a meeting to advance the budget format change process.
• their budget structures.
• So we look forward to these three continuing to grow and learn the legislative budget process and hope

Summary: The LEAP committee met on June 18, 2025, with introductions from members and staff, then received a clean audit report from the State Auditor covering 2020–2024. The audit reviewed accounts payable, general disbursements, theft-sensitive assets, and data backup/recovery, and found no findings. Staff also outlined the interim work plan, including a full rewrite of the capital budget application (Build Sum), updates to the transportation bond model and operating budget tools, website improvements, and continued research into secure, responsible AI use. Members asked about AI safeguards, keyword search improvements, and making the website more user-friendly, especially on mobile devices. The committee approved the July 8, 2024 minutes after a quorum was reached. It then considered and unanimously approved several budget format changes: the Department of Corrections moved chemical dependency and sex offender treatment into its health care program and renamed Program 700 from “Offender Change” to “Reentry Services”; the Department of Revenue moved the AMP program into its tax analysis and technology support program; and the Department of Transportation changed a toll program title and added new sub-programs for State Route 509 and State Route 167 toll operations to reflect new facilities and more accurate reporting. Kevin Feltis also provided staffing updates, noting the retirements of longtime LEAP staff, the hiring of three new associate consultants in October 2024, and an upcoming December 2025 retirement for Sherry Randage after decades of state service. The new staff members briefly introduced themselves and expressed enthusiasm for their work. The meeting ended with thanks to members and staff and adjournment after the committee completed its business.

Transcript Highlights:

• So 41% under budget and more than 100%. should say under budget, so 41% under budget and more than 100%
• And I'll say this with the executive hat on: I think it'll probably help as the budgeting process goes
• Support or at least some direction from the legislative interim study that will help the budgeting process
• I think it'll probably help as the budgeting process goes forward if there's some level of support or
• process.

Summary: The committee approved the March 26 minutes and then received a quarterly update on major IT projects from NDIT. Staff reported the portfolio included 116 major projects totaling about $546 million, with the overall portfolio under budget but slightly behind schedule. They reviewed projects over the 20% variance threshold, including an Industrial Commission grants management system and DOT’s roadway pre-construction replacement, and then heard startup and closeout reports from HHS, OMB, DPI, and DOT. Several previously troubled projects were closed, including HHS bed management, vital records modernization, and DOT roadway capital planning; some projects finished under budget and ahead of schedule, while others were significantly behind schedule or over budget but were now closed or being remediated. The committee also reviewed NDIT’s annual report, including service-fund financials, peer-state rate comparisons, records management, and customer satisfaction efforts. Members asked about how service-fund revenue and grant administrative charges are accounted for, how chargebacks work, and whether NDIT tracks customer satisfaction scores. NDIT said it does track CSAT-type measures in some service areas and has survey data, but it is not planning another customer survey this summer. Members encouraged more regular reporting of customer satisfaction, service-level metrics, and performance data to help guide future improvements. A major portion of the meeting focused on the state’s mainframe modernization effort. NDIT said the overall effort is still targeting about 2030, with multiple HHS and DOT projects underway and a $15 million tech-debt appropriation already removing some components. Staff described the main obstacles as data cleanup, complex integrations, limited staff capacity, retirements, and vendor constraints, and said they are seeking a vendor with modernization support in the next contract cycle. Members pressed for clearer accountability and faster progress, and NDIT and HHS emphasized that they are working jointly but need continued support and better tools. The committee then heard a cybersecurity update on NDIT’s statewide services and maturity assessments. NDIT explained that it provides vulnerability scanning, endpoint protection, security awareness training, threat briefings, and penetration testing, and that these services are tied to a cybersecurity maturity assessment based on CIS controls. Members questioned the sharp drop in participation since 2020 and whether the self-assessment should be mandatory or tied more strongly to StageNet access or insurance incentives. NDIT said participation is voluntary, but Enderf is now requiring annual assessments to keep a 4% insurance discount, and members discussed whether stronger requirements or audit authority may be needed. The meeting ended as the committee began a follow-up discussion on BEAD broadband connection costs and why some locations are much more expensive to connect than others.

Transcript Highlights:

• Good morning, and welcome to Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 4.
• So we will re-initiate the regulatory process.
• Over the next year, we are in the process of establishing some new processes for exemptions.
• Procedures and processes.
• We encourage you and the legislature to use the budget negotiation process to ensure a timely adoption

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• That was managed through an open bid process, through the RFP process, and that process, I can proudly
• Does the House budget cover it?
• The governance budget.
• of a delay of the process.
• So our fiscal year 2025 budget, current budget, is $2,201,861.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing was held in Clinton Town Hall as part of the Joint Committee on Ways and Means’ budget review, with local officials welcoming legislators and noting the long agenda of many panels. The main presentation was from Secretary Terrence Reedy of the Executive Office of Public Safety and Security, who outlined the Healey-Driscoll administration’s FY26 proposal for the secretariat, including a $1.7 billion budget and a 7% increase over FY25. He described investments in emergency preparedness, hate-crime prevention, reentry programming, technology modernization, internships, and public safety training, while also noting some reductions driven by resource constraints, including cuts to certain grant programs and administrative costs. Committee members also raised concerns about federal uncertainty and how it could affect state budgets and public safety planning. A major portion of the questioning focused on the Department of Correction. Secretary Reedy and Commissioner Sean Jenkins said the biggest challenges are staffing, officer wellness, facility safety, and contraband—especially K2. They described steps taken at MCI Souza and other facilities, including reducing population at the maximum-security unit, changing management, removing metal products and free weights, improving screening and roll calls, adding a rapid response team, and increasing investigative and technological efforts to combat K2. They also discussed the closure of MCI Concord, saying it was driven by high maintenance costs and staffing needs, and explained that savings are being used to improve staffing patterns and address deferred maintenance over time rather than producing immediate large budget reductions. Members also questioned the budget’s impact on police training and community policing. The administration defended the increase in police academy tuition from $3,200 to $6,000 as reflecting true training costs and said it would still be subsidized by the state, while acknowledging the burden on small municipalities. They said the MPTC is expanding regional training and considering proposals such as Greenfield Community College’s. On community policing, officials emphasized uniform statewide training, de-escalation, and communication skills. The State Police also announced an outside review of the academy by the International Association of Chiefs of Police and said the next class will be split into two smaller groups to improve oversight and allow quicker implementation of recommendations. Other topics included ICE and federal immigration enforcement, with Reedy saying state law prohibits Massachusetts law enforcement from acting in a civil immigration capacity and that no state dollars were used in the Tufts-related ICE operation mentioned by a member. Senators and representatives also raised the upcoming FIFA World Cup, warning that it will require significant public safety resources and likely federal funding. Additional discussion covered restorative justice and juvenile diversion, health care costs in DOC, electronic health records, and the need for more diverse and culturally competent public safety staffing. No votes were taken during the hearing.