Transcript Highlights:

• was not there to fund 80 additional warrants.
• The funding was not available to fund... We'll repeat that.
• The funding was not available to fund 80 additional warrants.
• Well, if we couldn't fund 80, we certainly can't fund 173.
• So we came up with the funding to fund the 60. Does it solve everything? No, it doesn't.

Bills: HR310, HR314, HR316, HR317, HR321, HR275, HR276, HR279, HR282, HR286, HR289, HR292, HR295, HR302, HR319, HCR112, HR307, SCR59, SCR61, SCR62, SCR68, SCR69, SCR70, SCR54, SCR55, SCR64, SCR75, HCR79, HCR104, HB75, HB410, HB719, HB750, HB944, HB1098, HB1220, HB1252, HB359, HB210, HB468, HB1117, SB382, HB368, HB552, HB732, HB870, HB1236, SB29, SB42, SB43, SB149, SB208, SB274, SB300, SB312, SB387, SB389, SB401, HR74, HB998, HB901, HR20, HCR65, HCR71, HCR98, HB284, HB306, HB341, HB366, HB393, HB458, HB577, HB603, HB605, HB614, HB625, HB646, HB733, HB752, HB773, HB798, HB911, HB955, HB996, HB1035, HB1069, HB1113, HB1140, HB1180, HB1191, HB1240, HB1255, SB82, SB89, SB97, SB123, SB237, HB36, HB42, HB74, HB119, HB159, HB258, HB259, HB302, HB414, HB459, HB848, HB956, HB1017, HB1028, HB1095, SB217, SB283, SB469

Keywords: oil and gas, orphan wells, inactive wells, shut-in wells, marginal wells, plugging and abandonment, well decommissioning, site remediation, site restoration, Oilfield Site Restoration, OSR program, financial security, bonding, taxpayer liability, public liability, offshore wells, onshore wells, coastal erosion, Department of Conservation and Energy, natural resources

Transcript Highlights:

• However, the board decided not to allocate any funds based on this new model.
• They will still use the current model to allocate 2026-27 funding.
• Funds will be allocated again on the current model. But this will allow...
• Funds will be allocated again on the current model.
• So finally, in June of 2027, the goal is that the new model will be used to allocate 2027-28 funding.

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Higher Education met to hear two presentations focused on the state university system: an update from the Board of Governors on performance-based funding and a state university efficiency study from Ben Watkins of the Division of Bond Finance. Chair Harrell emphasized accountability, maintaining Florida’s top-ranked higher education system, and getting the best return on state investment. A quorum was present, with several senators excused and one arriving later in the meeting. Sarah Donaghi outlined changes to the performance-based funding model. She said the current model will be used for 2026-27 funding, with only minor benchmark changes for metrics tied to programs of strategic emphasis, reflecting a statutory review that reduced the list of designated programs from about 800 to about 200. She also described a new “PBF 2.0” framework approved by the Board of Governors for implementation in 2027-28 funding, which will combine excellence and improvement measures, update benchmarks to the SUS 2030 strategic plan, reduce “layups” where many schools score perfect tens, expand the affordability metric to include students without loans, remove SUS transfer students from certain graduation metrics, and create a new transfer-student outcome metric. The board will run the new model alongside the current one before using it for funding, and no funding changes will occur this year. Watkins presented findings from an eight-month efficiency study ordered by executive order. Using audited financial data, student outcome data, and personnel data, he concluded that Florida’s universities provide strong value because of low tuition, rising degree production, and improved job placement and earnings outcomes. He said tuition remains the lowest in the country and that state support has increased, while per-student spending has also risen, driven largely by payroll costs. He argued that universities should operate more like business enterprises, with more granular budgeting, clearer financial reporting, and efficiency metrics such as operating expense per student and cost per degree, and he recommended that such measures be incorporated into performance funding and board oversight. Committee members asked about national comparisons, data transparency, payroll growth, admissions selectivity, and whether legislation should require more detailed institutional reporting. The meeting ended with no public comment and adjournment after Senator Bracey Davis moved to adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• is reevaluating, for CP and looking at alternatives to allocating costs.
• Can we fund a new wastewater treatment plant?
• Not even 5% of our allocation. Mr.
• And that's Texas Energy Fund plants that have been helped by that.
• And there are Texas energy fund plants coming online this summer.

Transcript Highlights:

• But we fund Broward Behavior, help the different coalitions where we have a funding entity, and then
• advances, as well as the discretionary funding through the base student allocation increase, as well
• Funded at $10 million, spent $24 million on safety. We were funded at $5 million for mental health.
• So we're funding three hours a day.
• Funded at $10 million, spent $24 million on safety. We were funded at $5 million for mental health.

Summary: The Senate Appropriations Committee on Pre-K-12 Education met to hear the governor’s fiscal year 2026-27 budget recommendations for education from the Office of Policy and Budget and the Department of Education. Shelby Salmons and Commissioner Stasi Kamoutsis outlined the governor’s proposed $117.4 billion state budget, including about $32.5 billion for education, with major emphasis on public schools and early learning. The presentation highlighted a $30.6 billion K-12 budget, a $486 million VPK program, continued funding for VPK Summer Bridge, TEACH, HIPPY, and Help Me Grow, as well as increases for teacher pay, base student allocation, mental health, school safety, civics education, and school hardening initiatives. The commissioner also cited a 92.2% statewide graduation rate and Florida’s national rankings in education and education freedom. Senators used the question period to raise concerns about counselor staffing, mental health services, school closures, school choice oversight, the Guardian Program, data reporting, and school capacity. Senator Jones asked about counselor ratios, school closures in historically Black communities, and whether school choice schools are properly monitored for safety and instructional quality. Senator Osgood argued that mental health funding should support more clinical services on campuses, not just academic counselors, and Senator Bradley asked whether the centralized data repository includes scholarship students. Senator Gates praised the civics and debate funding and asked for more detail on the Guardian Program’s performance; the commissioner said 53 of 67 districts participate and described it as a successful safety option with sheriffs approving training. Senators Simon and Osgood also pressed for better use of the FISH report and more accurate space data to understand school capacity and right-sizing. During public testimony, Pinellas County School Board member Laura Hine said her district is an A-rated district with no D or F schools, but spends far more on safety and mental health than it receives in state categorical funding. She said Florida’s mental health staffing ratio is about one counselor per 2,203 students, compared with a recommended one per 1,106, and urged the committee to consider funding full-day VPK statewide, estimating it would cost about $375 million. Committee members followed up on her comments about local flexibility and whether districts can shift funds to meet needs. The meeting ended after members thanked DOE and executive branch staff for the presentation, and the committee adjourned without taking any substantive vote on legislation.

Transcript Highlights:

• funding? funding?
• these funds? these funds?
• So, 59% of the funds that are allocated to Kentucky are sub-allocated to substate areas, which are based
• These sub-allocated funds cannot be transferred.
• So, let's look at these allocations. allocations. allocations.

Keywords: 00:05 Call to Order and Roll Call 01:55 Bridge Improvement Program 18:56 County Priority Projects Program 38:10 Transportation Alternative Program 51:47 Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The committee met for the first interim meeting of the 2025 Budget Review Committee on Transportation and heard from Bobby Jo Lewis, commissioner of Rural and Municipal Aid at the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet. She reviewed the new County City Bridge Improvement Program, created in the 2024 regular session, reporting that phases one and two are complete, 45 bridges have been funded so far, and about $18.45 million has been authorized. She said roughly $6.549 million remains for phase three in the current fiscal year, with about $26.445 million in bridge applications still pending. For fiscal year 2026, the program will again have $25 million and will use four application phases. She also described a training resource, Local Bridges 101, and said a new executive advisor, Greg Meredith, has been brought in to help with the bridge program. Members asked how rollover applications would be handled, whether they would be re-evaluated with new applications, how the program would account for bridge longevity and load posting, and how isolated communities would be prioritized. Lewis said applicants not funded in FY25 would be contacted and could choose to roll their applications into FY26, and all applications would be evaluated together at the end of each phase. She said preservation projects are assessed for how much they extend a bridge’s life, and isolated community access bridges or closed bridges with no detour access receive priority. She also said the department aims for equitable distribution across regions and plans to produce a map showing where funds have been awarded. Lewis then turned to the County Priority Projects Program and the Local Assistance Road Program established in House Bill 546 and related resolutions. She said the application cycle opened June 1 and closes October 1, with 106 memoranda of agreement being prepared for awards in House Joint Resolution 46. She described updated application and reporting forms, a scoring matrix, and a County City Pavement Evaluation Manual used to rate projects based on preservation of assets, average daily traffic, recent improvements, safety, cost, and district priority. She said projects must be rehabilitation projects designed to restore the original condition of the road, cannot exceed $500,000, and must use local match percentages tied to the economic development grant program formula. She also reported on funding status for prior road projects, including completed, partially completed, pending, and underrun amounts that may be reauthorized. Committee members asked about photo documentation, online access to project materials, how to measure whether projects truly restore roads to original condition, and what happens when project costs exceed estimates. Lewis said the department is still working on how best to store and share the large volume of photos, and that projects are certified through district offices and local sign-off after completion. She said overages are the responsibility of the applicant because the state does not have additional money beyond the awarded amount. No formal votes were taken during the discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• funding.
• We, Our homeowner rehab program is funded by federal home funds, and $5 million is New Mexico's allocation
• Assistance funds and a state allocation that is specifically for Española Pathways Shelter.
• The RHP funds are currently allocated to four service provider agencies that are serving the Albuquerque
• four that has the funding sources and the total funding, total annual funding.

Transcript Highlights:

• The 2023-24 FEFP also changed two components of the base student funding allocation.
• Base funding.
• Since the factor was not present in previous years, it has a direct funding effect on the add-on funding
• s FEFP funds, most do not have a way to track how each charter school uses those funds.
• s FEFP funds, most do not have a way to track how each charter school uses those funds, nor do they have

Summary: The Pre-K through 12 Budget Subcommittee met for its first meeting of the 2025 session and received an overview of add-on weights in the Florida Education Finance Program (FEFP), followed by a Department of Education presentation on a legislatively required study of add-on weight funding and expenditures. The chair explained that add-on weights apply to acceleration and career programs such as AP, IB, ACE, CAPE, dual enrollment, early graduation, and certain small-district needs, and noted that add-on funding has grown substantially as the base student allocation increased. The chair also raised concerns that the department’s report did not clearly show whether districts’ reported costs included the full costs required by the proviso, and asked for more specificity on any recommended adjustment to the weights. Deputy Commissioner Suzanne Pridgen said the department surveyed districts on how they spent add-on revenue for fiscal years 2021-22 through 2023-24, with categories including teacher compensation, materials, equipment, professional development, exam fees, counseling, apprenticeship costs, and other expenditures. She said most add-on funds were spent on teacher bonuses and compensation, with AP, ACE, CAPE, and dual enrollment showing the largest increases in spending in 2023-24 due to higher FEFP funding; IB and early graduation were relatively flat. The department reported that add-on revenue covered between 41.8% and 79.2% of total program expenditures in 2023-24 and recommended adjusting add-on weights to better align with pre-2023-24 funding relationships, though no specific percentage was given during the meeting. Members asked about how “other” expenditures were categorized, whether teacher compensation included only statutory bonuses, how dual enrollment tuition and fees were counted, the small district factor, and whether the weights incentivize districts to offer advanced programs. The department clarified that teacher compensation in the study referred only to bonuses, that some “other” costs included charter school payments and dual enrollment tuition/fees, and that the small district factor is 1.0277, increasing base funding by 2.77% for fiscally constrained counties. No votes were taken, and the meeting adjourned after the presentation and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is meant to ensure that any funds that remain after being allocated to Tier 1 LEAs can provide additional
• This funding will be allocated to county offices in the budget year under a revised methodology compared
• That includes a $500,000 base grant, with additional funding being allocated on the basis of each county
• This allocation of funds aligns with updates to local educational agency assistance and intervention
• Obviously, the lower campuses... ...allocate funding to those campuses.

Summary: The committee heard testimony on three education budget items: the Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELOP), differentiated assistance/statewide system of support, and universal school meals plus kitchen infrastructure grants. For ELOP, the Department of Finance described the Governor’s proposal to provide $4.7 billion ongoing Proposition 98 funding and $62.4 million to set a minimum Tier 2 rate of $1,800 per pupil. The LAO recommended instead fixing the Tier 2 rate at $1,579, and committee members questioned how the rate was determined, how much funding is actually spent, and whether overlapping funding from ELOP, ACEs, and 21st Century programs is being tracked. CDE said ELOP is showing positive attendance and math outcomes, but some requested data will not be available until mid-2027; members also raised concerns about double-funding, transparency, and whether middle and high school students are being equitably served. On differentiated assistance, CCEE outlined the statewide system of support and the various tiers of universal, targeted, supplemental, and intensive assistance. Finance explained the Governor’s proposal to replace the current DA structure with a more stable universal and targeted assistance model, funded at $131.9 million ongoing, with a three-year support cycle aligned to LCAP and ESSA timelines and broader State Board authority to revise eligibility criteria. The LAO objected to considering the proposal before the State Board finalizes the new performance criteria, and committee members expressed concern that moving to a three-year cycle could delay support for LEAs that newly fall into need mid-cycle. There was also discussion about whether the proposal would weaken subgroup-based equity guardrails or give the State Board too much discretion over who qualifies for support. For school meals and kitchen infrastructure, Finance proposed $1.8 billion ongoing for universal meals and an additional $100 million ongoing plus $100 million one-time for a fourth round of kitchen infrastructure and training grants. The LAO recommended rejecting the new kitchen grant round because prior rounds are still being spent and the unmet need is not yet clear. CDE said prior investments have improved meal participation, efficiency, and menu variety, but many schools still lack the facilities for scratch cooking and face construction, electrical, and procurement barriers. Members asked for more data on how prior grants were used, which schools are benefiting, and whether funds could also support lower-cost food access strategies such as pantries, while noting federal restrictions on some meal-service innovations.

Transcript Highlights:

• The current funding process allows lawmakers to allocate resources based on the evolving needs of Florida's
• So the current funding process allows lawmakers to allocate resources based on the evolving needs of
• with things like performance and some of the other incentive funds that you all have recently allocated
• And with more funding allocated to these strategic opportunities, I'm... In the Florida Panhandle.
• And with more funding allocated to these strategic opportunities, we can provide an even greater impact

Summary: The committee held an informational hearing on higher education funding, focusing on how Florida’s university system should be financed and whether a new funding model is needed. University system financial officers and Chancellor Ray Rodriguez discussed major cost drivers, including wages and benefits, utilities, maintenance, financial aid, research, and the effects of geography, institutional mission, and student mix. UF highlighted the cost of research and graduate programs; UCF and FAU pointed to growth, location, and cost of living; FAMU emphasized recruiting top-tier talent while relying on other revenue sources; and UNF noted the challenges of growth and long-term planning. Members also discussed the role of internal controls and audits in addressing excessive spending and questioned whether out-of-state tuition should be adjusted to help offset costs. On revenue sources beyond state appropriations and tuition, the panel described auxiliaries, restricted funds, capital projects, and component units such as foundations and health systems. Several universities noted that some revenues are restricted to specific purposes and cannot be used for general operations. FAMU explained that a large share of its capital project funding reflected active campus construction, while UF said its component-unit revenue is largely tied to UF Health. The Chancellor emphasized that the system’s low tuition and strong state support are central to Florida’s national standing, but also noted that some auxiliary revenues are pledged to debt and must be managed carefully. When discussing the current funding process, witnesses praised Florida’s performance-based funding model for aligning incentives with student success, transparency, and accountability. They also raised concerns about non-recurring appropriations, rising employee benefit costs, unfunded mandates, deferred maintenance, and the difficulty of multi-year planning. Suggestions for improvement included more recurring funding, better coverage of mandated costs, greater flexibility in fee-setting, and possible weighting for mission, geography, and institutional type. The Chancellor said the Board of Governors is considering a “version 3.0” of performance-based funding that would benchmark institutions against peers and Carnegie classifications, but any changes would require legislative action. On out-of-state tuition, most universities said they would prefer local board flexibility, while the Chancellor cautioned that increasing out-of-state enrollment or fees could affect future state support and should be balanced carefully.

Transcript Highlights:

• How we allocate those costs is going to be extremely important.
• They've got their allocation. And so that's not going to change.
• So the transmission is going to be allocated to them.
• Can we fund a new wastewater treatment plant?
• And we're in the process of finalizing our funding for that.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• is reevaluating, for CP and looking at alternatives to allocating costs.
• So the transmission is going to be allocated to them.
• Can we fund a new wastewater treatment plant?
• Not even 5% of our allocation.
• And there are Texas energy fund plants coming online this summer.

Summary: The Committee on State Affairs convened to discuss data centers and their impact on Texas's energy infrastructure. The meeting featured testimony from key representatives of the Public Utility Commission (PUC) and ERCOT, who outlined the evolving landscape of energy generation and the challenges posed by the rapid growth of data centers. Notably, ERCOT reported over 450,000 MW of generation resources planned for connection, with a significant portion attributed to data centers, which now represent around 87% of new large load interconnection requests. The committee explored proposed changes to the interconnection process, including a new 'batch study' approach aimed at streamlining the approval of multiple projects simultaneously. This change is intended to address the challenges of managing numerous simultaneous requests and to provide more certainty for developers regarding their energy needs. Testimonies emphasized the importance of ensuring that the costs of infrastructure upgrades are borne by the data centers rather than residential ratepayers, with discussions around the financial commitments required from developers. Several data center developers also provided testimony, highlighting the economic benefits of their projects, including job creation and increased local revenues. They expressed concerns about the potential for a moratorium on future growth due to the new interconnection rules and emphasized the need for a collaborative approach to address water usage and environmental impacts. The committee plans to continue discussions on these topics in future hearings, with a focus on balancing economic growth with energy reliability and resource management.

Transcript Highlights:

• With the allocated funds, CDSS will complete the revision of all modules of the training through new
• With the allocated funds, CDS will complete the revision of all modules of the training through new content
• This proposal will allocate $200 million in previously unappropriated community school funding to support
• Yes, based on our projections of spending trends that we're seeing, we believe the funds, the newly allocated
• The first is a request to reappropriate unexpended greenhouse gas reduction fund resources allocated

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Human Services held an informational hearing focused on the impacts of federal HR1 on CalFresh and Medi-Cal, along with related state mitigation efforts. CDSS, DHCS, DDS, county representatives, LAO, and Finance discussed automatic exemptions, data-sharing between departments, county workload, and the timing of implementation. CDSS said about two-thirds of adults ages 18 to 64 are already known to be exempt in CalFresh, and that administrative data matches could newly exempt about 200,000 of the roughly 955,000 adults potentially at risk. DHCS said Medi-Cal work requirements would begin in 2027 and the department is working to automate exemptions, including for IHSS recipients and some caregivers, while DDS said its population is expected to be covered by auto-exemptions. County welfare directors emphasized that individualized worker contact is critical, that counties need more staffing and stable funding, and that without it they expect delays, higher error rates, and reduced exemption screening capacity. Members pressed for written timelines, county-by-county impact data, and clearer guidance; the administration said it would provide follow-up materials and technical assistance. No votes were taken. The committee then heard a separate discussion on a proposed CFAP expansion or “CFAP Plus” concept to provide state-funded benefits to additional populations affected by HR1, including lawfully present non-citizens and ABODs. CDSS said implementation could not occur before October 1, 2027 because of policy and system-design constraints, and that adding unique eligibility rules would increase complexity and cost. Finance cautioned that any expansion would have General Fund impacts likely in the hundreds of millions to multiple billions. Members asked for cost estimates and technical feedback on trailer bill language, and CDSS said it would review the proposal and respond. The hearing also covered CDSS’s CalFresh strategic plan and mandated reporter training updates. CDSS said it is hiring a strategic plan lead to develop a long-term, data-informed CalFresh plan, and that the revised mandated reporter training is on track for launch in fall/winter 2026, ahead of the July 1, 2027 statutory deadline. The training will include updated content on structural racism, ICWA protections, implicit bias, and the distinction between reporting and supporting families. Members praised the work and asked for continued updates. Later panels focused on Promise Neighborhoods, Stop the Hate, and housing programs. Promise Neighborhood advocates and CDSS described the state’s prior $12 million investment, a positive evaluation showing roughly a 4-to-1 return, and a new proposal to support place-based partnerships and community schools through AB 1969. Stop the Hate grantees and CDSS reported that the program has provided direct services, prevention, and statewide coordination to millions of Californians, and urged reauthorization before funding expires; members asked for best-practice language and discussed focusing future funding on solidarity work, harm reduction, legal services, and education. Finally, CDSS presented on the CalWORKs Housing Support Program and Housing and Disability Advocacy Program, saying proposed General Fund investments of $105 million and $55 million would prevent funding cliffs and allow the programs to continue through 2026-27, while the absence of new funding would force reductions in housing assistance, subsidies, and enrollments.

Transcript Highlights:

• funds.
• <00:26:30.400> will<00:26:30.720> be<00:26:30.880> allocated how much TANF funding
• will be allocated how much TANF funding will be allocated to<00:26:31.840> those<00:26:32.559
• general funds. general funds.
• So, that is a proper TANF use for those funds. Could it be funded with general fund money?

Keywords: Public Health and Welfare - Room 216, 21 January, 2026; 3:30 PM, 925, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 3, a certificate-of-need measure that had passed last year but was vetoed by the governor because of one objectionable provision. The chair explained that the House had just passed the bill unanimously and urged quick Senate action so it could be sent to the governor again. He said the bill is intended to restore the prior law, with the main policy focus on rural hospitals and other future certificate-of-need changes. A question was raised about language affecting the University of Mississippi Medical Center’s academic exemption; the chair said the intent was to preserve the teaching hospital’s core exemption around its main campus while requiring certificate-of-need review for facilities it operates elsewhere, and the committee then voted title sufficient, due pass. The committee then considered Senate Bill 2476, requested by the Board of Pharmacy. Senator Hill explained that it would let licensed pharmacists self-report substance abuse or mental health issues and enter treatment before disciplinary action, similar to programs already available for nurses and with comparable provisions for physicians and dentists. Board representatives said participants would have to stop practicing until cleared, and that failure to comply would trigger discipline; the bill was described as an alternative to professional discipline, not immunity from criminal law. After questions about definitions and how many times a person could use the program, the committee voted title sufficient, due pass. The meeting concluded with an informational presentation from Mr. Anderson on child care funding and program operations. He said the state used ARPA funds during the pandemic to support child care certificates and providers, but those funds were exhausted, leading to a pause and a waiting list of about 20,000 families; the program currently serves about 18,000 children. He said the department is continuing $15 million in state support, is converting 30% of the TANF state assistance grant to child care, and is exploring additional TANF direct-assistance options, though cautiously because the state has not done that before. He also discussed child care tax credits, employer-based child care, and efforts to expand capacity through provider support and technical assistance.

Transcript Highlights:

• It provides new funding allocations to allow the Texas Water Fund to distribute money to the flood infrastructure
• fund, Allocations to allow the Texas Water Fund to distribute money to the flood infrastructure fund
• It provides new funding allocations to allow the Texas Water Fund to distribute money to the flood infrastructure
• fund, allocations to allow the Texas Water Fund to distribute money to the flood infrastructure fund
• indeed considered when determining the allocation of funds from HB 16.

Bills: HB16, HB16, HB1618, HB2692, HB2712, HB2970, HB3609, HB3628

Keywords: judicial administration, court reform, juvenile diversion, court security, mental health services, drug offenses, constitutional amendments, water infrastructure, Texas Water Development Board, financial assistance, water supply projects, rural municipalities, water access assessment, aquifer storage, Edwards Aquifer, water injection, environmental regulations, groundwater management, San Antonio River, pollution control

Transcript Highlights:

• The majority of collections are deposited into the state highway fund and the remainder is allocated
• In the ten years since state highway fund started getting these allocations, about $19.1 billion has
• Five new riders relating to specific project and program funding allocations and moving to page 10.
• And the funding that we have allocated with the commission for that has been, and I'll have to double
• I urge you to take immediate action to allocate necessary funding. and reform reimbursement policies

Bills: SB1, SB 1

Keywords: appropriations, budget, state funding, education, healthcare, infrastructure, campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• funding.
• Because of how the auctions work, that funding actually doesn't get allocated until the auction happens
• As previously mentioned, a large portion of the discretionary funding is being allocated to offset General
• We ask that you fund the 211 California budget request for a $20 million one-time General Fund allocation
• We ask that you fund the 211 California budget request for a $20 million one-time General Fund allocation

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The subcommittee heard an overview of the May Revision from the Department of Finance and comments from the Legislative Analyst’s Office on the state’s overall budget condition and natural resources proposals. Finance said the May Revision keeps the budget balanced in 2026-27 and 2027-28, reduces the structural deficit, and includes major natural resources items such as Proposition 4 climate bond spending, including up to $125 million for the Golden Gate Fields acquisition, $23.2 million for wildlife refuge and wetland projects, $25 million for Healthy Rivers and Landscapes, $25 million for Bay-Delta environmental flows, $1 million for coexisting-with-wildlife work, and $2.5 million for cancer-risk research. The LAO said revenues remain strong but argued the budget still relies too heavily on reserves, recommended more savings and fewer new discretionary expenditures, and urged the Legislature to prioritize only urgent health and safety needs while planning for uncertainty in greenhouse gas reduction fund revenues. Members focused heavily on the Golden Gate Fields purchase, Healthy Rivers and Landscapes, the wildlife coexistence initiative, and cap-and-invest funding for transit. On Golden Gate Fields, agency officials said the property is a time-limited, once-in-a-generation opportunity, that the state’s contribution would help secure the acquisition, and that the land would ultimately transfer to East Bay Regional Park District, which would assume operations and maintenance. Officials said the site would be remediated by the current owner, the state would use deed restrictions to prevent commercial development, and the remaining purchase price would be covered by nonstate partners. On Healthy Rivers and Landscapes, Finance and the Natural Resources Agency said the $25 million would support scientific monitoring and early implementation of the Bay-Delta plan update, while the LAO questioned the timing and said the request was premature until the Water Board formally adopts the plan. The committee also discussed the coexisting-with-wildlife proposal and wolf-livestock conflict. Finance said the May Revision’s $1 million proposal would backfill existing funds to support limited-term staffing, deterrence tools, and conflict response, while members and the California Cattlemen’s Association said the need is larger and includes direct loss compensation, indirect loss compensation, and nonlethal deterrence. The Cattlemen’s Association said private insurance is limited and often inadequate for these losses. Members also raised concerns about the greenhouse gas reduction fund and transit, warning that lower auction revenues and possible CARB rule changes could leave major transit and other tier-three priorities underfunded. The LAO recommended planning for multiple revenue scenarios and reconsidering the current cap-and-invest spending framework. No votes or formal actions were taken in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our office also estimates the portion of the general fund budget that's allocated to pensions.
• These allocations vary by system, with the remaining employer funding coming either from non-general
• fund allocations or local government funding.
• , the target asset allocation of the CTF, the commingled trust fund, and simulated CTF returns that are
• fund.

Summary: The Pension Funding Council met on October 8 with introductions from council members and staff, then received a detailed 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 are currently 100% funded on a smoothed basis, with open plans above 95% funded, and that legacy Plan 1 systems remain on a path toward full funding under current policy. The actuaries recommended updating assumptions to 3% inflation, 3.5% general salary growth, and a 7.25% investment return, while keeping Plan 1 membership growth at 1%. They also explained asset smoothing, the role of recent strong investment returns, and the expected budget impacts of the recommended changes. Representatives from the Economic and Revenue Forecast Council and the State Investment Board offered supporting perspectives, generally describing the assumptions as reasonable and consistent with their own outlooks. The council also heard an overview of the Long-Term Services and Supports Trust Program (WACares) from DSHS and OSA. Program staff described the program’s social insurance structure, premium collection, benefit eligibility, and upcoming implementation milestones. OSA reported that the program’s first actuarial valuation showed a positive actuarial balance under the base scenario and recommended no change to the current 0.58% premium rate during the program’s early learning phase, noting that future changes would depend on experience and the program’s risk-management framework. OSA also said the recommendation would remain the same regardless of the outcome of the pending ballot measure affecting investment options. During public comment, a representative of the Washington State School Retirees Association urged continued work on Plan 1 funding and related legislation, while the Association of Washington Cities cautioned against increasing pension assumptions in a way that could raise future employer costs and reduce flexibility for current local government services. In action, the council adopted a motion to maintain the current long-term economic assumptions by a 4-2 vote, adopted the recommendation to keep the WACares premium rate at 0.58% by a 6-0 vote, and then elected Katie Chapman as council chair by unanimous vote. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, we can fund a fund that also engages in venture... a fund that also engages in venture capital.
• Available funds?
• Those funds either were used as matching funds for MRG.
• We're just simply trying to provide some different examples of how you could allocate this funding, and
• They would like to have the funding allocated by September.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• funded, state funded, locally funded, or private resources.
• The current funding process allows lawmakers to allocate resources based on the evolving needs of Florida's
• with things like performance and some of the other incentive funds that you all have recently allocated
• And with more funding allocated to these strategic opportunities, we can provide an even greater impact
• And with more funding allocated to these strategic opportunities, we can provide an even greater impact

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Higher Education met to examine how Florida’s state universities are funded and to begin discussing a possible university funding model. The panel included the State University System chancellor and CFOs from FSU, UF, FAMU, FAU, UNF, and UCF. Members first reviewed major cost drivers, which the universities said are broadly similar across institutions: wages and benefits, equipment and supplies, financial aid, professional services, utilities, IT, and maintenance. Several institutions noted unique pressures from geography, growth, research intensity, and mission, such as UCF’s size and engineering focus, UF’s land-grant and research enterprise, FAMU’s need to recruit top talent while serving a high-Pell student population, and FSU’s large facilities and research obligations. The chancellor also summarized systemwide cost growth since 2012-13, including higher health insurance, retirement, and salary costs, while noting tuition had been held flat. The committee then discussed other revenue sources, including auxiliaries, restricted funds, capital projects, and component units such as foundations and health systems. University leaders explained that many of these funds are restricted to specific purposes, and some, like UF Health, account for a large share of operating expenses. Members also discussed the current performance-based funding process. University representatives generally praised it for transparency, accountability, and its focus on student success, but said the heavy use of one-time funds, nonrecurring appropriations, and unfunded mandates makes long-term planning difficult. FSU and others argued that rising employee costs, waivers, and facilities expenses are not fully covered, while FAMU said performance funding has improved outcomes but can disadvantage institutions serving more low-income students. In response to questions about improvements, the universities suggested more recurring and predictable funding, better coverage of mandated costs, more flexibility in fees, and continued investment in research and strategic priorities. The chancellor said the Board of Governors is considering a version 3.0 of performance funding that would benchmark institutions against peers and Carnegie classifications. The committee also explored whether universities should have more flexibility to set out-of-state tuition and professional school tuition. Most university leaders favored giving boards of trustees more authority, while the chancellor cautioned that increasing out-of-state enrollment or tuition too much could affect legislative support. No votes were taken; the meeting ended with the chair thanking the panel and adjourning the committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:25:39.039> these<00:25:39.279> funds relevant way to allocate these funds relevant
• way to allocate these funds across<00:25:39.840> our<00:25:40.080> institutions<00:25:
• /c><00:51:11.119> which development fund or the EDF fund which development fund or the EDF fund
• day fund. day fund.
• ,<01:17:12.239> the from funds other than state funds, the from funds other than state funds

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Attendance Roll Call 00:00:11 Approval of Minutes 00:02:00 Information Items 00:02:25 CPE Special Report 00:03:26 Review of Executive Branch Agency Plans 00:31:48 A. Attorney General 00:32:10 B. Court of Justice 00:36:41 C. Cabinet for Economic Development 00:50:44 D. Kentucky Public Pensions Authority 00:56:06 E. Board Discussion of Planning Issues 01:05:12, 958, all

Summary: The Capital Planning Advisory Board opened its fourth meeting, confirmed a quorum, approved the prior meeting’s minutes by unanimous voice vote, and then heard information items and agency presentations. The main substantive presentation came from the Council on Postsecondary Education, which outlined its capital planning recommendations for the 2026–28 biennium. CPE staff described the role of Kentucky’s research and education network (Kron), including connectivity to cloud services, Internet2, identity services, and new local AI/inferencing capacity, and argued that the network is now essential to higher education, health care, and extension services. They said the network’s recent upgrades were driven by privacy, security, redundancy, and the need to support modern research and AI workloads at lower cost than commercial providers. CPE also presented its broader higher-education capital request: $700 million for asset preservation and $1.73 billion for new construction, for a total recommendation of about $2.4 billion. Staff said they do not plan to recommend IT projects or equipment in this cycle, despite reviewing 48 IT submissions totaling nearly $1.4 billion and equipment requests totaling $322.6 million. For asset preservation, they said the recommended allocation method would remain based on each institution’s share of Category 1 and 2 square footage, and they noted that the state’s prior facility assessment is now 12 years old, with deferred maintenance still estimated in the $7–9 billion range. For new construction, they said the requests are heavily focused on STEM and health-related facilities that are difficult to retrofit into older buildings. Board members asked about how asset-preservation amounts were determined, including why Northern Kentucky University’s request was much larger than its prior allocation. CPE staff responded that campus size, building age, and institutional prioritization affect the requests, and that schools are asked to submit more projects than are likely to be funded. The board then moved on to an Attorney General capital plan overview, where senior counsel Will Schroeder began describing the office’s technology needs and the office’s prior reliance on a 2020 appropriation to replace legacy systems and improve security.