Transcript Highlights:

• So no impact to the general fund. Thank you.
• So no impact to the general fund. Thank you.
• So no impact to the general fund. Thank you.
• So no impact to the general fund. Thank you.
• The funds are available. There is zero impact to the general fund.

Bills: HF3298 , SF3832 , HF3528 , HF3516 , HF3972 , HF4118

Committee: House Ways and Means

Transcript Highlights:

• The estimated impact to the General Fund in 2026-27 is a cost reduction of about $102.4 million.
• Cost is $786 million General Fund in the budget year, growing to $1.5 billion General Fund ongoing.
• There's an increased General Fund cost because of H.R. 1, but then there's a General Fund savings because
• state General Fund, and county funds.
• extra General Fund dollar.

Summary: The Budget Subcommittee on Health and Human Services heard an overview of the expected California budget and program impacts from H.R. 1, including changes to Medi-Cal and CalFresh eligibility, redeterminations, work requirements, immigration-related coverage rules, retroactive coverage limits, and reductions in federal matching for certain services and provider financing mechanisms. DHCS and CDSS described implementation plans focused on automation, data matching, clearer communications, county training, and outreach, while noting that many federal details are still pending. The Legislative Analyst’s Office also reviewed how H.R. 1 could increase pressure on county indigent care systems, explaining the history of county responsibility under Section 17000, 1991 realignment, and AB 85, and warning that counties may face large increases in uninsured residents seeking care without corresponding funding flexibility. An independent policy expert urged consideration of a more standardized statewide approach to indigent care and raised questions about governance, benefits, and financing. Department witnesses estimated substantial coverage losses and fiscal effects: DHCS projected major Medi-Cal disenrollment tied to work requirements, six-month renewals, narrowed immigrant eligibility, and reduced retroactive coverage, while CDSS estimated large CalFresh benefit losses and a significant increase in administrative workload and payment accuracy pressure. Members questioned how exemptions would work for older adults, people experiencing homelessness, undocumented residents, and cash workers, and asked about the effect on the CalFresh Minimum Nutrition Benefit Pilot and on county administrative funding. Officials said they would use available data and self-attestation where possible, but acknowledged that many cases would require manual screening and that the county workload estimates remain in dispute. They also said the state is still evaluating the impact of H.R. 1 on provider taxes and state-directed payments, which could create additional budget pressure. County representatives from Los Angeles, Santa Clara, Tulare, and San Bernardino described major local consequences if H.R. 1 is implemented as written. They warned of higher uninsured rates, more strain on emergency rooms and public hospitals, increased homelessness and food insecurity, and a likely need to rebuild or expand county indigent care programs that were largely scaled back after the ACA. Counties said they are already freezing hiring, cutting positions, reducing overtime, deferring spending, and launching outreach and coordination efforts with managed care plans and community partners, but argued that these steps are not enough without additional state support. Several counties backed the California County Welfare Directors Association’s request for $373 million in General Fund support for eligibility work and asked for a CalFresh match waiver to soften the new county share of administrative costs; Los Angeles and Santa Clara also emphasized that their local revenue measures would not close the projected gaps. No votes or formal actions were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then in terms of non-general near general fund transfers, pension stabilization to the budget stabilization
• It shows the two-year near-general fund and total budgeted impact and the four-year near-general fund
• So for behavioral health, the net impact in the four-year near-general fund is minus $218 million.
• So on to higher education: in this case, the four-year near-general-fund impact is minus $237 million
• operating fees account and your general fund in the higher-ed institutions.

Summary: The conference committee on Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill 5998 met to review the operating budget conference report. House and Senate budget coordinators walked through comparison documents showing the Senate-passed budget, House-passed budget, and the conference proposal, including statewide totals, agency detail, revenue assumptions, transfers, and the four-year outlook. They said the conference budget uses the February 2026 ERFC forecast, includes an $880 million transfer from the budget stabilization account to the general fund, and reflects a four-year net near-general-fund impact of about $800 million, with an ending fund balance of $231 million in 2025-27 and $563 million in 2027-29. They also noted that future collective bargaining agreements are not included in the outlook beyond those already settled. The briefing highlighted major policy items across the budget, including Working Families Tax Credit expansion, a proposed city and county fiscal health account, changes to Working Connections child care attendance payments, behavioral health facility and staffing adjustments, long-term care funding for certain non-citizen residents affected by federal changes, Apple Health and other health-related responses to H.R. 1, K-12 changes such as free school meals contingent on related legislation, Running Start and transportation depreciation adjustments, higher education administrative reductions, corrections staffing and bed changes, wildfire response funding, and state employee compensation agreements. Members also discussed the budget’s reliance on revenue measures and transfers, including legislation referenced as 2487, 6228, 6231, and 6346. After the presentation, Senator Robinson moved adoption of the conference report and passage of the bill as recommended by the committee. In discussion, supporters said the budget protected core services and responded to federal H.R. 1 impacts, while opponents criticized the size of the budget, the use of reserves, future outlook assumptions, and reductions in some K-12 and other programs. The committee then voted 4-2 to recommend the conference report and ESSB 5998 to the legislature, with Representatives Gregerson and Ormsby and Senators Robinson and Stanford in favor, and Representative Couture and Senator Gildon opposed.

Transcript Highlights:

• Today, the focus of my remarks will be on NGFO, or near General Fund Outlook funds, though they are the
• of near general fund outlook in the higher ed institutions.
• of near general fund outlook in the higher ed institutions.
• Families Tax Credit in lieu of state general fund.
• It saves near General Fund Outlook in $239 million.

Summary: The House Appropriations Committee held a public hearing on proposed substitute House Bill 2289, the House operating budget. Budget staff Mary Monroe gave a detailed overview of the proposal’s near general fund outlook, reserve levels, major revenue assumptions, and major spending and savings items. She highlighted assumed revenue from capital gains and a proposed “millionaires tax,” a transfer from the budget stabilization account, administrative reductions across agencies, and several major policy shifts, including changes affecting Working Connections Child Care, K-12 education, higher education, long-term care, behavioral health, wildfire response, and state employee compensation. Members then asked questions, including about the higher education building account/operating fee swap and its interaction with the capital budget and Climate Commitment Act funds. The committee also announced amendment deadlines for the budget process. The bulk of the meeting was public testimony, with many speakers generally supporting or opposing specific parts of the budget. Supportive testimony praised funding for wildfire prevention, public health, reproductive health, civil legal aid, the Poison Center, some higher education institutions, and certain disability and child welfare services. Many speakers urged restoration or protection of funding for K-12 education, especially transition to kindergarten, local effort assistance, bus depreciation, and Running Start; others opposed cuts to child care, early learning, public defense, long-term care, adult day and home care services, occupational/physical/speech therapy for Medicaid patients, and community and technical colleges. Several local government, health, and nonprofit representatives also asked the committee to preserve public works, homelessness, energy assistance, environmental justice, and recovery/diversion programs, while some business and public safety groups sought continued funding for organized retail crime prevention and related initiatives. No votes were taken during the hearing. The committee recessed briefly and later resumed with virtual testimony, where additional witnesses repeated concerns about education cuts, long-term care, health care access, disability services, dispute resolution, early childhood programs, and the need for ongoing or increased funding in those areas.

Transcript Highlights:

• The State of California guidelines for evaluating impacts of generative AI on vulnerable and marginalized
• So this funding proposal will allow College Corps to continue to make an impact throughout our state,
• This is for a $5 million General Fund request to support the Belonging Campaign.
• expanding or creating new programs funded by the General Fund.
• Since these funds are all now general funds, we just have to make sure that there are agreements that

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:

• </c> into the general fund. into the general fund.
• </c> general fund money.
• It would be general general fund money.
• of this on the general fund.
• of this on the the the fiscal impact of this on the general<01:31:06.840><c> fund.

Committee: House Taxes

Transcript Highlights:

• There are no general fund enhancements requested by the Department of Environmental Quality.
• And that is because there was no general funds to remove. There is no general funds to reduce.
• fund is we appropriate general fund appropriation and then we transfer it to the fire suppression deficiency
• general fund is zeroed out.
• That is because the Endowment Fund Investment Board does not receive any general funds.

Committee: Senate Resources and Environment

Transcript Highlights:

• of $1.1 billion of these new General Fund costs.
• , a net increase of 1.1 billion of these new general fund costs.
• And that's because most of that cost falls on the general fund.
• general fund, some of the cost growth has been borne by other fund sources.
• funding that applies generally to SNAP.

Committee: Senate Budget and Fiscal Review

Summary: The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee held an oversight hearing on the impacts of H.R. 1 on California’s safety net, focusing on Medi-Cal and CalFresh. The chair and vice chair framed the discussion around major federal changes to work requirements, eligibility redeterminations, immigrant eligibility, and financing rules, while noting the state’s own structural budget deficit and the need for a second hearing later in March on county and safety-net impacts. The first panel included the Legislative Analyst’s Office, the Department of Finance, the UC Berkeley Labor Center, and the Food Research and Action Center. LAO and Finance described H.R. 1 as driving major enrollment losses and cost shifts. LAO estimated that Medi-Cal work requirements and six-month redeterminations could affect 3.5 million people, with 1 to 2 million potentially disenrolled, while CalFresh changes could subject more than 800,000 people to work requirements and cause over 600,000 to lose food assistance. They also highlighted new ineligibility for certain non-citizens, reduced federal matching for emergency Medi-Cal services, tighter provider tax rules, and higher state and county administrative costs for CalFresh. Finance said the governor’s budget reflects about $1.4 billion in new General Fund costs in 2026-27 and a $2.4 billion reduction in federal funds, with larger out-year impacts and up to 2 million Medi-Cal disenrollments by 2029-30. The UC Berkeley Labor Center projected up to 3 million Californians could lose full-scope Medi-Cal by 2028 when H.R. 1 is combined with state budget changes, though it said the state could limit losses by choosing not to apply some new requirements to state-funded populations and by keeping some immigrants in full-scope state-funded coverage. The Food Research and Action Center argued that CalFresh cuts and time limits would increase hunger, homelessness risk, and health costs, while also hurting local economies and increasing administrative burden. Committee members from both parties questioned the fiscal sustainability of Medi-Cal growth, the 11% CalFresh error rate and possible $2 billion penalty, county indigent care costs, and the effect of work requirements; several Democratic members argued the federal changes and state cuts would disproportionately harm low-income Californians, immigrants, and communities of color, while Republican members emphasized program growth, work incentives, and the need for budget restraint. No votes were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• There's a general fund impact of $106,000, and in fiscal 26 and 27, the fiscal impact actually combined
• fund. general fund.
• These provisions also have legacy fund impacts and other non-general fund impacts, and I will.
• Pages 5 and 6 are the non-general fund provisions or tax provisions that have non-general fund impact
• Lines 42 are again interaction impacts with sales tax provisions that have non-general fund impact.

Bills: HF2730 , HF2257 , HF2768 , HF1932 , HF2437

Committee: House Taxes

Transcript Highlights:

• So the $15 million General Fund backfill will not impact Round 1 funding, and there's not currently a
• General Fund, special funds, bond funds, and federal funds.
• from the General Fund to bond funds.
• funds from the general fund.
• to backfill funds from the general fund.

Summary: The subcommittee heard presentations on the administration’s Proposition 4 spending plans for extreme heat mitigation and outdoor access, then took up SB 54 implementation, SB 707 textile producer responsibility, and recovery needs related to the Los Angeles fires at state parks. For the extreme heat chapter, agencies described funding for the Extreme Heat and Community Resilience Program, urban greening, urban forestry, fairground upgrades, and technical assistance for community-based climate programs. Witnesses emphasized that these are existing programs with strong demand, that technical assistance is important for reaching disadvantaged and tribal communities, and that the proposed funding would expand outreach and implementation capacity. Members asked for more detail on where funds have gone geographically, examples of successful projects, tree-planting totals, and how fairgrounds could better support fire staging and emergency preparedness. The LAO said the timing of the administration’s proposed funding generally made sense because the programs are already established, and no votes were taken. For outdoor access, State Parks, Fish and Wildlife, and Natural Resources described funding for new parks in underserved communities, deferred maintenance, state lands access, and several new or pending programs. State Parks said the park development program would fund roughly 48 projects and that deferred maintenance funding would address high-priority health, safety, and access needs. Fish and Wildlife said its lands program would improve visitor amenities and access on properties that often lack basic facilities. The Natural Resources Agency also outlined three newer outdoor-access proposals: expanding recreation in disadvantaged communities, enhancing natural resource values and trail access, and a nature/climate/education facilities grant program. The LAO distinguished between existing programs, which are ready to move forward, and the newer proposals, where the Legislature may want more input before funds are allocated. Members also raised concerns about park police vacancies, the need to track outcomes for accessibility investments, and whether Prop. 4 could help with wildfire-related recovery at state parks. CalRecycle then presented on SB 54, the plastics and packaging producer responsibility law, and members pressed hard on the delay in regulations. CalRecycle said it has held workshops, formed an advisory committee, selected the producer responsibility organization, and completed required baseline and covered-material reports, but needs more time to address complex comments and novel features such as source reduction and eco-modulated fees. Members expressed frustration that a statutory deadline was missed and asked for a concrete timeline; CalRecycle said it expects regulations in place by 2026, ahead of the PRO’s January 1, 2027 plan deadline. Finance said the Beverage Container Recycling Fund is currently healthy enough to support short-term loans for implementation. The committee also reviewed SB 707, the textile EPR law, which would create the nation’s first textile producer responsibility program; staff said the proposal would add positions and loan authority, and members noted the statutory deadlines for PRO approval, needs assessment, and later regulations. The hearing ended with discussion of the January Los Angeles fires’ damage to Topanga State Park and Will Rogers State Historic Park, where State Parks described extensive losses, emergency response work, and ongoing damage assessment. Members asked about FEMA eligibility, state funding sources, and community engagement in rebuilding, and the department said it is still assessing costs and will work with the public on reimagining the parks.

Transcript Highlights:

• of the funding dictates its purpose, but it is slightly less restricted in that those agencies generally
• impact of these funds to understand the impact of these funds in<00:07:38.160><c> the</c><00:07:38.400
• ><00:49:01.440><c> talk</c><00:49:01.640><c> about</c> General fund, and we'll talk about that more in
• Due to both our tuition and the value we remain with the generous amount of scholarship funds that we
• is with the generous amount of uh<01:06:18.240><c> scholarship</c><01:06:18.799><c> funds</c><01:06:

Committee: House Higher Education Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• Those special funds, the ones that are segregated, that are not co-mingled with the general fund, we
• Enterprise funds operate as businesses and generate significant economic impact for the city and state
• More than the total growth of our general fund revenues.
• Our police and fire department is 63% of that general fund.
• That's not from bonds; that's out of the general funds.

Bills: HB26 , HB73 , SB 14 , HB46

Committee: House Intergovernmental Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• All of these programs have received previous funding from the general fund or other sources.
• The $15 million general fund backfill will not impact Round 1 funding, and there's not currently a round
• general fund, special funds, bond funds, and federal funds.
• The governor's proposed budget proposes to spend general fund money to backfill general fund commitments
• funds from the General Fund.

Transcript Highlights:

• , not General Funds.
• , not General Funds.
• and homelessness, all General Fund spending for labor and workforce development, all General Fund money
• and homelessness, all General Fund spending for labor and workforce development, all General Fund money
• Did that take the place of general funding, General Fund funding for those projects?

Committee: Senate Budget and Fiscal Review

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

Transcript Highlights:

• The revenue is currently deposited into the state general fund.
• awarded for airport projects and the estimated amount of funds returned to the general fund, accounting
• In terms of revenue impact, this legislation will decrease the general fund state by an estimated amount
• You funded a health impact study, other impact study, flight demand increase.
• It's just going to go into the general fund. Follow-up, Madam Chair. Sure.

Summary: The committee began with a work session on aircraft fuel taxes, hearing from WSDOT Aviation about the FAA’s aviation fuel tax rules, Washington’s compliance history, and the potential consequences of noncompliance. WSDOT said the state has collected roughly $210 million in aviation fuel taxes since the federal compliance period began, and that FAA has questioned some of the state’s claimed offsets. Members asked about the federal authority behind the rules, who pays the taxes, and whether Boeing is affected. The committee then moved to public hearing on several bills tied to aviation fuel tax revenue. SB 5989 would redirect a small share of state sales and use tax on aircraft fuel to the aeronautics account and require reporting on airport project funding. Supporters, including port, airport, and pilot groups, said it was a measured step toward FAA compliance and airport investment; the bill’s staff summary said it would reduce general fund revenue and increase DOR costs. SB 5898 would redirect hazardous substance, petroleum products, and oil spill-related taxes on aircraft fuel to the aeronautics account. Supporters said it would bring Washington into compliance and help airports, while Ecology, counties, and ports warned it would significantly reduce MTCA and related environmental funding. SB 6240 would create a new noise and air quality mitigation account funded by a portion of hazardous substance tax revenue; airport and aviation groups opposed it as duplicative or noncompliant with FAA rules, while community and environmental advocates from Sea-Tac area cities supported it as a needed mitigation source. The committee also heard SB 6244, which would extend a hazardous substance tax exemption for certain pesticides used in Washington agriculture through 2038. Agricultural and logistics witnesses supported it as important for food security, storage, and competitiveness, and staff said it would have a small revenue loss and administrative cost. SB 6231, a governor-request bill, would repeal the sales tax exemption for data center refurbishments while keeping the exemption for original server equipment; OFM and local government groups supported it as a revenue-raising budget measure, while data center, labor, and business representatives opposed it, warning of lost investment, jobs, and competitiveness. SB 6228 would repeal the preferential B&O rate for prescription drug resellers; OFM supported it as an outdated preference, but pharmacies, wholesalers, and business groups argued the cost would be passed through to pharmacies, hospitals, insurers, and patients and could worsen pharmacy closures. The committee then heard SB 6220, which would narrow and clarify a property tax exemption for nonprofit low-income homeownership property by allowing temporary community use and preserving the exemption when property is transferred to another exempt nonprofit. The sponsor said the bill was intended to let a community land trust host local performances without jeopardizing affordable housing plans. Finally, the committee heard SB 5880, which would allow blood and breath toxicology results to be admissible if tested by ISO/IEC 17025-certified labs, in addition to the state toxicologist process. Seattle’s city attorney supported it as a way to reduce a long toxicology backlog and speed DUI cases, while counties raised concerns about shifting costs to local governments and creating unequal access based on local resources. No votes were taken in the transcript provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Basically just describing what general fund is and what it’s currently used for.
• These funds may be used as grants for impacted entities, but no clear funding source has been identified
• No, it's adding in need for general fund between ongoing and annual. Ms. Leone?
• Leone, so in ongoing need for general fund annually...
• Yeah, annual need, general funds or general fund to backfill... Okay.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our office also estimates the portion of the general fund budget that's allocated to pensions.
• We're itemizing the estimated impact of the general fund state budget, as well as local government budgets
• We're itemizing the estimated impact of the general fund state budget, as well as local government budgets
• So, and this is a completely self-funded program. There's no general fund subsidy.
• And so now the program is completely self-funded for worker contributions and has no impact on the general

Committee: Joint Pension Funding Council

Summary: The Pension Funding Council met on October 8 with introductions from council members and then heard a presentation from the Office of the State Actuary on long-term economic assumptions and the state pension systems’ financial condition. OSA reported that the combined pension systems were 100% funded as of June 30, 2024, with open plans above 95% funded, and explained that strong investment returns and prior funding policy decisions contributed to that position. The actuaries recommended increasing the inflation assumption from 2.75% to 3%, increasing general salary growth by 0.25%, keeping the Plan 1 membership growth assumption at 1%, and raising the assumed investment return to 7.25% for all plans. They also reviewed estimated budget impacts and explained that investment gains are smoothed over up to eight years, while other assumption changes flow directly into future valuations. The council also heard comments from the Economic and Revenue Forecast Council and the State Investment Board, both of which said their inflation and return outlooks were broadly consistent with the actuary’s recommendations. ERFC discussed inflation trends, the Federal Reserve’s 2% target, and why Seattle-area inflation tends to run above the national average, while SIB said its 15-year inflation assumption is 2.5% and that 7.25% is a reasonable long-term return assumption. Public testimony included support for maintaining Plan 1 funding efforts and caution from the Association of Washington Cities about the budget impact of higher assumptions and the risk of overfunding pensions. The council then considered and adopted a motion to maintain the current prescribed long-term economic assumptions, with a roll call vote of 4-2. It next considered the long-term services and supports trust program and, after hearing an overview from DSHS and OSA, adopted the recommended WA Cares premium rate of 0.58% by a unanimous 6-0 vote. OSA said the WA Cares program is still in its learning phase, with no benefits yet paid, and recommended no premium change at this time regardless of the outcome of the related ballot measure. The council also elected Katie Chapman as chair and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Also, Sales tax now includes amounts accrued to the general fund from the tax relief fund.
• So now let's talk about net collections, general fund revenues, and general fund accruals.
• We look at the amount distributed into the general fund and the amount accrued to the general fund.
• That's the general fund distribution.
• accrual to the general fund via sales tax.

Summary: The committee was convened to review Idaho’s economic outlook and general fund revenue projections for fiscal years 2025-2028, with members instructed to submit “homework” revenue estimates by noon the next day so staff could compile committee averages and medians for deliberations and a final recommendation to JFAC. Opening remarks emphasized the committee’s constitutional charge, the use of the binder materials and online packet, and that the committee would meet again the next day to discuss and vote on the revenue projection recommendation. Staff and agency presentations focused on the state’s budget and revenue picture. Legislative Services Office staff described structural imbalance concerns, noting that statutory spending changes and earmarked sales tax distributions have crowded out flexibility, while cash reserves remain substantial. The Division of Financial Management’s economist explained the official revenue forecast, including revised treatment of sales tax and tax relief fund accruals, and said the forecast largely held steady overall even as corporate and individual income tax categories shifted. She also discussed the impact of the federal One Big Beautiful Bill Act on SALT deductions and said recent corporate collections had rebounded sharply, suggesting timing and behavior changes rather than a broad economic downturn. Outside economists and labor experts painted a generally stable to positive economic picture. Zions Bank’s economist said the Federal Reserve is likely near the end of major rate cuts, long-term rates and mortgage rates remain elevated, tariffs have risen sharply, but inflation has not yet shown broad tariff-driven acceleration; he described the national labor market as slowing but not contracting and said 2026 could be a rebuilding year. The Idaho Department of Labor reported that Idaho’s unemployment remains historically low, job growth is steady, wage growth is moderating from overheated pandemic-era levels, and the state’s labor market remains healthier and more balanced than the national picture. The committee also heard from Idaho Power’s economist, who began a presentation on broader economic conditions and utility-related demand trends before the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• of these new General Fund costs.
• new general fund costs.
• And that's because most of that cost falls on the general fund.
• general fund, some of the cost growth has been borne by other fund sources.
• funding that applies generally to SNAP.

Committee: Senate Budget and Fiscal Review

Transcript Highlights:

• Fund to the State Court Facilities Construction Fund, thereby reducing the General Fund backfill needed
• Fund to the State Court Facilities Construction Fund, thereby reducing the General Fund backfill needed
• to the General Fund.
• So the COVID funding is in its own program. It's not part of our general fund.
• So the COVID funding is in its own program. It's not part of our general fund.

Summary: The subcommittee heard May Revision presentations for the Office of Emergency Services, Judicial Branch, CDCR, and the Department of Justice, with the LAO offering comments and recommendations throughout. For Cal OES, the administration outlined funding for relocating the Red Mountain communications site, increased FEMA reimbursement authority, cybersecurity grants, next-generation 911 support, and a reduction to the Flexible Cash Assistance for Survivors of Crime program. Members raised concerns about VOCA backfill and disaster reimbursement, while the LAO recommended approving the 911 request with reporting, adding contingency planning for cybersecurity grants, clarifying the FEMA reimbursement language, and increasing reporting on emergency spending. For the Judicial Branch, the May Revision included funding for implementation of the Trial Nations Access to Justice Act, reductions tied to court facilities and employee benefits, and General Fund solutions such as a reduction to the pretrial release program, a reversion from the Trial Court Trust Fund, and elimination of the jury duty pilot program. The LAO cautioned that the pretrial reduction could affect detention and release decisions and recommended tighter legislative oversight over the trust fund transfer and reallocation language. Members questioned the impact of the pretrial cut, the lack of Prop. 36 court funding, and the rationale for the jury pilot elimination; the Judicial Branch said it was generally supportive of the budget as proposed. CDCR presented requests for roof repairs, fire alarm replacements, CalAIM-related costs, and trailer bill changes on incarcerated college students, mental health hiring, and tuberculosis testing, along with a planned prison closure by October 2026. The department also proposed reducing or delaying several items, including radio replacement, ADA improvements, COVID mitigation, and some facility upgrades, while adding a $125 million placeholder for consultant-driven operational savings. The LAO recommended rejecting or reducing several San Quentin-related proposals, questioned the staffing and contract medical requests, and urged more transparency on the consultant savings plan; members expressed concern about the realism of the savings targets and the potential legal or operational risks from delaying ADA and radio projects. For DOJ, the May Revision proposed ongoing funding and 44 positions to defend against federal actions, IT and accounting system upgrades, implementation funding for AB 1877, and a special fund loan. The LAO supported the KLETS connection but asked for a contingency plan if the new DMV link is delayed, noted that AB 1877 would not be fully implemented without additional funding, and recommended limiting and reporting on the federal accountability workload. Members questioned the size and permanence of the DOJ request, the use of the earlier $25 million special session appropriation, and the pace of federal litigation; DOJ said the new request would support ongoing litigation, expert assistance, and coordination across multiple cases and states.