Transcript Highlights:

• Training Fund.
• Training Fund.
• Fund, which did get the lion's share of the public safety funding in this bill.
• It has clean water funds. It has outdoor heritage funds.
• </c> uh fund. It has outdoor heritage fund. uh fund. It has outdoor heritage fund.

Transcript Highlights:

• And what this does is it shifts funding from our under-enrolled campuses and shifts that funding to those
• So 85% of the CSU's operating budget, or operating fund, is a combination of state General Fund and tuition
• It's our understanding that the Library opted to reduce funding for programs that have other fund sources
• The Law Library has historically been funded through a mix of General Fund support and special fund support
• fixing this technical detail would allow some funding to continue flowing to fund the State Library

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance met to review CSU and State Library budget issues, enrollment trends, the Capital Fellows program, and a Title IX update. Chair David Alvarez opened by stressing that CSU faces serious financial pressure, including a systemwide deficit and proposed cuts that he and several members said were too large and likely to harm access, course offerings, and student services. Public comment focused heavily on the Braille Institute Library, with patrons, staff, veterans, and advocates urging restoration of funding and warning that the proposed cut would severely affect blind and visually impaired Californians across Southern California. Several CSU faculty, staff, and union representatives also opposed the proposed reductions and warned of larger class sizes, fewer sections, and layoffs. On the CSU core operations item, the Department of Finance explained the Governor’s proposal to reduce ongoing General Fund support by about $375 million and defer a 5% base increase, while the LAO said CSU core funding would be roughly flat once tuition and targeted augmentations were considered, but warned that rising costs and prior shortfalls would still force campuses to cut spending. CSU’s Chancellor’s Office said the proposed cut would deepen existing problems, citing prior-year budget gaps, job losses, reduced course sections, and student-service reductions. Members pressed Finance and the LAO on whether cuts could be made more surgically, especially at the Chancellor’s Office or in institutional support rather than in instruction, and the LAO said the Legislature has flexibility to target cuts more specifically. CSU also described ongoing consolidation efforts, including shared services among campuses and the planned Cal Maritime/Cal Poly San Luis Obispo integration, while cautioning that savings are not yet fully known. The committee then discussed CSU enrollment. The LAO recommended holding enrollment targets flat because the budget does not add new funding, while CSU reported strong recent growth, including more California residents, record first-year enrollment, and expanded direct admissions and transfer pathways. Members questioned why some campuses with high demand turn away many applicants while others continue to lose enrollment, and CSU said it is shifting resources from campuses with sustained declines to those with demand, using a 10% below-target threshold. The committee also discussed whether enrollment declines mirror local population trends, how to improve marketing and program alignment, and whether lessons from Cal Poly Humboldt’s conversion could inform other campuses such as Sonoma State. The Capital Fellows item drew a Finance proposal for a salary increase and an LAO counterproposal for a smaller raise plus future COLA language; the committee kept the item open. Finally, CSU reported progress on Title IX compliance, saying it has completed most State Auditor recommendations, expanded civil rights staffing, and increased training, prevention, and case-management efforts, though members asked how proposed budget cuts might affect those services.

Transcript Highlights:

• Now, private sector does financing against funding commitment or collateral, against funding commitment
• So we are not asking about moving funds from Merced to Bakersfield because we have the funds to build
• that funding materialize.
• A funding gap there as well.
• And I think anything beyond that, there is a large funding gap, a very large funding gap.

Summary: The Senate Transportation Committee held an informational hearing on the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s 2026 draft business plan, with testimony from the authority, the Legislative Analyst’s Office, and the High-Speed Rail Inspector General. Chair Cortese framed the hearing around the project’s recent changes: a new CEO, revised delivery strategy, proposed station and scope changes in the Merced-to-Bakersfield segment, the loss of major federal funds, and the authority’s push for private investment and ancillary revenue. He also raised concerns about financing risks, the proposed changes to the initial operating segment, and the Inspector General’s finding that the draft plan may be missing required statutory elements. Authority CEO Ian Chaudhry said the project is now in a more disciplined phase, citing major construction progress in the Central Valley, near-completion of right-of-way and utility work, and plans to begin track and systems procurement. He said the authority expects the Merced-to-Bakersfield segment to be completed around 2032-33, with broader Phase 1 service later, and argued that design optimization, direct procurement, and public-private partnerships could reduce costs and attract private capital. He also described plans for ancillary revenue from real estate, broadband, energy, and logistics, and said the authority is discussing station locations and value-capture tools with local governments rather than locking them in yet. Several senators questioned the legality and practicality of tax increment financing, utility relocation authority, transparency, and whether the project’s revised scope still meets high-speed rail standards and public expectations. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the draft plan assumes major statutory changes, including changes to station locations and scope, and warned that the plan’s cost and schedule estimates depend on assumptions that may not materialize. LAO said the plan lacks transparency because it does not clearly disclose the assumed station changes, and it questioned whether even the shorter segment can be delivered within existing funding once borrowing costs and other risks are included. The office also noted uncertainty around future greenhouse gas reduction fund revenues and said ancillary revenues are not yet credit-worthy for financing. The Inspector General’s office said the draft business plan does not appear to meet several statutory requirements, including requirements added in AB 377, and reiterated that the final plan must address those omissions. Chaudhry said the authority would respond to the OIG’s findings in the final business plan and committed to resolving the compliance issues before final adoption.

Transcript Highlights:

• by the General Fund.
• Fund.
• So cutting General Fund dollars clearly saves General Fund dollars.
• and special fund exercises after enactment we've been reductions in both general fund and special fund
• This funding is allocated across various programs within the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation

Transcript Highlights:

• It's very innovative for its time and still is because some states are still trying to make their funding
• Students generate less funding.
• So when you fund K-12 Plus, you're essentially funding people.
• for innovation and other pieces.
• this tier two funding.

Committee: House House Education

Transcript Highlights:

• Through statutory changes, continuation funding for programs safeguarding consumer safety and financial
• regulation of the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation, and funding for various programs
• Through statutory changes, continuation funding for programs safeguarding consumer safety and financial
• regulation of the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation, and funding for various programs
• We have requested that GoBiz be funded at $26 million in the SIP and TAP programs.

Summary: The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee 4 met for its 11th and final hearing on a large set of budget items tied to the Senate Democrats’ budget package. The chair highlighted major themes including investments in affordable rental and homeownership programs, full funding for homeless housing programs, oversight and efficiency changes at the Department of General Services, continuation funding for consumer protection and financial regulation programs at the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation, and funding for information technology, resilience, and data security. Members also noted the broader budget process and the large volume of testimony and agency follow-up throughout the hearings. During member comments, Senator Smallwood-Cuevas raised concerns about incomplete responses to information requests from departments, said more work is needed to prepare for the Olympics, and urged additional investment in Expo Park and arts and cultural programs, especially near Olympic venues. Senator Cowan praised the transparency of the budget process, the work of staff and agencies, and the subcommittee’s oversight role, while acknowledging some follow-up issues raised by colleagues. Public testimony included support from the California State Association of Counties for fully funding the HAP program at $1 billion and distributing the funds by September 1, and from the Small Business Development Centers for $26 million in GoBiz funding for SIP and TAP loan and technical assistance programs. The committee then voted in blocks on the agenda items: one large block passed unanimously, a second block passed 3-1 with Senator Niello voting no, and items 20 and 42 passed 3-0 with Senator Niello not voting. The hearing then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Because of the funding that became available during COVID, and especially the emergency food funding
• We need a dollar of non-state funds to apply for those federal funds.
• If CalFood funding is not maintained, that's the state funding program.
• We have to keep funding this. We have to keep funding this. We have to keep funding this.
• We have to keep funding this. We have to keep fighting for federal funding.

Summary: The joint oversight hearing focused on food insecurity in California and how state and federal nutrition programs, agricultural production, and food distribution systems intersect. Assemblymembers emphasized that many Californians, including farmworkers, seniors, children, and communities of color, remain food insecure despite California’s agricultural abundance. Panelists and members discussed CalFresh, WIC, school meals, Sun Bucks, food banks, and the impact of federal policy changes, including possible nutrition cuts, tariffs, and immigration enforcement, on access to food and the agricultural workforce. Secretary Karen Ross described CDFA programs aimed at improving access to fresh food and supporting local agriculture, including the senior farmers’ market program, California Nutrition Incentive Program, Healthy Refrigeration Grant Program, Community Food Hubs, Farm to School, urban agriculture, and a proposed tribal food sovereignty program. She said these efforts help connect local producers to consumers, expand healthy food access, and build infrastructure such as refrigeration, mobile markets, and aggregation hubs. Department of Social Services Deputy Director Alexis Fernandez Garcia outlined CalFresh, CFAP, Sun Bucks, CACFP, emergency food programs, and tribal nutrition assistance, noting that CalFresh and related programs significantly reduce poverty and food insecurity, but participation gaps remain for non-English speakers, some Asian American communities, and undocumented households. PPIC researcher Tess Thorman presented data showing that 13% of California households experienced food insecurity in 2023, with higher rates among households with children and Latino, Black, and other households. She said nutrition programs reduce poverty and food hardship, but federal rules, income thresholds, immigration restrictions, and high living costs limit their reach. Members asked about simplifying applications, improving call center access, increasing outreach in multiple languages, and adjusting benefits for inflation. Officials said the state has used available federal options to streamline enrollment, improve customer service, and target outreach, but many core rules and benefit levels are set federally. The second panel shifted to food production and market access. A farmer, a UC food systems leader, and a produce distributor described efforts to connect small and medium farms with food banks, schools, universities, and Medi-Cal food-as-medicine programs. They highlighted programs such as Farms Together, the USDA Southwest Regional Food Business Center, Farm to School, food hubs, and climate-smart infrastructure grants as ways to create stable markets for local growers while improving food access. Speakers also raised concerns about land tenure, consolidation, regulatory burdens, labor constraints, and the loss of federal funding, and members discussed whether state investments and Prop. 4 funds could help sustain and expand these efforts.

Transcript Highlights:

• This amendment strengthens provisions for applied research and... ...innovation, ensuring it remains
• THIS BILL WILL ENSURE WE ARE PREPARED BY PUTTING SCIENCE, SUSTAINABILITY, AND INNOVATIVE POLICY AT THE
• Is there a funding mechanism?
• There is funding associated with the foster care pilot program. Senator Davis for a question.
• This late filed amendment clarifies that the FARM Program funds be...

Bills: SCR5 , SCR13 , SB3 , SB6 , SB10 , SB12 , SB13 , SB15 , SB17 , SB18 , SB19 , SB24 , SB35 , SB57 , SB65 , SB112 , SB284 , SB290 , SB388 , SB400 , SB402 , SB412 , SB495 , SB499 , SB502 , SB509 , SB621 , SB706 , SB740 , SB815 , SB842 , SB854 , SB875 , SB893 , SB917 , SB974 , SB1025 , SB1061 , SB1073 , SB1106 , SB1268 , SB1281 , SB1300 , SB1362 , SB1379 , SB1447 , SB1451 , SB1555 , SB1902 , SJR36 , SJR12 , SCR13 , SCR25 , SCR5 , SCR22 , SCR12 , SCR24 , SB495 , SB412 , SB10 , SB18 , SB565 , SB372 , SB842 , SB765 , SB62 , SB19 , SB666 , SB707 , SB888 , SB687 , SB706 , SB847 , SB290 , SB13 , SB1248 , SB740 , SB14 , SB1006 , SB504 , SB917 , SB925 , SB388 , SB1902 , SB1121 , SB995 , SB857 , SB305 , SB296 , SB284 , SB35 , SB6 , SB815 , SB3 , SB1281 , SB1379 , SB1300 , SB1497 , SB1499 , SB1498 , SB1451 , SB1061 , SB15 , SB65 , SB241 , SB304 , SB402 , SB499 , SB621 , SB974 , SB1023 , SB1024 , SB1025 , SB1106 , SB686 , SB112 , SB371 , SB204 , SB400 , SB609 , SB1447 , SB670 , SB502 , SB427 , SB850 , SB854 , SB413 , SB1555 , SB1362 , SB1346 , SB1033 , SB1220 , SB1073 , SB810 , SB987 , SB1539 , SB893 , SB447 , SB875 , SB406 , SB509 , SB985 , SB965 , SB17 , SB1119 , SB1505 , SB12 , SB24 , SB57 , SB1194 , SB1253 , SB1215 , SB1532 , SB1268 , SB1302 , SB856 , SB650 , SB583 , SB673 , SB840 , SJR57 , SCR8 , SB213 , SB681 , SB1172 , SB1252 , SB378 , SB610 , SB918 , SB1343 , SB608 , SB487 , SB955 , SB957 , SB988 , SB990 , SB1019 , SB1021 , SB1120 , SB251 , SB958 , SB535 , SB761 , SB1 , SB541 , SB315 , SB379 , SB1018 , SB1737 , SB266 , SB1415 , SB3 , SB6 , SB15 , SB35 , SB290 , SB706 , SB842 , SB917 , SB1281 , SB1451 , SB1902 , SB12 , SB13 , SB17 , SB19 , SB388 , SR261 , SR265 , SR276 , SR277 , SR281 , SR286 , SR293 , SCR5 , SCR13 , SB2425 , SB2880 , SB10 , SB12 , SB13 , SB17 , SB18 , SB19 , SB388 , SB412 , SB495 , SB2425 , SB2880

Transcript Highlights:

• Kelly LaRue with Resilient Advocacy on behalf of the Crypto Council for Innovation, in support.
• This is one of the things that’s funding the wars in Europe and in the Middle East is crypto money.
• California’s Department of Financial Protection and Innovation, DFPI.
• Hi, Deanna Latour Keene, on behalf of Satoshi Action Fund, just also stepped in a few seconds later,
• Hi, Deanna Latour, Keene, on behalf of Satoshi Action Fund, just also stepped in a few seconds later,

Committee: House Banking and Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• , federal funds if those federal funds become available.
• , federal funds if those federal funds become available.
• , federal funds if those federal funds become available.
• , federal funds if those federal funds become available.
• , federal funds if those federal funds become available.

Committee: House Resources, Recreation and Development

Transcript Highlights:

• FUNDING THAT GOES DISLOCATED WORKERS SO THIS IS A SUBSET OF THE FUNDING THAT GOES FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
• THE TOTAL FUNDING ALLOCATION IS OVER $32 MILLION FOR CAREER SOURCE FLORIDA INCLUDING ALL THOSE FUNDING
• THE LAST BOX IS LOCAL FUNDING.
• AND THIS COULD BE COUNTY FUNDS OR MUNICIPAL FUNDS, COMMUNITY PARTNERS SO YOU HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE
• SO TOTAL FUNDING OVER $12 MILLION ACROSS ALL FUNDING STREAMS. 6.87 MILLION FOUR WIOA TITLE I. 4.5 MILLION

Transcript Highlights:

• We've got the Complete Streets Funding Program, which is not included in this bill today, but does fund
• So again, the funding is so important.
• Local officials are grateful for this funding, and at the same time, to make sure that this funding is
• So again, the funding is so important.
• Local officials are grateful for this funding, and at the same time, to make sure that this funding is

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Bonding, Capital Expenditures and State Assets

Summary: The Joint Committee on Bonding, Capital Expenditures and State Assets held a public hearing on H. 5279, a bill financing long-term improvements to municipal roads and bridges. MassDOT and A&F testified in support, describing the bill as a more than $5 billion transportation bond package centered on a four-year, $1.2 billion Chapter 90 authorization, plus funding for MBTA rail reliability and modernization, housing-related transportation improvements, a new DCR/MassDOT PRISM program for parkways and other DCR assets, and reauthorizations of the Municipal Pavement Program, Shared Streets and Spaces, and highway programs. They said the bill would support safety, resilience, housing production, and multimodal transportation, and noted that some bonds could be issued as special obligation bonds backed by the Commonwealth Transportation Fund and Fair Share revenues. Committee members asked about the size and structure of the authorizations, the federal match for highway projects, the source of MBTA vehicle procurement, bridge repair needs, and whether the housing-related funds could be used flexibly for items like sidewalks, bike lanes, bus stops, and other local transportation improvements. Administration witnesses said the bill is intended as a temporary refill of existing programs until a larger transportation bond bill is filed next session, that the federal-aid line includes the full spending authority while the state only borrows the 20% match, and that the housing-related program is deliberately broad and not limited to MBTA communities. They also said Chapter 90 includes a road-mile component that especially helps rural communities and that preservation and safety are built into the programs. The Massachusetts Municipal Association also testified in strong support, emphasizing that Chapter 90 is the most important tool municipalities have to maintain the roughly 30,000 miles of local roads and bridges they are responsible for. MMA urged timely passage before construction season and praised the continued $300 million Chapter 90 level, especially the $100 million road-mile distribution that helps communities with large road networks and smaller populations. No votes were taken on the bill, and the hearing concluded with adjournment after testimony ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:13:59.880><c> and</c> formation and stifle Innovation and formation and stifle Innovation and
• </c><00:14:46.279><c> because</c> negatively impact Innovation because negatively impact Innovation because
• </c><00:16:06.880><c> and</c> new business formation Innovation and new business formation Innovation
• </c><00:39:19.000><c> when</c> we're talking about Innovation when we're talking about Innovation when
• </c> of California um some of that Innovation of California um some of that Innovation is<00:39:25.000

Bills: HF1355 , HF1469 , HF1768

Committee: House Workforce, Labor, and Economic Development Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• The goal is to strengthen communities and bring in extra funds to support preservation.
• In March, DENREC had to stop processing requests as the fund ran out of money.
• There were over 100 requests waiting for potential reimbursement funds.
• I support innovation, economic development, and technological advancement.
• Innovation is important. Economic growth is important, but accountability is important.

Committee: Senate Environment, Energy & Transportation

Summary: The committee heard several bills focused on energy, public safety, and environmental cleanup. House Bill 455 would create a historic preservation license plate to raise funds and awareness for Delaware preservation efforts, and House Bill 471 would tighten rules and penalties for off-highway vehicles on shared private roads, with golf carts excluded. House Substitute No. 1 for House Bill 439, the Truth in E-Bike Marketing Act, would require clearer disclosures when selling electric mopeds and electric motorcycles so consumers understand classification, power, and licensing/insurance requirements. House Substitute No. 1 for House Bill 407, related to the Hazardous Substance Cleanup Act and brownfields, would shift funding for brownfield cleanup from the original realty transfer tax approach to a dedicated share of the hazardous substance cleanup fund and raise civil penalties for fraudulent acts. The committee also approved the June 18, 2026 minutes once quorum was reached. Most of the meeting centered on House Substitute No. 1 for House Bill 233, as amended, a large-load/data center bill intended to protect ratepayers from costs tied to massive new electricity users. The sponsor and Public Advocate said PJM’s warnings about a coming reliability backstop auction made it urgent to establish a Delaware framework now, requiring large energy users to sign utility agreements, cover their share of transmission, distribution, and capacity costs, and comply with curtailment and other protections. Supporters from environmental groups and some labor and business voices said the bill was needed to prevent cost shifts to households and small businesses, while opponents argued it was being rushed, could deter investment, and might unintentionally affect other industries; several asked for more time and clearer definitions. No vote was taken in the portion provided. The committee also took up House Bill 470, which would authorize Delmarva Power, with PSC approval, to build and operate utility-owned battery storage and spread costs across the customer base. The sponsor and Delmarva said the bill would improve reliability quickly and help avoid outages, while the chair expressed concern that the state had not yet fully studied whether utility-owned or competitively procured storage is the best model, noting a recent SEU storage study and broader policy questions. Supporters said utility storage could be deployed faster and help with peak shaving, while others urged a competitive process; the transcript cuts off before any final action on HB 470.

Transcript Highlights:

• We want to keep everyone safe, support innovation and affordability, and protect riders who often simply
• It's an innovative step and it's also just good common sense.
• We want to be able to do this in a way that can improve safety, reduce confusion, support innovation,
• The speaker said they appreciated the recommendation in the commission's report for a stable funding
• And then finally, Recommendation 12: funding for upgrades and expansion.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Transportation

Summary: The Joint Committee on Transportation held a hearing on the governor’s Ride Safe Act (S 3077), a micromobility bill based on recommendations from last year’s Special Commission on Micromobility. Administration witnesses from MassDOT and the MBTA said the bill is needed because current laws are outdated and inconsistent, and they emphasized a new speed-based framework that would classify devices by maximum speed rather than by device name. They said the bill would set statewide rules, clarify enforcement, require safety equipment and age limits, restrict unsafe modifications, improve crash-data collection, and create a working group to address future issues such as registration, licensure, insurance, and emerging technologies. Committee members asked about crash reporting, battery safety, enforcement on shared-use paths, commuter rail access, and how the bill would apply to off-road vehicles. Several witnesses and legislators supported the bill’s general approach but raised concerns about whether the speed tiers should be tied more directly to actual operating speed on paths, whether higher-speed devices should be registered, and how police would distinguish between similar-looking devices. Representative and commission witnesses also urged more funding for Complete Streets and Shared Streets and Spaces, and some suggested adding default speed limits on shared-use paths and automated enforcement tools. Public testimony was mixed. Pediatric emergency physicians strongly supported the bill but urged amendments for a minimum age to operate powered devices and a universal helmet requirement, citing rising severe injuries and deaths among children. A police chief and other safety advocates backed clearer rules and better data collection, while some moped riders objected that the bill would treat low-speed gas mopeds too harshly and should better account for mopeds as vulnerable road users. UL Standards and AAA supported the bill’s safety and clarity goals, with UL recommending tighter language on battery certification and equivalent standards. No vote was taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:41:05.800><c> and</c> for purposes of state funding and for purposes of state funding and grants
• </c> this ability to access grant funding this ability to access grant funding does<00:47:49.120><c>
• </c> the funds. the funds.
• </c> Our dreams of technological innovation Our dreams of technological innovation can<01:46:23.000><
• </c><02:19:17.519><c> while</c> Vermont can encourage innovation while Vermont can encourage innovation

Transcript Highlights:

• More matching funds on that? What do we do?
• But I'm just curious: are we funding enough of that?
• We've got the Complete Streets Funding Program, which is not included in this bill today, but does fund
• So again, the funding is so important.
• Local officials are grateful for this funding, and at the same time, to make sure that this funding is

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Bonding, Capital Expenditures and State Assets

Summary: The Joint Committee on Bonding, Capital Expenditures and State Assets held a public hearing on H. 5279, a transportation bond bill financing long-term improvements to municipal roads and bridges. MassDOT and A&F testified in support, describing the bill as a major transportation investment package centered on a $300 million annual Chapter 90 local aid program, with $200 million distributed by the traditional formula and $100 million by lane miles to better support rural communities. They also outlined funding for MBTA rail reliability and modernization, transportation projects that support housing production, a new DCR parkway resilience and safety program, and reauthorizations of existing highway and municipal grant programs such as the Municipal Pavement Program and Shared Streets and Spaces. Witnesses said the bill would help address aging infrastructure, improve safety and resilience, support housing development, and leverage Fair Share surtax revenue through the Commonwealth Transportation Fund. They explained that some authorizations are structured to allow the state to issue special obligation bonds, and clarified that the bill authorizes the full spending amount for federally aided projects even though the state only borrows the 20 percent match, with the federal government reimbursing the rest. Committee members asked about bridge repair needs, the size of the backlog, how housing-related transportation funds would be allocated, MBTA vehicle procurement, and whether rural communities would have fair access to the new funding streams. Several members praised the administration’s financing approach but urged future Chapter 90 increases to keep pace with inflation and requested more attention to rural municipal capacity and bridge safety needs. The Massachusetts Municipal Association also testified in strong support, emphasizing that Chapter 90 is the most important tool for cities and towns to maintain local roads and bridges and urging prompt passage before construction season. No votes were taken; after testimony concluded, the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• instead a harmful experimental government product in which billions of taxpayer dollars were used to fund
• I'm here on behalf of the Biotechnology Innovation Organization, representing more than 1,000 biotech
• And again, as stated and documented, this is a government program funded 100% using Pfizer and Moderna
• And again, as stated and documented, this is a government program funded 100% using Pfizer-Moderna, This
• But it also isn't so long that it sets in motion something that suppresses innovation and suppresses

Committee: Senate Health and Welfare

Transcript Highlights:

• prohibition and requires disclaimers for committees that meet a certain threshold of out-of-state funding
• So, in essence, we funded the UN, who gave money to UNRWA that attacked Israel just about a year ago,
• to the International Monetary Fund and withdraw entirely from the organization.
• The IMF is basically just a token transmittal of funds for international affairs, something else that
• This particular bill just authorizes possible funding through WIFA if the funds are available.

Summary: The meeting covered a very large number of bills across multiple committees, with most items presented on consent calendars and several sponsors explaining their measures. Education bills focused on moving statewide testing later in the school year, allowing paper testing by local choice, increasing transparency around district administrator pay, expanding religious excusal policies, creating a school fitness recognition program, and sending a resolution to voters to require sex-based designation of school sports teams and private spaces. Federalism and Government items included bans on foreign contributions to ballot-measure committees, a proposed ballot measure to eliminate voting centers and return to precinct-based voting, memorials urging withdrawal from the United Nations and the IMF, penalties for late agency financial reporting, restrictions on state contracts with China, and a bill limiting use of ADS-B aviation data for fee collection. Commerce bills addressed digital goods disclosure, child influencer trust accounts, liability for river outfitters, marketplace contractor termination rights, utility submetering charges, unemployment eligibility checks, and association-based health plans. Health and human services measures included lactation consultant certification and Medicaid breastfeeding support, a ban on gender transition procedures for minors, a requirement that chief medical officers hold active licenses, technical ambulance definitions, a SNAP waiver request to restrict non-eligible food purchases, hospital collection of patient immigration status, and enrollment verification for AHCCCS-related hospital presumptive eligibility. Judiciary bills included consent-verification requirements for online sexual material, a civil cause of action for DEI policy violations, hate-crime-style enhancements that also cover political affiliation, name-change disclosure rules for sex offenders, penalties for possession of falsified commercial driver’s licenses by unlawfully present persons, penalties for mailing abortion-inducing drugs, speed-inhibiting devices as an alternative to license suspension, longer transition services for inmates, stronger penalties for sexual extortion of minors, and legislative oversight of state shooting range closures. Natural resources and water bills dealt with brackish groundwater recovery and desalination studies, water augmentation authority financing, HOA drought-year watering restrictions, water-rate parity for customers outside city limits, and groundwater transportation from the McMullen Valley basin. Other topics included a ban on PFAS firefighting foam, restrictions on vaccine and mask mandates by governments and businesses, protections against employment or service discrimination based on medical interventions, elimination of long-vacant state positions, consumer protections against device disabling after owner modifications, and restrictions on Chinese-made critical infrastructure. The committee also heard a Space Commission update bill and a continuation of the Arizona Beef Council. Several bills were pulled from consent or flagged for amendments or legal concerns, including the testing-window bill, student directory information bill, river outfitter liability bill, ambulance bill, and others. No final floor votes were taken in the transcript, but many bills were advanced on third-read or consent calendars, while a few were set aside for amendments or further discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• CAT Fund.
• I was thinking at the Could there be something, whether it's FEMA funding?
• The dark blue is the cap fund that represents the cap fund coverage.
• Cyril, I know, you know, we're talking about the funding now.
• Woodson, I'd have to get back to you on the cap fund numbers.

Summary: The Insurance and Banking Subcommittee received a lengthy presentation from Citizens Property Insurance Corporation CEO Tim Serio, with Insurance Commissioner Michael Yaworski also answering questions. Serio reviewed Citizens’ role as Florida’s insurer of last resort, its statutory funding structure, eligibility rules, depopulation program, reinsurance obligations, and the surcharge/emergency assessment mechanisms that can be used if Citizens runs a deficit. He emphasized that recent legislative reforms, combined with lower litigation and improved market conditions, have helped the private market recover and reduced Citizens’ policy count from a peak of about 1.41 million in 2023 to 936,182 at the end of 2024, with a projected drop to about 771,000 by the end of 2025. He also said the reforms reduced Citizens’ rate need and helped avoid an emergency assessment after the 2024 storms. Members asked about Citizens’ rate increases, why Citizens still seeks higher rates despite lower litigation, how the 20% eligibility threshold works, whether Citizens should be wind-only, and whether the state or federal government could help with deficits. Serio explained that Citizens is still charging below actuarially sound rates in most areas, that rate filings reflect reduced litigation and lower reinsurance exposure, and that assessments on all Florida property policyholders are the reason Citizens tries to build surplus and depopulate. He said the depopulation program is working better than in the past, with less than 2% of takeout policies returning to Citizens, and that the Office of Insurance Regulation has been vetting takeout companies more carefully. A substantial portion of the discussion focused on claims handling after Debby, Helene, and Milton, including flood-versus-wind disputes and Citizens’ use of the Division of Administrative Hearings for some claim disputes. Serio said Citizens had received 76,625 claims from the three storms and had paid nearly $823 million in indemnity and expenses as of January 7, 2025. He said many closed-without-payment claims were either below deductible, withdrawn, duplicate, or flood-only, and that Citizens had asked its internal audit function to independently review the claims data and denials. He also described Citizens’ storm outreach, catastrophe response centers, managed-repair program, and claim review process, and said the corporation remains focused on paying valid claims while minimizing the risk of assessments on the broader Florida market.