Transcript Highlights:

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

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair, Representative, that every transportation district needs extra funding for projects, and maintenance
• So I think we need to supplement the funding for the Department of Transportation.
• the fund.
• , 15% of the Transportation Project Fund, And, much needed, I know, 15% of the Transportation Project
• I appreciate that because I need to make sure my school districts are using that funding too.

Summary: The committee first received a detailed New Mexico DOT District 5 presentation from Rhonda Lopez. She reviewed District 5’s budget, staffing vacancies, completed and ongoing special appropriations from 2020 through 2025, active construction projects, maintenance work, STIP and local government funding, and equipment needs. Members asked about a guardrail issue near U.S. 64, the status of the 5% local match for Transportation Project Fund projects, and the New Mexico 371/Navajo Route 36 intersection; DOT said the match agreements were in place or waived where eligible, and that the Navajo Nation funding agreement was nearly finalized. The chair then moved the agenda to bills before finishing the remaining presentations later. House Bill 270, dealing with contributions to apprenticeship and training programs on public works projects, was presented by Rep. Borrego as a follow-up to the 2024 workforce development and apprenticeship trust fund law. The bill would remove an exclusion for street, highway, bridge, road, utility, and maintenance contracts and require contributions unless a trade classification has no approved apprenticeship program. Associated Contractors and the Asphalt Pavement Association opposed the bill, arguing it would raise road project costs and duplicate existing training programs. Members raised concerns about notice, added costs, and whether contractors with existing programs would be paying twice. A motion to table failed on a tie vote, and a later motion to pass also failed on a tie vote, leaving the bill in committee and available for reconsideration. Ranking Member Brown then presented House Bill 322, which would create a transportation trust fund and transportation program fund, with a planned distribution beginning in 2029, including a 5% use for federal matching funds. The bill would also dedicate a portion of the gross receipts tax on electricity and redirect part of the motor vehicle excise tax to grow the fund. Associated Contractors and the Asphalt Pavement Association supported the concept, saying it would help sustain DOT and address the state’s road maintenance gap. Members questioned the electricity tax component, its effect on ratepayers and data centers, the interaction with SB 2 and bond financing, and how projects would be prioritized. A motion to pass failed on a tie vote, and the ranking member suggested the bill could be reconsidered with an amendment removing the electricity portion. The committee then heard a District 4 DOT presentation from assistant district engineer Cruz Sudoste, covering the district’s geography, budget, staffing, completed and active projects, STIP and local government programs, and equipment replacement needs. Members asked about school district uses of transportation project funds and the impact of aging equipment on repair costs. The presentation concluded without any vote or other action on the district report.

Transcript Highlights:

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

Transcript Highlights:

• We will also discuss Title IX, basic needs funding, as we have seen students have needs that go beyond
• The proposed budget pushes deferrals from 2025-26 to future years, but those funds are needed to support
• Go on to our final issue: basic needs funding. So no action on this item.
• Go on to our final issue: basic needs funding.
• So there's a breakdown on the basic needs, rapid rehousing, and mental health funds.

Transcript Highlights:

• We can't take these funds out of the fire operations money, so there needs to be General Fund monies
• And so those funds are needed specifically for that work that we do.
• We need that funding to enforce the Idaho Forest Practices Act.
• And I have no doubt that there are needs here, that there are things that we need to fund, but there
• And I have no doubt that there are needs here, that there are things that we need to fund, but there

Summary: The committee first considered the Department of Environmental Quality budget. Janet Jessup outlined enhancements for Triumph Mine monitoring and maintenance, a transfer for the Cordilleran Basin Superfund cleanup, and a fund shift to move two positions from federal support to the IPDES Program Fund. Members also discussed language to consolidate air permitting and drinking water permitting fee funds, and a separate cash transfer related to the new solid waste regulatory fund created by House Bill 555. The budget motion and the related language both passed, and the committee issued do-pass recommendations. The committee then took up the Department of Lands budget, focusing on Forest and Range Fire Protection funding. Members debated a one-time General Fund restoration for fire preparedness in FY 2026 and a similar request for FY 2027, with concerns raised about prior reversions and whether dedicated funds could be used instead. Director Dustin Miller explained that the other funds cited were restricted to forest practices enforcement and equipment replacement, and that the preparedness money supports standby crews, including seasonal firefighters in eastern Idaho and other regions. The FY 2026 request passed, the initial FY 2027 request failed, reconsideration was later allowed under parliamentary ruling, and the FY 2027 request then passed. The committee also adopted language limiting General Fund firefighter bonus appropriations to firefighters, after some discussion about whether the wording was too narrow. Next, the committee considered Educational Services for the Deaf and the Blind. The agency’s request included career ladder adjustments, a van for student transport, staffing for a new 18-bed residential building in Gooding, replacement items, and an endowment fund adjustment. A substitute motion to add the cottage staff funding failed, but the original motion passed, providing funding for the career ladder, replacement items, and the endowment adjustment, with a do-pass recommendation. Finally, the State Department of Education budget was reviewed. The agency requested additional spending authority for school bus camera grants, an extended USDA farm-to-school grant, and ongoing technology grants for the child nutrition program. A substitute motion to increase the farm-to-school authority to cover the anticipated extension failed, but the original motion passed, approving the school bus camera fund increase, the farm-to-school grant authority, and the child nutrition technology funding, with a do-pass recommendation. The committee then announced the next day’s agenda and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• If we don't have the funding, we need to cut that right there, and we would not have visibility into
• Okay, so I think we need to look at something we need to consider as far as more funding for that.
• And so after that year, they need to either reapply for additional funding if we've received funding,
• or they need to find some other source of funding so they can continue to provide services to their
• I think, to put it bluntly, has never been funded to be the type of agency that the state needs it to

Committee: House House Appropriations & Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• that need funding the most. must continue to work together to make funding applications streamlined,
• funding reaches the communities that need it most and used as effectively as possible.
• We need that bipartisan infrastructure funding to get rid of the backlog and then we need to do a better
• We need to have the funding to address those issues and to address the issues going forward.
• We need to get that funded. moving in Nebraska we need to get an apprenticeship program and start that

Committee: Senate Environment and Public Works Committee

Keywords: Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, water infrastructure, lead service lines, federal reauthorization, sustainability, cybersecurity

Summary: The meeting primarily focused on discussions surrounding the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) and its implications for local water systems. Various witnesses highlighted the transformative impact of the bipartisan infrastructure law, which has provided an unprecedented amount of funding to help address long-standing issues in drinking water infrastructure, particularly concerning lead service line replacements and sustainability in water management. The discussions emphasized the urgent need for federal reauthorization to continue supporting these initiatives, as many rural and disadvantaged communities still face substantial barriers in upgrading their water systems. Additionally, cybersecurity risks were noted, raising concerns over the vulnerability of water systems across the nation.

Transcript Highlights:

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

Committee: House Appropriations - S/C on Article II

Transcript Highlights:

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

Committee: House Housing and Community Development

Transcript Highlights:

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

Transcript Highlights:

• However, they need more than that; they need a skilled person to be able to do the job.
• That had some other funding.
• I was just talking earlier about how we need funding to incentivize regional collaborations across segments
• We need to take a vote, so we need a motion.
• oppose the combination of any of those funds into one singular funding source.

Transcript Highlights:

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

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

Transcript Highlights:

• Needs.
• needs.
• we need to operate If not fully funded, New Mexico risks losing or degrading critical services and operations
• If we don't get the funding we need, and frankly, Our funding, our budget, and our requests are a drop
• But are you going above what your agency needs for funding in your rates and capacity or you're just

Committees: Senate Senate Finance , Senate House Appropriations & Finance

Transcript Highlights:

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

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

Transcript Highlights:

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

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

Transcript Highlights:

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

Committee: Senate Budget and Fiscal Review

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

Transcript Highlights:

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

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

Transcript Highlights:

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

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

Transcript Highlights:

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

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

Transcript Highlights:

• and through their ARPA funds.
• It's phase two state funds.
• It's phase two state funds.
• They don't need any additional funds; it's just considered a change in scope.
• funds that we set aside.

Summary: The Water Sector Commission met with a quorum and first approved the minutes from the prior meeting. Chairmen reminded members that no funding had yet been appropriated for future Water Sector awards, so any discussion of upcoming projects remained speculative until the legislature acts. The committee then moved through a series of deadline extension requests for phase two state-funded projects, including Delcambre, Faraday, Meyer Branch Water Corporation, and Waterworks District No. 1 of Pointe Coupee Parish. Each extension was approved after brief discussion, including testimony explaining local match timing, consolidation agreements, and project delays. The committee next considered several phase one ARPA-funded requests. St. Tammany Parish Project 845 received approval for a scope change to relocate an unmarked fiber optic line discovered during construction. Tallulah’s mayor gave an extended update on the city’s water rehabilitation project, explaining that the original project had been bid twice, that the state had already completed some emergency work, and that the city wanted to isolate the purchase of four permanent media filters and related electrical work from the original rehab plan. Members questioned whether the request was a scope change or a partial implementation of the original project, but ultimately approved it. The committee also approved additional funding for the City of Kaplan’s sewer project and for Ponchatoula’s sewer project, with Ponchatoula explaining that the increase covered emergency levee repair, miscellaneous equipment and safety items, and a force main reroute around unmarked fiber and other obstacles. St. Martin Parish Water Project 1001 was approved for additional funding after engineers explained that the final well site and related work cost more than originally estimated, though the project remained within the original consolidation plan. West Allen Water Works also received approval for additional funding after its new groundwater well encountered unexpected geologic problems; the contractor and engineers agreed to reduce their fees to preserve the project’s match structure, and members asked that the in-kind match be clearly documented for JLCB. By contrast, Tensaw Water Distribution Association’s large request for additional funding to complete a consolidation with Newelton drew significant concern over cost growth and timing. After discussion of the project’s scope, the need to serve Newelton, and the possibility of future reapplication or further value engineering, the committee voted to defer the Tensaw item to the next meeting for more review. At the end of the meeting, staff reported that 42.11% of ARPA funds remained and reviewed a list of high-risk projects, noting that the committee was trying to ensure ARPA dollars are drawn first and reconciled properly before deadlines. Members discussed the need to ground-truth self-reported project status and potentially adjust procedures to better track construction progress and final draws. The meeting concluded with no subfund or termination items and adjourned after a motion by Senator Bass.