Transcript Highlights:

• I think HAP needs to be funded more in the future, and I think they are reaching out to tribes now.
• I think HAP needs to be funded more in the future, and I think they are reaching out to tribes now.
• I think HAP needs to be funded more in the future, and I think they are reaching out to tribes now.
• You should need less funding, but that assumes that the HAP funding serves all homeless people in a community
• need that critical funding support.

Summary: The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee 4 met to hear an information-only agenda focused on homelessness. The chair and vice chair opened with remarks about affordability, accountability, and the need for flexible but effective state responses. The committee then heard an update from Dr. Ryan Finnegan of UC Berkeley’s Turner Center on homelessness trends, data limitations, and program impacts. He said homelessness remains high, with 2024 point-in-time counts showing about 187,000 people experiencing homelessness statewide, though unsheltered homelessness has declined somewhat as shelter capacity expanded. He emphasized that California’s high housing costs and shortage of affordable housing are the main drivers, while also noting persistent racial disparities, high chronic homelessness, and the importance of coordinated housing, health, and social services. He also warned that cuts or changes to federal programs and state funding streams like HAP could threaten progress. Members questioned Dr. Finnegan about the 9% decline in unsheltered homelessness, the timing and methodology of point-in-time counts, how to interpret trends over time, and the role of policy changes such as Housing First, Proposition 47, and Martin v. Boise. He explained that the 9% figure came from 30 continuums of care that had completed 2025 counts, and that HUD’s eventual statewide number would likely differ because not all regions counted that year. He also discussed how different funding sources are layered in local programs, including HAP, local funds, philanthropic support, federal funds, and CalAIM reimbursements. Several members stressed the need for clearer, more comparable measures of effectiveness and outcomes, including whether programs reduce long-term homelessness and move people toward self-sufficiency. The committee then heard from the California Interagency Council on Homelessness on statewide data systems, especially the Homeless Data Integration System (HDIS). Staff described HDIS as the first state-level integrated homelessness data system, built from local HMIS data and used to track demographics, services, outcomes, and program performance across all 44 continuums of care. They said HDIS has enabled statewide dashboards, system performance measures, and new accountability tools under AB 977 and AB 799. Cal ICH also said HAP Round 4 was highly cost-effective under the State Auditor’s methodology, estimating a cost of about $9,172 per person permanently housed, and that new AB 799 dashboards are intended to provide clearer public reporting on outcomes, fiscal data, and progress toward statewide goals. Members asked about measuring self-sufficiency, identifying the best local partners, detecting fraud, and whether the new dashboards will allow better comparisons among program types and funding uses. No votes were taken, and the one scheduled vote was postponed.

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:

• 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:

• Minnesotans help each other meet their basic needs, and the state funds water infrastructure throughout
• Minnesotans help each other meet their basic needs, and the state funds water infrastructure throughout
• Minnesotans help each other meet their basic needs, and the state funds water infrastructure throughout
• Minnesotans help each other meet their basic needs, and the state funds water infrastructure throughout
• Minnesotans help each other meet their basic needs, and the state funds water infrastructure throughout

Transcript Highlights:

• I think HAP needs to be funded more in the future.
• You should need less funding, but that assumes that the HAP funding serves all homeless people in a community
• Cities recognize the important need to be held accountable for the funding that they spend addressing
• At the same time, we really want to ensure that funding gets out the door quickly to those who need it
• need that critical funding support.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have an obligation to meet those obligations that says that Prop. 98, we need to fund.
• The state still needs to provide 40% of state revenues to schools, so the overall pot of funding isn't
• We need to make sure that the funding is consistent for these school districts.
• We are very appreciative of the funding that is proposed for special education, but more needs to be
• They use CLSA funds to address their needs, including shared digital books.

Summary: The subcommittee opened with remarks on the state budget and K-12 education, noting the large increase in the Proposition 98 minimum guarantee, the use of deferrals and reserves in the prior budget, and the challenge of balancing education funding against other state priorities. Superintendent Tony Thurmond described California education as improving overall, citing gains in test scores, graduation, and college readiness, but said major gaps remain for low-income students, students of color, agricultural communities, English learners, foster youth, and students with disabilities. He praised recent investments in universal meals, transitional kindergarten, community schools, arts, broadband, and special education, while warning that declining enrollment, chronic absenteeism, and the proposed $5.6 billion Prop. 98 settle-up create uncertainty for districts. He also urged a long-term literacy plan, expanded tutoring, universal kindergarten, and continued protections for students and families affected by immigration enforcement, including ICE-related fear and attendance loss. The committee then heard a detailed presentation on Proposition 98 from the Department of Finance and the Legislative Analyst’s Office. Finance explained that the Governor’s budget projects the minimum guarantee will rise by about $21.7 billion over three years, with a $5.6 billion settle-up obligation in 2025-26 intended to avoid overappropriation if revenues weaken. Finance also described revised reserve deposits and withdrawals, ending with about $4.1 billion in the Public School System Stabilization Account by 2026-27. The LAO said recent revenue collections were stronger than expected in the current year but warned that the outlook for 2026-27 is weaker and that stock-market-driven revenues remain volatile. The LAO supported maintaining reserves and one-time spending buffers, but recommended fully funding the guarantee and using other budget solutions rather than shifting the settle-up into future deficits. Members asked about the settle-up process, certification timeline, the effect of attendance declines tied to immigration enforcement, and wildfire-related impacts, including Pasadena Unified’s $4 million special appropriation. On LCFF and necessary small schools, Finance proposed a 2.41% COLA and about $2.2 billion in additional LCFF funding for districts and charters in 2026-27, plus a $30.7 million ongoing increase to raise the necessary small schools allowance by 20%. The LAO supported funding the COLA but said the small-school increase was not tied to a specific cost study and could be redesigned to better target small districts, noting that only a fraction of very small districts would benefit. Questions focused on how small schools access supplemental and concentration grants and how attendance recovery programs are being implemented. The Department of Education said only 130 LEAs had reported attendance recovery so far, likely because it is a new program with compliance requirements, though interest appears to be growing. FICMAT then reviewed the fiscal health of local districts, reporting an uptick in qualified and negative certifications, though still far below Great Recession levels. It said declining enrollment, rising special education costs, and higher labor and insurance costs are the biggest fiscal pressures, and that some districts are using fiscal stabilization plans and staff reductions ahead of second interim reports. FICMAT also discussed wildfire impacts on Pasadena Unified and Los Angeles Unified, explaining that Pasadena’s $4 million state appropriation was based on an early post-fire assessment and that the district is being monitored with the county office of education. Members raised concerns about Pasadena’s leadership, special education staffing shortages, AB 218 sexual abuse litigation costs, insurance premium increases, and the need for stronger prevention and training measures. FICMAT said SB 848 and related policies address some of those concerns by strengthening standards, training, and reporting requirements.

Transcript Highlights:

• We need lawmakers and Governor Healey to pass the DRIVE Act to fund SSS and the other TRIO programs that
• We need lawmakers and Governor Healey to pass the DRIVE Act to fund SSS and the other TRIO programs that
• We need to use the fair share funds to support the public colleges in this moment.
• So we need the funding for language access from the moment our students arrive in the admissions office
• We need targeted funding to complete the innovation cycle.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies

Summary: The committee on Economic Development held a hearing on the DRIVE Act, a proposal to invest $400 million in Massachusetts research and innovation without new taxes. Governor Healey and administration officials said the bill would direct $200 million to public higher education research and regional partnerships and $200 million to a research funding pool for hospitals, universities, and other institutions, with the goal of retaining talent, leveraging private and philanthropic dollars, and offsetting major federal R&D cuts. They argued that research is a core economic engine for the state, supporting jobs across labs, construction, services, and surrounding businesses, and said the bill would help protect the Commonwealth’s tax base and competitiveness during a period of federal uncertainty and cuts to SNAP, Medicaid, and other programs. Committee members raised concerns about whether Fair Share surtax dollars should instead be used for K-12 and other community needs, whether the proposal is enough given the scale of lost federal grants, and how the money would be allocated. The governor responded that the funds are one-time surplus dollars, that most surtax revenue already supports education, and that the bill is meant as a bridge to stabilize public higher education and research. She also said the legislation includes a review board and could support a revolving or matched-fund approach in some cases. Several members pressed for more detail on selection criteria, future funding, and whether private companies and large endowments should contribute more. University of Massachusetts leaders and researchers testified that federal grant cancellations and delays are already causing layoffs, furloughs, rescinded admissions, and lost research capacity. UMass officials said the bill would help preserve faculty, postdocs, graduate students, and research programs in medicine, climate science, marine science, Braille instruction, and AI decision-making. They emphasized that the funding should be merit-based and that the state needs to act quickly to prevent talent from leaving Massachusetts. Business, labor, and industry groups, including MassBio, the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, AIM, the AFL-CIO, and Building Trades, supported the bill, saying it would protect jobs, sustain the innovation ecosystem, and reinforce Massachusetts’ national leadership in research and life sciences. No vote was taken in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• The department estimated a 250-person need, so we only have funding for 100, which means we have 150
• If we needed to refund an individual, if we need to refund some funds for a federal grant to the granters
• So in order for the other funds to be used here, we would need a piece of legislation...
• So in order for the other funds to be used here, we would need a piece of legislation pass, and that
• And so there is funding available. There wasn't any need for the GR.

Committee: House Budget

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:

• And so back in FY23, we knew we didn't need any funds for that particular year.
• for any funding needs in FY26.
• The request in need for general fund is only $6,650,000 compared to what we currently have.
• But in order to actually build capacity efforts, we need supplemental funds.
• Typically, we need it full-funded before we go advertise a project for bidding.

Committee: House Ways & Means

Transcript Highlights:

• The need for additional interpreter service is critical, and this funding on a two-year basis will help
• This is because continuously appropriated funds eliminate the need for the administration to come to
• Law Fund.
• So seeing no new funding for that, in an issue that we see as an area that needs attention, is sending
• We really appreciate the $25 VOCA funding, but we know that we need $100.

Transcript Highlights:

• and 14 of which are funded by the General Fund.
• Special or other funds, and 14 of which are funded by the General Fund.
• Many of the positions are also funded through special funds, not General Fund.
• We need a $15 million allocation from GGRF or General Fund to keep this program ready for the next disaster
• So we do need more time, and I support the $45 million that we're requesting out of the General Fund.

Summary: The subcommittee heard a series of Department of Food and Agriculture budget proposals, beginning with ongoing funding and trailer bill language for the Farm to School program and related climate-smart agriculture work. CDFA described the program’s goals of linking California producers with schools, expanding access to local and nutritious food, and supporting underserved farmers through technical assistance and outreach. The LAO recommended rejecting the proposal as presented because of the state’s budget condition and suggested that some activities might instead be supported through Proposition 98. Members questioned whether the program is reaching the schools and communities with the greatest need, how grants are scored, and whether the proposal’s goals are measurable enough to justify ongoing funding. The item was held open. The committee also discussed CDFA’s climate bond expenditure plan, which would allocate remaining Proposition 4 funds to existing programs such as SWEEP, Healthy Soils, urban agriculture, fairground emergency response upgrades, and invasive species work, as well as new or developing programs including year-round certified farmers markets, mobile farmers markets, regional farm equipment sharing, and tribal food sovereignty. CDFA said the funds would be released in stages based on program readiness, with audits and performance metrics tied to each program. The LAO found the plan reasonable and consistent with bond requirements. Members asked about audit responsibility, performance tracking, and whether the bond programs should be front-loaded or spread over a longer period. A third CDFA item addressed the elimination of vacant positions under prior budget reductions. CDFA and the Department of Finance explained that the positions were selected because they had been vacant for long periods or were hard to fill, and that departments identified the positions based on their own operational knowledge. The LAO supported retaining the special-fund positions and suggested the General Fund positions be weighed on their merits. Members raised concerns about the impact on core functions such as audits, investigations, milk marketing, and grape pricing reports, and asked for follow-up on how the department determined which positions could be removed. The committee then heard a CDFA IT proposal to add funding and four positions for information technology operations; the LAO had no concerns, and members discussed cybersecurity, legacy systems, and future risks such as AI and quantum threats. The committee took public comment and then voted to approve items 9 through 13, which included CDFA dog importation certificates, livestock carcass disposal, Gambling Control Commission IT support and tribal grant funding, and an ABC district office relocation. The hearing then moved to the Department of Cannabis Control, which presented a request to strengthen enforcement against the illicit cannabis market by adding a North State field office in Redding and three non-sworn support positions. DCC said the illicit market remains far larger than the legal market, with a large backlog of cases and significant public safety and environmental concerns. Finance supported the targeted expansion, the LAO had no comment, and members asked about regional coverage, officer safety, and whether a larger, more transformational enforcement effort might be warranted in the future.

Transcript Highlights:

• It also includes $850 million to an endowment fund to support capital needs for career and technical
• That was not funded, and we need $48,000 for the public to be able to hear those oral arguments.
• If you need more funding, state that. But let's don't... ...it going like our chairman said.
• If you need more funding, state that.
• TIDC has counties lined up at the door, but we need more funding for it.

Bills: SB 1 , SB 1

Committee: Senate Finance

Summary: The Senate Finance Committee convened for its first hearing of the 89th regular session, confirmed a quorum, adopted committee rules by a 15-0 vote, and began review of Senate Bill 1, the state budget for fiscal years 2026-27. Chair Huffman outlined the committee’s organization, introduced staff, and described the budget as conservative and focused on one-time investments. She highlighted major SB 1 priorities including property tax relief, full funding for public education formulas, teacher pay, school safety, border security, Medicaid growth, dementia research, energy and water infrastructure, transportation, wildfire suppression, and other capital and public safety needs. Comptroller Glenn Hager presented the biennial revenue estimate, saying the state has $194.6 billion available for general-purpose spending in 2026-27, with a projected $23.8 billion ending balance from the current biennium. He cautioned that revenue growth is returning to more normal levels and that lawmakers should avoid committing short-term surpluses to ongoing expenses. He also explained that the Economic Stabilization Fund is projected to hit its constitutional cap, meaning an estimated $5.6 billion in severance tax and related revenue would remain in general revenue in the upcoming biennium rather than flow into the fund. Senators discussed whether to raise or rename the fund and the implications of keeping more severance-tax revenue in general revenue. The Legislative Budget Board then gave an overview of SB 1 and the budget’s major funding changes. LBB staff explained that the bill is essentially flat at $332.9 billion in all funds, but includes large method-of-finance shifts and major property tax relief. They detailed how prior property tax relief enacted in the 88th Legislature grew from an estimated $18 billion to $22.7 billion because of higher property values and hold-harmless provisions, and said SB 1 continues that relief with a total of $51 billion in ongoing and new property tax support. Members asked extensive questions about the automatic growth in school tax compression, the constitutional homestead exemption, COVID-era federal funding, Medicaid assumptions, and the sunset of the non-homestead circuit breaker. No additional votes or final budget actions were taken beyond adoption of the committee rules.

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:

• They need movement, they need heavy joint exercise, they need outdoor activities, they need these things
• I'm curious, for each of the schools, how much additional funding would you need to make up the difference
• needs.
• So when we have things that we need to purchase for students that we can't use our regular funds for,
• Senator, if we're being funded to do projects that we need to move through design before we move through

Transcript Highlights:

• So that's the funding mechanism that provides what we need to build out this system and operate it.
• is funded by the General Fund.
• It's funded by the General Fund, so we really do need a framework addressing that issue.
• Okay, but in terms of the costs, I thought you said that you needed $1.2 million from the General Fund
• And there are also, we need to ensure that there's fair play and that the funds are distributed appropriately

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Corrections, Public Safety, Judiciary, Labor, and Transportation heard updates from the Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) and the Department of Justice. Cal OES Acting Director Tina Curry described the department’s proposed budget, disaster response and recovery work, Los Angeles wildfire recovery, FEMA reimbursement delays, hazard mitigation grant applications, planning for major events like the FIFA World Cup and LA28 Olympics, and the state’s next generation 911 priorities. Senators raised concerns about Operation Stonegarden, small-disaster recovery delays, FEMA reimbursement timing, VOCA funding, and the need for more detailed reporting on federal grants and recovery costs. The committee then focused on Next Generation 911. Cal OES staff said the current regional deployment encountered call-routing and transfer failures, leading the department to pause further rollout and propose a new phased plan centered on a statewide provider, followed by an open procurement for a long-term vendor. They said the plan is intended to improve reliability, simplify architecture, and support Los Angeles-area PSAPs ahead of the Olympics, with a target of full statewide transition by summer 2030. The Legislative Analyst’s Office urged the Legislature to pause major changes until it receives more information, including a clearer explanation of the problems, alternatives considered, costs, cybersecurity and privacy issues, and oversight needs. Members expressed mixed views, with some supporting a joint oversight hearing and requesting quarterly fiscal reports and monthly progress updates. The Department of Justice then presented its overall workload, emphasizing public safety enforcement, fentanyl and human trafficking prosecutions, housing enforcement, civil rights work, and extensive federal litigation against the Trump administration. DOJ said the additional federal accountability work has significantly increased staffing and overtime demands, though it has hired 44 additional employees. The committee also heard DOJ’s firearms workload proposal, including funding for SB 704 implementation, continued firearms IT modernization, and a proposed shift of Bureau of Firearms costs to the General Fund. The LAO recommended using special funds and loans instead of ongoing General Fund support where possible, and asked DOJ to develop a framework by January 2027 for determining which firearms and ammunition workload should be supported by fee revenue. The Department of Finance largely agreed with the need for SB 704 funding but disagreed with the LAO’s proposed loan approach for the firearms account.

Transcript Highlights:

• for, so that the state can decide how to use our own funds in other areas where it's needed.
• In exact terms, there are various requirements that need to be met to get the funding.
• Who do you fund? Which is more important? It's very challenging because the need is so high.
• Knowing that there's limited funding, we need to get the funding to the right places and the right communities
• Decisions of, okay, where are we still seeing the need, and where can we put that funding?

Transcript Highlights:

• have the funds when the project needs done again.
• But in terms of the overall magnitude of how much funding would be needed for maintenance over the long
• We need a more sustainable approach to funding to make sure that as this problem goes forward Approach
• We need funding both for wildfire fuel reduction in the forest context and also for home hardening for
• We need funding both for wildfire fuel reduction in the forest context and also for home hardening for

Transcript Highlights:

• they need to come in front of you all and ask for the authority to pull money from those funds.
• funds.
• fund, spits off money into the general fund.
• That funding is going to specifically that fund.
• That funding is going to specifically that fund.

Committee: House House Appropriations & Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• Expanding that would be needed, particularly if federal funding is reduced.
• how we need to leverage funds better.
• What does that GROW funding actually fund, and can we work to make it actually meet the needs of students
• We need to complete all projects funded by the Capital Projects Fund by the end of 2026.
• together, I think we do need some dedicated funding for digital literacy and digital opportunity.

Committee: House Economic & Rural Development & Policy Committee