Transcript Highlights:

• Have different revenue sources, such as other state agencies contribute, of course, the general fund.
• Of course, we have the general fund, federal fund, but we also have a county-supported Medicaid fund.
• from the general fund to increase provider rates and other rates.
• federal education funding impacts.
• I definitely want to highlight here the impact of the delays in receiving our ESSER funds.

Committee: House Federal Funding Stabilization Subcommittee

Transcript Highlights:

• Our proposal is for $74.8 million General Fund ongoing in 2025-26.
• SSI is federally funded and SSP is funded by the state General Fund.
• First, I'd like to highlight the... ...funded and SSP is funded by the state General Fund.
• maintains a $70 million loan to the General Fund per the 2024 Budget Act.
• Fund for 2025-26... ...of $74.8 million in General Fund for 2025-26 to stabilize the CBAS program by

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittees held a joint hearing on older adults and long-term care supports and services, with members and witnesses focusing on the growing “forgotten/overlooked middle” of Californians who are too wealthy for Medi-Cal but unable to afford long-term services and supports (LTSS). Administration witnesses from DHCS and the Department of Aging described Medicare’s limited long-term care coverage, Medi-Cal’s role for low-income residents, and ongoing state work on LTSS financing, including a 2024 financing initiative and a final report due in 2026. Testimony emphasized rising costs, caregiver shortages, homelessness among older adults, and the need to preserve home- and community-based services to avoid more expensive institutional care. Several advocates urged immediate action, especially Medi-Cal share-of-cost reform, housing supports, and protection of HCBS funding. Members asked for the most urgent budget priorities and were told to focus on share-of-cost reform and assisted-living rate protections, along with broader system navigation and caregiver support. The committee also heard testimony on the Community-Based Adult Services (CBAS) program. CDA reported that CBAS serves about 42,000 participants through 304 centers, with demand generally stable but geographic gaps in some regions and staffing challenges after the pandemic. DHCS explained a rate-setting issue: a 10% CBAS rate increase had been mistakenly posted on the Medi-Cal fee schedule in 2024, and while Proposition 35 later made the targeted SB 159 rate increase inoperative, DHCS said any repayment by managed care plans would depend on contract terms and the department would not require clawbacks. CBAS providers and advocates warned that the program is in a financial crisis, with six center closures since June 2024, and requested $74.8 million ongoing General Fund to close about half the gap between current reimbursement and costs. Members expressed concern that clawbacks could accelerate closures and noted the program’s role in preventing institutionalization and supporting family caregivers. In the final panel, CDSS presented on In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) provider recruitment and retention and on the AB 102 statewide bargaining report. CDSS said the IHSS Career Pathways program has concluded successfully, with more than 59,000 providers completing training, and that the AB 102 report—based on workgroup meetings and consultant analysis—will be sent to the Legislature shortly. The department said the workgroup viewed statewide bargaining as more viable than regional bargaining, but identified major issues around consumer participation, county fiscal impacts, administrative responsibilities, and the need to define bargaining scope in statute. CDSS estimated that each $1 per hour statewide wage increase would cost at least $1.3 billion to $1.5 billion annually. Provider unions supported statewide bargaining, arguing it would improve wages, benefits, and workforce stability, while county representatives said any statewide model should preserve consumer focus, protect county finances and realignment funds, and keep core administrative functions with local public authorities. The hearing concluded without votes, with members requesting additional follow-up information and urging continued engagement ahead of the May revise.

Transcript Highlights:

• proposal the money would revert back to the General Fund.
• One is the General Fund dollars, and that's the piece I was referring to.
• Absent that, that would revert to the General Fund.
• any general fund obligations.
• any general fund obligations.

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Resources, Environmental Protection and Energy heard six budget-related items and took no votes, holding all items open for a future hearing. The first item concerned a climate bond expenditure plan for the California Transmission Accelerator Revolving Fund under SB 254. GoBiz, IBank, and the Department of Finance described a request for nearly $26 million and 10 limited-term positions to develop financing strategies and evaluate transmission projects, while the LAO said the proposal was broadly consistent with Prop. 4 but noted that the Legislature may want to provide more direction on program design. Senators questioned how the proposal would lower ratepayer costs, protect state funds, and ensure accountability for billion-dollar transmission projects. The second item covered trailer bill language to redirect funding among demand-side reliability programs. Finance proposed moving $22 million from the DEPA program to DSGS for summer 2026 and using CalSHAPE interest funds for ELRP or an equivalent CPUC program in 2027-28, with CEC and CPUC coordinating the transition. Senators and LAO questioned why CalSHAPE funds should not continue supporting schools, and several members argued DSGS has been more successful and should continue rather than be shifted to ELRP. CEC and CPUC explained that DSGS and ELRP serve different reliability functions and do not address public safety power shutoffs. Public commenters, including school groups and clean energy advocates, split between extending CalSHAPE for school HVAC/plumbing projects and preserving or expanding DSGS. The committee also heard on petroleum market oversight implementation under SBX1-2 and ABX2-1, with the CEC and its Division of Petroleum Market Oversight requesting additional staffing to support inventory monitoring, refinery resupply analysis, and market oversight. Senators pressed for details on investigations, refinery margins, gasoline price spikes, and the transportation fuels transition plan, while staff said the draft plan would be released soon and that DPMO’s work on branded versus unbranded gasoline remains ongoing. Finally, the CPUC presented three additional proposals: implementing AB 1207’s climate credit reforms, studying large-load/data center cost impacts under SB 57, and preparing for regional market participation under AB 825. The LAO repeatedly cautioned that some of these requests may go beyond statutory minimums and urged the Legislature to decide how much policy direction and staffing it wants to provide. Public commenters supported DPMO funding, opposed ending CalSHAPE, and strongly favored continued DSGS funding over a new ELRP structure.

Transcript Highlights:

• generations and their impacts to our society for history, for storytelling, for art.
• Generations and their impacts to our society for history, for storytelling, for art.
• The impact of our terminated federal funds to California Humanities has a negative The impact of our
• The documentary space is just not that well funded generally.
• These funds impact communities like mine.

Summary: The joint informational hearing focused on how recent federal actions are affecting arts, culture, humanities, libraries, museums, and the creative economy in California. Chair Ben Allen and Vice Chair Chris Ward opened by describing the hearing as a response to proposed and ongoing federal cuts to the NEA, NEH, IMLS, and public broadcasting, as well as grant terminations and leadership changes at cultural institutions. Several members emphasized the economic and civic importance of the arts, while one Republican member argued for greater ideological diversity in the arts and noted the loss of music programs in small schools. Testimony from Aaron Harky of Americans for the Arts and Jolie Fisher of SAG-AFTRA described the impact of federal policy on grants, jobs, and production. Harky said executive orders and the FY 2026 budget proposal threaten arts agencies and arts education, and that rescinded grants are causing hiring freezes, shutdowns, and losses for small organizations, especially in rural and underserved communities. Fisher focused on runaway film and television production, outdated tax rules, and the need for federal incentives, intellectual property protections, and action on AI and digital replicas. Members also discussed bipartisan support, the role of business and tourism partners, and the need to include more diverse voices in arts advocacy. The second panel featured Rick Noguchi of California Humanities, Greg Lucas of the State Library, and Danielle Purcell of the California Arts Council. Noguchi said NEH funding was cut immediately, putting California Humanities’ grantmaking and documentary programs at risk and prompting consideration of litigation and possible state support. Lucas reported that IMLS funding for California libraries was briefly canceled but partly restored, though a budget gap remains. Purcell said the California Arts Council is still awaiting federal award language for state partnership funds, but NEA grant terminations and the proposed elimination of federal cultural agencies create major uncertainty; she also said the council is assessing the damage and tracking impacts on grantees. Members asked about measuring outcomes, AI’s threat to creative work, documentary funding losses, and possible state and national strategies to protect cultural institutions and jobs.

Transcript Highlights:

• So it does have a general fund impact and it's terrible for the communities that and Ms.
• A few things I need to correct today. about general fund that's going to impact individuals who desperately
• the general fund.
• funds relieve much pressure on the general fund.
• These special funds have no impact. on the general fund and we ask that full budget authority be reinstated

Transcript Highlights:

• Every administration has good impacts, bad impacts; we just have to assess them.
• Every administration has good impacts, bad impacts; we just have to assess them.
• I was reading your recent reports, thank you, about the federal impact in general.
• Each dollar of NIH funding is estimated to generate two to three dollars in economic activity within
• Moakley's question, where do you see the biggest impact in cuts in services as opposed to cuts in funding

Committee: House House Committee on Federal Funding, Policy and Accountability

Summary: The inaugural hearing of the newly named House Committee on Federal Funding, Policy and Accountability focused on how federal policy changes could affect Massachusetts, especially in education, health care, research, infrastructure, climate, and business conditions. Chair LaNatra said the committee was created to monitor federal funding decisions and their impacts on state programs and services. Members introduced themselves, then heard testimony from Doug Howgate of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, Sarah Mills of Associated Industries of Massachusetts, and Quentin Palfrey, the governor’s Director of Federal Funds and Infrastructure. Howgate argued that the Trump administration and new Congress pose ideological, practical, and process-related risks to Massachusetts, citing proposed cuts to Medicaid, education, research, and other domestic programs. He said federal dollars make up about a quarter of the state operating budget and capital plan, warned against using one-time reserves to backfill ongoing federal cuts, and urged the state to prioritize core services while protecting areas where Massachusetts is especially strong, such as higher education and research. In response to committee questions, he said the House Medicaid proposal would still cost Massachusetts hundreds of millions and that international student and NIH-related changes could harm the state’s labor force and innovation economy. He also advised that the state communicate clearly without overreacting to daily federal developments. Mills testified that AIM members are most concerned about uncertainty, tariffs, Medicaid cuts, and NIH reductions. She said tariffs are raising costs, disrupting supply chains, and hurting small and medium-sized businesses, housing construction, and exporters, with AIM’s business confidence index falling to its lowest level since the pandemic. She said Medicaid cuts would raise employer health costs, reduce productivity, and strain the health care system, while NIH cuts would threaten Massachusetts’ life sciences and academic research ecosystem. In questions, she said AIM has increased federal outreach, is coordinating with the U.S. Chamber and the Massachusetts delegation, and is hearing concerns from employers about immigration compliance and workforce disruptions. Palfrey described the Healey-Driscoll administration’s efforts to maximize federal funding, including a biweekly interagency council, a municipal partnership effort, and a statewide roadshow. He said Massachusetts has secured nearly $9 billion from major federal laws for projects such as the Cape Cod bridges, Allston Multimodal, grid modernization, clean-energy school buses, and broadband. He also said the administration launched a public website to track federal impacts and is working with municipalities, nonprofits, and the Attorney General on grant changes, legal issues, and litigation. In response to questions, he warned that cuts to NOAA, NSF, Medicaid, SNAP, and other programs could affect services and the state budget, and said the administration is tracking changes to federal grant applications and conditions. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational only.

Transcript Highlights:

• Column one is going to be your appropriations from the general fund.
• It doesn't generate funding.
• . generate funds; it only distributes existing legislative appropriations.
• If they have a higher proportion of English learners, they generate more funding.
• So again, general fund on the left, and then other state funds, inter-agency transfers, federal funds

Transcript Highlights:

• <c> and</c><00:19:50.320><c> then</c> general fund spending forecast, and then general fund spending
• As we've mentioned, continued federal funding uncertainty could have impacts on the general fund bottom
• have rolled forward and the general fund budget reserve.
• </c> that have rolled forward and the general that have rolled forward and the general fund<00:37:20.680
• </c> general fund. general fund.

Committee: Senate Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• with no General Fund impact.
• This includes $626 million of General Fund, $2.2 billion of special funds, and federal funds of $2.3
• This includes $626 million of general fund, $2.2 billion of special funds.
• loan can be repaid at an earlier date, or if the General Fund no longer requires the funding.
• been utilized for the General Fund?

Summary: The committee heard a series of budget and oversight presentations from CalHHS-related departments and agencies. CalHHS opened with a broad overview of its 2026-27 budget and priorities, including behavioral health, housing and human services integration, children and youth services, and aging/disability supports. OICR then presented its budget and its SB 823 realignment report on youth formerly committed to DJJ, saying county implementation varies widely but that the state has not seen evidence of net widening in the available data. OICR recommended climate surveys, youth advisory councils, stronger behavioral health and education programming in secure youth treatment facilities, better transitional planning, and improved longitudinal data systems. The agency also described a Title II federal grant transition problem, saying it cannot yet pay some subrecipients for prior work and is awaiting federal action on retroactive spending authority and an administrative funding adjustment. The Ombudsperson division requested two additional positions to address a growing complaint workload and access issues with counties over youth meetings, records, and grievance files; LAO raised no policy objection but noted the ongoing General Fund cost. The State Council on Developmental Disabilities requested $730,000 General Fund ongoing to cover the gap between federal limits on administrative overhead and the actual cost of an interagency agreement with the Department of Social Services. EMSA presented its department overview and several proposals, including a delayed AB 716 ambulance rate report, a $2.6 million request to replace aging disaster-response vehicles, a $250,000 security architecture assessment, and four positions plus ongoing General Fund for HR, enforcement, and legal workload. Members questioned the delay in the AB 716 report, the optics and timing of the vehicle replacement request, and whether EMSA was doing enough to prevent future staffing and enforcement problems. LAO repeatedly noted the ongoing General Fund implications of EMSA’s requests. The Department of Community Services and Development sought reappropriation of unspent Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund money for the Low-Income Weatherization Program and described a Proposition 4-funded continuation of the farmworker housing component, which would require a new statewide administrator and program design process. The Department of Rehabilitation requested authority to draw an additional $60 million in federal funds annually and add 54 positions to meet sharply increased Vocational Rehabilitation caseloads; LAO had no concerns. Child Support Services proposed restoring a prior reduction to local child support agency funding and reported higher federal performance incentives, while also presenting a supplemental report on full pass-through of child support collections to CalWORKs families, estimating about $150 million annually for full pass-through or about $80 million for a state/county-only approach, plus automation costs. Members questioned why funding should rise when caseloads are declining, and whether the policy could be made cost-neutral. CDPH closed the hearing with an overview of its $5.1 billion budget and its state of public health report, highlighting record-low mortality and higher life expectancy, but also rising overdose deaths among ages 25-44, persistent maternal and infant mortality disparities, and the need for stable public health and emergency-response capacity; no votes were taken during 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
• We're itemizing the estimated impact of the general fund state budget, as well as local government budgets
• So, and this is a completely Self-funded program. There's no general fund subsidy.
• And so now the program is completely self-funded by worker contributions and has no impact on the general

Committee: Joint Pension Funding Council

Summary: The Pension Funding Council met on October 8 with introductions from council members and 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:

• fund, and those impacted by these products.
• We're going to be backfilling through the general fund.
• fund, and those impacted by these products.
• A preliminary fiscal note from the Department of Revenue shows no impact to the State General Fund.
• A preliminary fiscal note from the Department of Revenue shows no impact to the State General Fund.

Summary: The committee heard briefings, sponsor presentations, and public testimony on several finance bills. HB 2038 would impose an additional B&O tax on businesses operating social media platforms beginning in 2027 and create a youth behavioral health account funded by the tax. The sponsor argued the bill would help address youth mental health harms linked to social media and support implementation of the Washington Thriving plan. Supporters in testimony, including youth advocates and some public health voices, said social media contributes to youth anxiety and addiction and that the revenue should be used for behavioral health services. Opponents, including technology and business groups, argued the tax unfairly singles out one sector, could be passed on to consumers, and may violate federal internet tax law. The hearing on HB 2038 was suspended and later reopened for public testimony; no vote was taken. HB 2297 would create tax incentives for grocery stores in underserved communities, including local B&O preferences, a sales tax exemption for security services, a 30-year property tax exemption program, a B&O tax credit, and a B&O exemption for certain locally owned or employee-owned stores. The sponsor and supporters said the bill is intended to preserve and attract grocery stores in food deserts, especially after recent store closures, and to help communities with limited transportation and access to healthy food. County representatives supported the goal but raised concern about the bill’s sales tax exemption and its effect on local revenues. Public testimony was largely supportive, with advocates, local officials, grocers, and residents describing grocery stores as essential community infrastructure. No action was taken. HB 2382 would raise cigarette taxes by $2 per pack, restructure vapor and other tobacco product taxes, and dedicate portions of the revenue to a time-sensitive emergency system, tobacco enforcement, and the foundational public health services account. The sponsor said the bill would generate needed revenue, support cancer research funding, and strengthen public health and enforcement. Supporters said higher tobacco taxes reduce use and help cover long-term health costs, while some public health witnesses supported the revenue but suggested directing more funds to existing tobacco prevention accounts. Opponents from retail and industry groups argued the proposal is regressive, could increase illicit sales and cross-border purchasing, and would hurt small businesses and low-income consumers. The committee also heard HB 2487, a Department of Revenue request bill that would narrow the B&O exemption for insurers to clarify that it applies only to premium income subject to insurance premium tax, and apply the change retroactively to 2019. The sponsor and supporters said the bill closes a loophole created by a recent Supreme Court ruling and preserves tax equity, while insurers and business groups objected to the retroactive application, warning of higher premiums and unfair taxation. Finally, HB 2018 would increase the solid waste tax by 0.5% per year for five years and direct the new revenue to a local government solid waste assistance account for county and city waste management plans. County officials supported the bill as a way to stabilize funding for solid waste systems, and testimony emphasized rising disposal and infrastructure costs. No votes were taken on any of the bills during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• in General Fund, $2.2 billion in federal funds, and $199 million in Proposition 64 funds.
• Ongoing Proposition 98 General Fund and $1 billion ongoing for a non-Proposition 98 General Fund to support
• Our intent at the department is to absorb the fund reduction through unspent funds and not impact services
• The request is for $703,000 General Fund in 2026-27 and $733,000 General Fund in 2027-28 to fund four
• So this request is not General Fund.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittees on early childhood education heard a broad review of the Governor’s child care and preschool budget proposals, with testimony from the Department of Finance, the Department of Social Services (CDSS), the California Department of Education (CDE), and the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO). The main topics were cost-of-care-plus and COLA adjustments, the California State Preschool Program, child care slot reductions tied to federal and Proposition 64 funding changes, disaster recovery grants for child care facilities, trailer bill proposals on family fees and absences, prospective pay, and several budget change proposals for departmental staffing and licensing. Officials also discussed the state’s transition toward an alternative methodology for setting rates based on the true cost of care. On rate reform, CDSS and CDE said the current reimbursement system remains below the alternative methodology in many counties and that providers continue to struggle with recruitment and retention. The LAO recommended aligning cost-of-care-plus increases across provider types, while CDE urged that any COLA be added to base rates rather than cost-of-care-plus payments because providers view the latter as less ongoing. CDSS said the next alternative methodology update will be developed with a contractor during fiscal year 2026-27, with public engagement and legislative input, and estimated that fully transitioning to rates informed by the methodology would take about 24 months once policy and funding are in place. CDSS also said the direct-service cost of care under the methodology was estimated at about $18.7 billion in a July 2025 report. A major point of contention was the proposed reduction of 4,167 child care slots due to lower federal CCDF funding and reduced Proposition 64 revenue. CDSS said it expects to absorb the reduction through unspent funds and relinquishments so currently enrolled children are not disrupted, while the LAO supported the reduction as a way to avoid worsening the structural deficit. Members strongly objected to the slot cuts, arguing the administration has repeatedly proposed reductions after prior budget agreements and emphasizing the economic and family benefits of child care. The committee also discussed preschool enrollment trends, including growth in three-year-old enrollment and a sharp increase in two-year-olds served under a temporary provision, with CDE warning that the temporary two-year-old authority expires in 2027. The committee also reviewed an $11.5 million Proposition 64 proposal for child care infrastructure grants for facilities impacted by 2025 state disasters, especially the Los Angeles fires, and members asked for trailer bill language to make the funds flexible for repairs, equipment, insurance, and permitting. On trailer bill items, the panel discussed codifying family fee reimbursement rules, defining excessive unexplained absences to allow disenrollment after prolonged nonuse, and expanding temporary provider absences; CDSS said the absence policy is meant to mirror federal CCDF rules, while CDE said it is already pursuing its own rulemaking. The hearing also covered prospective pay, with CDSS and CDE saying they are waiting for final federal guidance before moving ahead; LAO said the state could save ongoing costs if the federal requirement is rescinded. Finally, the committee reviewed staffing and support budget requests for CDSS and other implementation items, and held several items open for further discussion before the May Revision. Public comment overwhelmingly urged full funding for child care slots, true cost-of-care payments, and ongoing support for early education programs and county offices of education.

Transcript Highlights:

• Billion, **$45.2 billion** general fund.
• General fund expenditures aim to achieve general fund savings.
• 20 percent** of the state general fund.
• Solutions to the state's general fund shortfall.
• So we would save 165 million general funds.

Transcript Highlights:

• Fund to increase the special education... ...of 509 million ongoing Proposition 98 General Fund to increase
• Lower funded SELPAs rely heavily on local general funds to meet federal obligations, which creates structural
• Their issue currently is not a general fund issue. It is a building.
• The issue currently is not a general fund issue.
• their general fund.

Transcript Highlights:

• So it does have a General Fund impact, and it's terrible for the communities that Ms.
• A few things I need to correct today: we're not talking about general fund that's going to impact individuals
• with GGRF against those you're funding with the general fund.
• general fund.
• These special funds have no impact on the General Fund, and we ask that full budget authority be reinstated

Summary: The hearing opened with budget framing from the chair and the LAO, who said the May Revision addresses roughly a $14 billion budget problem and that the environment and transportation subcommittee’s proposals account for about $1.9 billion of the solution. The LAO urged members to focus on solutions that do not worsen out-year deficits, to preserve reserves, and to defer major policy changes that are not necessary to pass the budget, including the newly introduced water-related trailer bills. Members also raised concern about a late-dropped Olympic-related trailer bill, which the LAO likewise suggested should be deferred for fuller review. The first major item was the Delta Conveyance Project and related water quality control plan trailer bills. The administration argued the proposals would streamline permitting, water rights proceedings, judicial review, and land acquisition, and would clarify DWR’s bond authority for the project. DWR said the project is needed to protect water supply reliability against drought, earthquakes, sea level rise, and other climate-related disruptions, and that the tunnel would help move water when conditions are wet and safer for the environment. Committee members from both parties questioned the timing, the use of budget trailer bills for major policy changes, the scope of the CEQA and water-rights changes, the lack of a bond cap, cost growth, and eminent domain protections. The LAO recommended deferring both water trailer bills without prejudice. Public comment was sharply divided, with labor, water agencies, and some business groups supporting the project as climate adaptation and reliability infrastructure, while environmental, tribal, fishing, county, and community groups opposed it as an attempt to bypass public process and weaken protections. The committee then briefly heard the DMV’s Digital Experience Platform fee trailer bill, which would reinstate a $1 system improvement fee to help fund the vehicle-registration phase of the project. DMV said the fee would raise about $7 million annually and offset roughly $59 million to $60 million of project costs, while the LAO noted it would help but would not solve the Motor Vehicle Account’s broader structural gap. The hearing then moved to California High-Speed Rail, where the new CEO presented an updated plan and said the project remains a major climate and infrastructure investment. He reported a revised Merced-to-Bakersfield cost range of $34.9 billion to $38.5 billion, said the agency is trying to reduce risk through direct procurement of materials, and argued that stable annual funding is needed to avoid higher costs from delays.

Transcript Highlights:

• For CSU, $143.8 million one-time General Fund.
• Specifically for UC, this means 129.7 million one-time general fund.
• For CSU, 143.8 million one-time general fund.
• General Fund.
• A few facts: State General Fund is about 57% of CSU's core funding, with tuition comprising most of the

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Education held its first 2026 hearing on higher education, focusing on UC and CSU system updates, student housing, enrollment, and core operations. In opening remarks, the chair noted recent state fiscal stress, the prior rejection of proposed UC/CSU cuts, and the Governor’s proposed 5% ongoing compact increases. UC President James B. Milliken and CSU Chancellor Mildred Garcia described the systems’ public value, research and workforce roles, and the impact of federal actions on grants, financial aid, and campus operations. Both also emphasized Title IX and civil rights efforts; CSU said it had implemented nearly all state auditor recommendations and was on track to finish the remaining one, while UC highlighted its systemwide civil rights and Title IX offices. Both leaders said federal investigations, grant cancellations, and litigation demands were consuming staff time and money, with UC reporting more than 200 grants lost or affected and CSU citing more than $161 million in lost grants and more than 1,600 grants affected overall. The committee then heard on student housing. Finance and LAO staff said the Governor’s budget made no major new housing proposal but continued support for the Higher Education Student Housing Grant Program. CSU reported 12 supported projects that will add about 5,047 beds, most below market rate, with four already open and seven more expected this year; it also said it has about 68,000 beds systemwide, a 92% occupancy rate, and ongoing emergency housing support. UC said the program has supported seven UC projects and two joint community college projects, adding more than 7,000 beds total, but nearly 10,000 UC students were on housing waitlists at the start of fall 2025. UC asked for additional state support, including possible bond funding and a statutory change to allow UC participation in public-private partnership housing projects. Members discussed rapid rehousing, student homelessness, faculty and staff housing, and community college housing partnerships, with both systems describing existing emergency beds and support services. On enrollment, LAO recommended maintaining UC’s 2026-27 resident undergraduate target, funding enrollment growth separately from base increases, pausing the nonresident reduction plan, and holding UC flat in 2027-28. For CSU, LAO recommended revising the 2026-27 target downward to reflect current projections, funding growth separately, and holding 2027-28 flat. CSU said it had rebounded from COVID declines, now exceeds its funded target by about 3,000 FTE, and is shifting about $89 million and 10,000 FTE spots from lower-demand campuses to higher-demand ones while developing turnaround plans for seven campuses with sustained enrollment declines, including Sonoma State. CSU also described direct admissions, transfer success pathways, and new degree programs aimed at workforce needs. UC said it had surpassed its compact enrollment goals, planned to add 2,721 California undergraduates in 2026-27, and was seeking $5.5 million for health professional programs. Members raised concerns about underprepared freshmen, K-12 alignment, nonresident caps at UC San Diego, deferred maintenance, ROTC access, and the need for stronger turnaround plans and teacher preparation pipelines. The final item on core operations addressed the Governor’s proposal to defer 3% base funding again, moving the one-time deferral to 2027-28 and allowing short-term zero-interest loans to cover it.

Transcript Highlights:

• So in the two-year period, we have about $155 million worth of near-general-fund costs.
• There's a 2% reduction to near-general-fund-funded WMS and EMS staff, as well as a 5% reduction for administrative
• There's a 2% reduction to near-general-fund-funded WMS and EMS staff, as well as a 5% reduction for administrative
• There's a 2% reduction to near-general-fund-funded WMS and EMS staff, as well as a 5% reduction for administrative
• I understand the challenge of addressing a general fund shortfall.

Summary: The House Appropriations Committee opened with committee guidelines for the 2026 session, including limits on testimony, amendment deadlines, confidentiality expectations, and professionalism rules. Chair Ormsby also reviewed housekeeping for the public hearing, noting the meeting was recorded and live streamed, and that testimony would be limited to one minute because of the large number of sign-ups. The committee then began its work session on Governor Ferguson’s proposed 2026 supplemental operating budget, presented by OFM Director Katie Chapman, who outlined the state’s fiscal pressures: higher caseloads in major programs, a revenue forecast decline of about $390 million, federal policy changes tied to H.R. 1, inflation, and a relatively small ending fund balance. She said the governor’s budget solves about a $2.3 billion shortfall through nearly $800 million in spending reductions, revenue shifts, fund transfers, use of about $1 billion from the Budget Stabilization Account, and some tax preference changes, while also making targeted investments in areas such as child welfare, behavioral health, wildfire response, housing, and IT modernization. Chapman also explained that the proposal does not fully balance over the four-year outlook under the state’s statutory assumptions, but said the governor relied on the budget-balance law’s exception tied to BSA use and low employment growth. A question from Rep. Connors about credit ratings was answered with the view that the impact is difficult to predict and that Washington’s strong pension funding and balanced-budget framework remain positives. The public hearing drew testimony from state officials and many advocates, most of whom opposed specific cuts or fund shifts in the governor’s proposal. Secretary of State Steve Hobbs objected to proposed sweeps from the corporations and charities fund and the library archives account, citing prior cuts, layoffs, cyberattack-related costs, and the need to upgrade aging systems. Commissioner of Public Lands Dave Upthegrove urged restoration of wildfire prevention funding, saying the proposed amount was still $30 million short of the commitment in House Bill 1168 and that underfunding would increase suppression costs and risk to communities. Many education witnesses opposed reductions to Working Connections Child Care, transition to kindergarten, local effort assistance, Running Start, and higher education across-the-board cuts, arguing they would harm access, equity, and workforce development. Higher education leaders from community colleges, the University of Washington, Western Washington University, and Evergreen State College described staffing cuts, program reductions, and pressure on student services, while K-12 groups and OSPI said the budget would deepen existing funding gaps. A large portion of testimony focused on human services, health, housing, and civil legal aid. Child welfare and youth-serving organizations supported some targeted investments but opposed cuts to child care, child welfare network administration, and youth programs; advocates for foster youth, homeless youth, and mentoring programs asked for continued or increased funding. Health care and long-term care providers warned that proposed Medicaid and rate changes would reduce access for seniors, people with disabilities, and safety-net patients, while Planned Parenthood and abortion access advocates urged full restoration of the Abortion Access Project and related reimbursements. Housing and legal aid witnesses backed the governor’s proposed right-to-counsel funding but asked for more support, and homelessness advocates sought contingency funding for federal housing programs. Crime victim and domestic violence service providers repeatedly said the proposed $12 million was far short of the roughly $21.38 million needed to avoid service cuts and closures. Other testimony addressed the Climate Commitment Account shift for the Working Families Tax Credit, with environmental advocates opposing the diversion of CCA dollars and workforce advocates supporting the governor’s economic security and employment programs. No votes or formal committee action were taken during the hearing portion described in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• And those are mostly, you know, non-General Fund.
• This greatly alleviated the state General Fund from funding these programs in the past, and it also created
• by the General Fund.
• To save $300 million General Fund.
• And so this was enacted to save $300 million General Fund. Right.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Health began with a hearing on the impacts of H.R. 1 on California health programs, focusing first on reproductive health state investments. HCAI outlined five state-funded reproductive health programs created after Dobbs, including uncompensated care, practical support, capital and clinical infrastructure, and workforce programs. Essential Access Health and Planned Parenthood testified that these funds have served hundreds of thousands of patients, but warned that the uncompensated care program is fully awarded and needs renewal, and that Title X and Medicaid-related federal uncertainty continues to threaten access. Members questioned who the uncompensated care program serves, why Medi-Cal covers a large share of abortions, and whether Planned Parenthood could expand prenatal services; public commenters urged continued support for reproductive health access. The committee then took up long-term care services and supports, starting with the HCBA and Assisted Living Waiver programs. DHCS reported large wait lists for both programs and said enrollment is limited by workforce and provider capacity, while LAO noted that increasing slots alone may not increase access without additional programmatic changes. Members pressed the department on whether more slots should be added given the lower cost of home- and community-based care compared with skilled nursing facilities, and public testimony argued that the wait lists should be reduced and that staffing concerns do not fully explain unused capacity. The committee also heard testimony on congregate living health facilities, where providers and a patient family described the homes as critical, lower-cost alternatives to nursing facilities for younger, medically complex people. Witnesses requested short-term bridge funding, while DHCS said it is proposing to transition CLFs into a managed care benefit by January 1, 2028, which would remove caps and expand access statewide. The final long-term care topic was PACE. DHCS explained that it has paused new PACE applications and service expansions for at least two years to reassess oversight capacity and develop a statewide strategic growth framework, while existing programs continue operating. CalPACE supported the pause as a planning measure but asked for four additional state nurse positions to reduce delays in level-of-care determinations and speed enrollment for frail older adults. Members shared personal stories about how PACE has helped family members and asked how the state will meet growing demand; DHCS said stakeholder engagement will begin later in the year and that some existing applications already in process will continue. Public commenters broadly supported PACE, HCBA, and CLF funding requests. The hearing then moved to the Department of Health Care Services’ 2026-27 Medi-Cal budget and related trailer bills. DHCS said Medi-Cal spending has grown due to coverage expansions, higher acuity, rising utilization, and especially pharmacy costs, and it described proposals to extend the current skilled nursing facility financing framework for one year while the state develops a new value-based payment strategy. LAO said most recent Medi-Cal spending growth has been driven more by higher per-enrollee costs than by caseload growth, with pharmacy spending growing especially quickly, and recommended better and more timely data to analyze the drivers. Members expressed concern about the rapid rise in Medi-Cal spending and asked for more detail on the largest cost increases.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Department of Revenue estimates no impact to the state general fund and roughly $8,000 in lost property
• The Department of Revenue estimates no impact to the state general fund and roughly 8,000 and lost property
• Currently, the Veterans Assistance Fund receives an allocated portion of a county's general property
• housing funding tools.
• The witness said the funds would generate revenue and they would work with the county.

Bills: HB2559 , HB2135 , HB2133 , HB2442

Committee: House Finance

Keywords: affordable housing, local government funding, housing programs, community development, financial assistance, adaptive housing, disabled veterans, tax preferences, housing affordability, retail sales tax, property tax, senior citizens, tax exemption, permanent legislation, local government, tax authority, sales tax, use tax, real estate excise tax, REET

Transcript Highlights:

• That's broken down by $730 million general fund, about $2.3 billion from federal fund sources, and then
• We urge you to let it move forward as planned; it does not negatively impact the general fund, and it
• So, CDPH is requesting state general fund to support.
• I understand that we loaned about $900 million in ADAP funds to the General Fund.
• So, would ADAP be sustainable if we decided not to loan funds to the General Fund? ADAP.