Transcript Highlights:

• sales tax funds. sales tax funds.
• These are mostly non-general funds.
• the allocations that are designated from those proceeds, certain allocations will be proportionally
• into various funds and and allocated<00:24:52.800> among<00:24:53.080> local<00:24:53.360
• <00:42:22.400> The need to fund public services. The need to fund public services.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Local funds is next at $3.4 billion.
• It started last year with $100 million in non-recurring funds, and another $100 million was allocated
• programs benefited by receiving some of these funds.
• The amount of state funds allocated to performance funding this year is $350 million.
• any state funds.

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Higher Education received a presentation from Tim Jones, Senior Vice Chancellor and CFO for the State University System of Florida, on the system’s funding methodology, budget structure, tuition, and performance-based funding. He outlined the system’s scale, including 12 universities, more than 430,000 students taking classes, about 78,000 employees, and a roughly $20 billion operating budget. He also reviewed tuition levels, noting Florida’s low resident undergraduate tuition, the lack of tuition increases since 2013, and the distinction between state-set resident tuition and Board of Governors authority over other tuition categories. Jones described several funding components, including performance funding, preeminence funding, faculty recruitment and retention programs, universities of distinction, nursing pipeline and matching programs, and operational enhancements. He explained that performance funding is based on a 100-point model tied to retention, graduation, employment, and other metrics, with student success plans required if scores decline or fall below 70 points. He said the current performance funding allocation is $350 million and the legislative budget request seeks $400 million. He also said the new SUS 30 strategic plan will lead to updates in the performance metrics and benchmarks, with some changes possibly phased in over time. Senators asked questions about how the new strategic plan will affect future scoring, how long universities have to improve after declining scores, and how out-of-state enrollment and tuition are handled. Jones said universities will be evaluated on the current metrics for the upcoming budget cycle, while the new plan’s changes will be developed later and may include glide paths. He also said there is no statutory cap on nonresident students, though the Board of Governors has a 10% systemwide guideline under discussion, and that graduate out-of-state tuition varies by program and requires institutional and Board of Governors approval. No votes were taken, no public testimony was offered, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• The state ultimately decided to allocate funding to schools that was $6.2 billion above that minimum.
• with those funds.
• And we've allocated the funding for that, yes. All right.
• So they've really been crucial in helping support the funds that have been allocated as grant funds for
• Though the previous funding allocations and staff increases have drastically reduced wait times... ..

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard the Governor’s May Revision proposals for TK-12 education, beginning with a Proposition 98 overview from the Department of Finance and the Legislative Analyst’s Office. Finance said the May Revision increases the Proposition 98 minimum guarantee by about $6.4 billion relative to the Governor’s January budget across the three-year window, with higher guarantees in each year, continued full payment of the outstanding settle-up obligation in 2024-25, and a reduced $3.9 billion settle-up amount in 2025-26. Finance also described larger mandatory and discretionary deposits into the Proposition 98 reserve, ending with an estimated $10.3 billion reserve balance. The LAO said the overall estimates were reasonable, but urged the state to fully fund the guarantee and use other budget tools, including reserves, to manage volatility rather than delay settle-up payments. Members questioned the remaining settle-up amount, the risk of revenue volatility, and possible alternatives such as advance payments or other reserve strategies. The second panel covered Department of Education proposals and trailer bill language. Finance outlined additional state operations funding and positions for CDE, along with trailer bill changes affecting community schools, preschool, literacy, special education, charter accountability, teacher-related programs, and other technical cleanups. The LAO supported the overall structure of the package but recommended changes to several items, including rejecting some additional one-time community schools, literacy, math, multilingual screener, and inclusive college proposals, while supporting the ongoing LCFF and special education increases and raising concerns about the paid pregnancy disability leave proposal’s cost and implementation complexity. CDE supported the special education increase, community schools, literacy and math investments, homelessness funding, and the paid pregnancy leave proposal, while asking for more funding for county office support, clearer homelessness definitions, and continued preschool parity. Members also asked about immigrant student supports, community schools reporting, and the rationale and cost estimate for the paid pregnancy leave proposal, which Finance estimated at $218 million annually. The final panel addressed the Commission on Teacher Credentialing. Finance proposed additional legal staffing for SB 848 implementation and educator misconduct caseloads, a fee increase for clear credential renewals from $100 to $125, a $5 million one-time Proposition 98 investment to build a transcript review platform, $2 million ongoing for transcript review staffing, and $30 million one-time for the statewide residency technical assistance center. The LAO had no concerns about the legal staffing, supported the transcript review platform if the fee increase and ongoing staffing were adopted, and recommended rejecting the residency technical assistance center expansion because existing funding runs through 2029. The Commission explained that the misconduct workload has grown over several years, that AI would assist but not replace human review in transcript matching, and that the residency technical assistance center helps recruit and retain teachers and support rural districts. Public commenters largely supported special education, discretionary block grants, community schools, literacy investments, homelessness funding, and teacher credentialing alternatives, while some urged rejection of the settle-up proposal and preschool COLA reduction.

Transcript Highlights:

• funds.
• For every $1 in federal funding, we have about $3 in state funding. General Fund.
• request technically since you're funding the fund with general funds.
• The request encompasses various funding allocations necessary for our operations and initiatives.
• You mentioned specifically how funds were being allocated to the Navajo Nation, but to look at other

Transcript Highlights:

• Fund to the State Court Facilities Construction Fund, thereby reducing the general fund backfill needed
• to the general fund.
• unencumbered funds.
• to the process for allocating these funds.
• And if there is funding allocated for Prop 36 implementation, We strongly urge you to include funding

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This current budget does not have any dollars allocated for preeminence funding.
• Although we weren't able to fund it this year, is the reason we couldn't fund it because we instead allocated
• This current budget does not have any dollars allocated for permanence funding.
• able to fund it this year, did we, is the reason we couldn't fund it because we instead allocated higher
• And so we have funded, uh, We've made historic funding in our state parks.

Keywords: 998, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• or whatever then by that act and funding or whatever then by that act and funding it<01:29:17.520
• <01:29:52.760> so there's just a changing in funding so there's just a changing in funding
• We are not funded by the general fund. We are overseen by a Board of Trustees.
• /c><03:38:25.840> we<03:38:26.239> overseen funded by the general fund we overseen funded
• Uh, real estate allocation.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee held an orientation for new and returning members of the House committee on agencies and administration, with introductions from members and staff. Chair Carol Maguire outlined her expectations for hearings: keep questions focused on the bill, be respectful to witnesses, and use the committee’s orientation opportunities to learn about the jail staff, retirement system, and Office of Professional Licensure. Members also discussed related assignments on other bodies, including the Joint Legislative Committee on Administrative Rules and the Joint Committee on Employee Classification, and noted that some members already serve on those panels. A substantial portion of the meeting focused on the State Building Code and the committee’s upcoming workload. Members explained how the state code is intended to provide a common baseline while allowing limited local options, and why municipalities must formally adopt and publish any local amendments. They reviewed several anticipated bills: a consolidation bill to gather building-code enforcement materials in one place, a bill to update the state energy code, a bill to restrict municipal adoption of building-code changes, and a bill to update the electrical code. Members also discussed how building codes apply to older homes and commercial buildings, and why code updates are important for safety and clarity. The chair said the committee had 36 bills currently scheduled, including many early bills that must move by March 6 because they will be heard by two committees. She said the committee would use subcommittees for harder bills, with three subcommittees this year: pensions, licensing, and likely state building code. She also outlined the hearing schedule, including lighter bills on February 12 and the expectation of executive sessions later in the month. No votes were taken during the orientation, but members were told that public hearings do not require a quorum and that hard copies of bills would be distributed by committee staff.

Transcript Highlights:

• PERA had a funded ratio of 67%, and ERB was 65% funded.
• Those funding policies indicate that the funding gap will continue to grow.
• On a special reserve fund that was funded through a one-time allocation, but we've also seen states looking
• flows into funds.
• How are these reserve funds funded in other states?

Transcript Highlights:

• With these surplus funds, we will be allocating an additional $190 million on top of the funds that will
• With this surplus funds, we will be allocating an additional $190 million on top of the funds that will
• Funding that we will undertake in the coming weeks.
• And so I also acknowledge the deep need to fund the MBTA.
• The current bill, while allocating substantial funds for the transportation needs, does not specifically

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The House opened with the Pledge of Allegiance and adopted two ceremonial resolutions: one commemorating the dedication of the Woburn Battle Road Memorial as part of the Massachusetts 250th celebration, and another recognizing May 1-7 as Elks National Youth Week. The chamber then took up House Bill 4005, a fiscal year 2025 supplemental appropriations bill using FY24 Fair Share surtax surplus funds, and ordered it to a third reading before later considering it for passage to be engrossed. During debate on the bill, the House heard a lengthy presentation in support of the proposal, which would direct about $828 million to transportation and $353 million to education. The transportation spending was described as primarily supporting the MBTA, including workforce and safety funding, reserve replenishment, station and infrastructure improvements, reduced fares, and reimbursement for tunnel closure costs, along with smaller amounts for regional transit authorities and unpaved roads. The education side included additional special education circuit breaker funding, vocational school capital, early education workforce supports, early literacy, universal school meals, higher education endowment matches, Green School Works, and ESOL waitlist reduction, with the Inspector General directed to review circuit breaker cost controls. Members then debated several amendments. One amendment related to a school athletics policy was modified by a further amendment calling for DESE analysis before implementation; both the further amendment and the underlying amendment as amended were adopted. A transportation amendment to shift $50 million from MBTA funding to Chapter 90 municipal roads was supported by members emphasizing rural road needs but was rejected on a roll call, 25-120. Another transportation amendment adding at least $300,000 for Route 93 mitigation costs in Medford was adopted, 133-20. The bill itself then passed to be engrossed on a roll call, 140-14. The House also observed moments of silence for former First Lady Kitty Dukakis and for victims of the Santo Domingo nightclub collapse, and later adopted an order to meet the next day at 11 a.m. before adjourning in memory of former Representative Philip W. Johnston.

Transcript Highlights:

• We just need more funding. We need more funding.
• State credits are funded through the general fund. They're incredibly efficient.
• I really appreciate the discussion here today and also appreciate the funding allocated to affordable
• Funding is subsidy.
• All states, except for California and Massachusetts, have their tax credit allocator also fund the gap

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Housing Finance and Affordability held its first hearing of 2025 to examine California’s housing finance system, with opening remarks emphasizing the state’s severe housing shortage, high costs, and the need for practical recommendations to the Legislature and Governor. Co-chairs described the committee as an educational and problem-solving forum focused on financing housing production, first-time homeownership, mixed-income developments, and affordability across the income spectrum. Witnesses from state agencies and the development sector were invited to explain how housing is financed and where the system is breaking down. Panelists from the California Housing Partnership, the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency, the Tax Credit Allocation Committee/State Treasurer’s Office, CalHFA, and Related outlined the “capital stack” used to finance affordable housing, stressing that projects typically rely on multiple public and private sources, including federal and state low-income housing tax credits, tax-exempt bonds, state subsidies, local funds, and rental income. Speakers noted that affordable housing rents generally cannot support full project costs without public subsidy, and that recent federal changes—especially the expansion of the 4% and 9% tax credit programs and the reduction of the bond financing threshold for 4% credits—should allow California to finance substantially more units. CalHFA also described its homeownership programs, including My Home, Dream For All, and disaster-related mortgage assistance, as well as its multifamily lending and bond issuance programs. Several witnesses and committee members emphasized that the system remains too complex, too slow, and underfunded. They pointed to the need for more state funding, a housing bond, a permanent funding source, and better coordination among agencies, while also citing recent streamlining efforts such as AB 434’s SuperNOFA, AB 519’s one-stop-shop working group, and the planned California Housing and Homeless Agency reorganization. Members raised concerns about equity, access, missing-middle housing, gender and racial disparities, and whether current programs adequately serve extremely low-income households and those at risk of homelessness. No formal votes or actions were taken during the hearing; the discussion ended with committee members and witnesses agreeing that both funding and administrative reform are needed to increase production and improve affordability.

Transcript Highlights:

• DHS has also provided counties with annual funding allocated for county CCS monitoring administrative
• Nearly $10 billion, almost a quarter of Medi-Cal's General Fund, is being allocated to health care for
• Moving forward, we must ensure that funding is allocated in a way that allows districts to implement
• The funding would be through the PACE Oversight Fund.
• The funding would be through the PACE Oversight Fund.

Summary: The committee heard a budget oversight hearing on the Department of Health Care Services, focusing first on the overall Medi-Cal budget and a March General Fund loan to cover a current-year shortfall. DHCS said the 2025-26 budget proposal totals $193.4 billion, with Medi-Cal projected at $188.1 billion total funds and $42.1 billion General Fund, driven by higher enrollment, pharmacy costs, managed care growth, and costs tied to eligibility expansions and the COVID-era redetermination unwinding. The department said the $3.44 billion loan was needed to manage cash flow and ensure timely payments to providers and plans, while the LAO noted Medi-Cal’s cash-basis budgeting creates volatility and that more detailed estimates would come with the May Revision. Members discussed federal Medicaid threats, the need for transparency on cost drivers, and the impact of pharmacy spending, long-term care, and immigration-related coverage expansions. The second major topic was family health programs, including California Children’s Services, the continuous coverage unwinding, and opioid settlement fund spending. DHCS described CCS funding methodology changes, ongoing county stakeholder work, and a delayed rollout of CCS monitoring and oversight until July 1, 2025, while county representatives and advocates argued the program is underfunded and asked for more technical assistance and a delay in implementation. On the unwinding, the department explained that federal redetermination flexibilities helped maintain coverage after the pandemic, but the Governor’s budget proposes ending them at the end of June 2025; advocates urged making the flexibilities permanent to avoid coverage losses. For opioid settlement funds, DHCS and Finance said the budget increases funding for naloxone distribution while reducing other harm-reduction spending based on updated settlement revenues, prompting criticism from members and public commenters who argued the change would weaken effective harm-reduction programs. The hearing also included an update on Proposition 35 implementation. DHCS said the voter-approved measure continuously appropriates MCO tax revenues beginning in 2025, with up to $4.6 billion annually available for specified Medi-Cal and provider investments in 2025 and 2026, but implementation depends on consultation with the required stakeholder advisory committee. The department and LAO noted uncertainty about future federal rules affecting the MCO tax after 2026. Public testimony largely supported maintaining Medi-Cal expansions, protecting immigrant coverage, preserving harm-reduction funding, and increasing support for community health workers, pediatric dental care, and CCS county administration. No votes were taken during the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Road funding.
• Road<00:20:54.640> funding.
• The quality and Road funding.
• Back in on up to the equity in road fund allocations. I guess what does that mean?
• <00:29:40.960> um equity in road fund um equity in road fund um allocations.<00:29:43.440>

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00:13 Roll Call 00:00:24 Approval of Minutes from September Meeting 00:02:10 Presentation of Special Purpose Governmental Entities Report 00:03:19 Presentation of Kentucky League of Cities Legislative Platform for the Upcoming 2026 Session of the General Assembly 00:15:37 Discussion of Centralized Collection of Net Profits and Occupational License Taxes 00:37:05 Adjournment 00:55:53, 958, all

Summary: The committee received reports on special purpose governmental entities from the Department for Local Government and the Fire Commission. DLG staff described SPGEs as limited-jurisdiction political subdivisions and reviewed the department’s registry, reporting portal, compliance monitoring, and planned system upgrades such as a two-way message center, automated noncompliance notices, and tracking for new entities and board expirations. They reported that, as of October 10, 2025, 69% of SPGEs were active and discussed compliance data by cycle, fiscal year, and district type. The Fire Commission reported that fire department mergers have reduced the number of departments by 16 since last year, largely because of volunteer staffing shortages, while financial disclosure compliance had risen to 94%. The commission also noted 509 compliance reviews, 19 in-house inquiries, seven referrals to outside agencies, and one recent federal prison sentence in a theft case. Members asked whether DLG advises SPGEs on tax rates; staff said it only performs calculations and the entities set their own rates. Questions to the Fire Commission focused on whether department reductions meant station closures; officials explained that most changes were mergers that keep physical buildings in place while combining personnel and finances to meet minimum staffing requirements. They said the trend is spread across the state but is especially pronounced in rural areas. The Kentucky League of Cities then presented its 2026 legislative agenda. Its priorities included modernizing city revenue options, increasing equity in road funding, fixing tax increment financing issues, addressing transient room tax collection from web-based platforms, strengthening emergency response coordination, clarifying massage parlor regulation preemption, correcting unintended consequences of House Bill 606, improving newspaper publication rules, and modernizing procurement statutes. KLC also said it supports allowing all cities to collect restaurant tax revenue, wants cities to receive a larger share of road funds and EV-related revenues, and seeks state collection and remittance of any future local sales tax to comply with the Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement. Members asked about best-value bidding, road-fund equity, Airbnb tax litigation, EV prevalence, and disaster funding applications; KLC said cities currently must accept the lowest bid, the road split should better reflect city street costs, the Airbnb tax case remains pending, EV data by locality has not been studied, and allowing cities to apply directly for disaster funds would reduce reliance on county officials. No votes or formal actions were taken beyond approving the September meeting minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• This executive committee creates a framework for the program funding allocation.
• funding properly.
• This executive committee creates a framework for the program funding allocation.
• funding properly.
• has uh not um this particular allocation has uh not not<01:42:22.599> funded<01:42:23.480>

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The House Higher Education Finance and Policy Committee met and approved the minutes from the previous meeting. The chair noted that agency overviews from the Office of Higher Education and other state agencies were not available, so the committee proceeded with University of Minnesota presentations instead. The committee also reviewed posted committee rules. University of Minnesota representatives gave an overview of the university’s research enterprise, describing it as a system of five campuses with a possible expansion to St. Cloud, and highlighting research strengths across campuses in agriculture, energy, natural resources, health, and the Twin Cities flagship campus. They said the university has more than $1.3 billion in annual research expenditures, receives most of its research funding from federal sources, and is ranked highly for both overall research and interdisciplinary research. Examples discussed included the Clinical and Translational Science Institute, the Forever Green initiative, and research tied to sustainable crops, health, and commercialization. Members asked questions about specific research areas, including biodegradable or renewable plastics, wheat research, food dyes, health and environmental toxins, and the market for winter camelina and winter pennycress. University staff said they could follow up with more detailed information and explained that the winter crop work is intended to become market-driven over time, while also improving soil health and creating new revenue streams for farmers. They also clarified that the university’s federal research funding includes money from NIH, NSF, DOE, DOD, and other agencies, and that the “other” funding category includes foundations, subawards, and internal university seed funding. The committee then heard a second University of Minnesota presentation focused on partnerships, commercialization, and workforce development. Testimony highlighted collaborations with industry and government partners such as U.S. Steel, 3M, Medtronic, Cisco, and defense-related industry leaders, as well as programs supporting microelectronics, AI, cybersecurity, and sustainable aviation fuels. No formal votes were taken beyond approving the minutes, and the committee ended the segment by moving on to the next testifier.

Transcript Highlights:

• Before allocating more funding, we must demand greater accountability from the DHHL.
• /c> allocating more funding we must demand allocating more funding we must demand greater<00:32:41.600
• It establishes the accessory dwelling unit financing and deed restriction program to allocate funds to
• It establishes the accessory dwelling unit financing and deed restriction program to allocate funds to
• We'll also change the funding source from DERF to the Rental Housing Revolving Fund.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint Housing and Public Safety/Water and Land hearing first took up HB 1096, which would repeal statutory tenant-selection preferences for disabled veterans and spouses of deceased veterans in state low-income housing. HPHA testified in support, saying the change was a housekeeping measure because the same preferences already exist in administrative rules and could be adjusted later to align with other local preferences, while also noting the federal VASH program provides stronger veteran housing support. Several members questioned why the preference should be removed at all, emphasizing that veterans have long been underserved and asking for a stronger justification; the committees ultimately deferred HB 1096. The later Housing/Hawaiian Affairs agenda heard HB 606 HD1, a measure to extend Act 279 funding and related exemptions for the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands. Supporters argued the bill would give DHHL more time to use the $600 million appropriation to acquire land, work with developers, and address a wait list of about 29,000 applicants, while also helping restore Hawaiian communities and reduce the Hawaiian diaspora. Opponents focused on accountability and oversight, saying DHHL needs clearer plans, measurable goals, and stronger safeguards before receiving more money, and warning that prior spending and strategic-plan changes had reduced the number of applicants served. The committee also heard testimony that the bill would help DHHL fulfill long-standing obligations to Native Hawaiians and that the housing need affects the broader state, not only Hawaiian Home Lands beneficiaries.

Transcript Highlights:

• Those metrics will showcase the funds that have been allocated and what is produced by those funds.
• And so when we receive funding either through our federal allocations that come to the department every
• , or HOME funds.
• funds.
• funds.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The Committee on Director Nominations met to consider Ruby Dylan Williams for Director of the Arizona Department of Housing. Chair Jay Kaufman opened with remarks about the committee’s role in scrutinizing nominees’ commitment to faithfully executing state law. Williams, who has served in housing roles since 2020 and as interim director since March 2025, described her background in both public service and the private sector and said her priorities would be expanding housing supply, preserving housing stability, and improving technology-driven operations and transparency. Members questioned Williams extensively about department oversight, fraud prevention, auditor general findings, homelessness policy, budget priorities, and the cost of affordable housing programs. She said the department had strengthened internal controls, added verbal verification steps for wire transfers, increased site inspections and grantee monitoring, and was tracking 68 performance metrics. She also defended the use of LIHTC and other federal housing programs as key public-private tools, said the department was working on a real-time homelessness data system, and explained that if state funding were cut, staffing would likely be reduced before core programs. Several members pressed her on past fraud and audit findings and on whether the department had been sufficiently proactive in preventing them. Public testimony was overwhelmingly supportive. Developers and industry representatives praised Williams’ experience, her knowledge of housing finance, and her role in streamlining the qualified allocation plan and improving the department’s responsiveness. They argued that her leadership has helped attract investment and increase housing production in Arizona. After debate, the committee voted 3-2 to recommend Williams’ confirmation to the full Senate, with Senators Kavanagh and Shope voting no and Senators Bravo and Ortiz voting yes.

Transcript Highlights:

• This measure will allocate an additional $55 million, in addition to other allocations, to expand the
• This measure will allocate an additional $55 million, in addition to other allocations, to expand the
• This measure will allocate an additional $55 million, in addition to other allocations, to expand the
• This measure will allocate an additional $55 million, in addition to other allocations, to expand the
• This measure will allocate an additional $55 million, in addition to other allocations, to expand the

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We need to make sure when these funds are allocated, there's accountability and transparency.
• , special funds from the state funds.
• , special funds from the state funds.
• I'm not sure what you're going— Well, while reviewing the general fund and the allocations in itself,
• the federal match funding.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This will include three main things: how Proposition 1 changed county funding allocations, changes to
• , with the Department of Public Health responsible for allocating the prevention funds.
• So this funding is to be allocated under the Behavior Health Continuum Infrastructure Program kind of
• It's essentially allocating funding, largely allocating funding to seven different regions of the state
• , and that amount of allocation was based on historical funding for realignment many years ago.

Summary: The hearing opened with remarks from the chair and members about recent federal cuts to public health, mental health, family planning, and Title X funding, with strong concern about the impact on California programs and providers. The committee then turned to the Department of State Hospitals, which presented its 2025-26 budget proposal of $3.4 billion, including new positions, capital improvements, and funding tied to increased patient costs and incompetent-to-stand-trial services. DSH reported major progress in reducing the IST waitlist and wait times, said it had met the court’s 28-day treatment benchmark for those without extenuating circumstances, and described workforce recruitment and retention efforts such as residency programs, fellowships, outreach, and hiring streamlining. Members asked about future IST referral trends, SB 1323’s effect on diversion and community treatment, and workforce lessons in high-cost regions; public comment urged reconsideration of county IST growth cap methodology in light of new criminal justice initiatives. The committee next received an informational overview of Proposition 1 and its changes to behavioral health funding and governance. The Legislative Analyst’s Office explained that Prop. 1 restructured county MHSA funding buckets, expanded the Commission for Behavioral Health, shifted prevention and early intervention responsibilities, and authorized a $6.4 billion bond, including $4.4 billion for behavioral health facilities through BHCIP. DHCS said it had released guidance for county integrated plans and was receiving extensive public comment. Members focused on BHCIP application requirements, especially letters of support and tribal projects, and raised concerns about whether DHCS’s implementation matched statutory intent. DHCS said it had authority to set application requirements and that tribal entities were treated differently because of sovereignty and funding structure. DHCS then updated the committee on BHCIP, the Behavioral Health Bridge Housing Program, and related bond implementation. The department said BHCIP had awarded about $1.7 billion across five rounds, with more than 130 projects and 223 distinct facilities funded, and that it was preparing to award the new bond funds after receiving nearly $8 billion in applications. The LAO’s assessment found that more than half of awards served at least 80% Medi-Cal enrollees, but also raised concerns that the regional allocation model could reinforce inequities, that the program had not sufficiently addressed the highest-need regions such as the southern San Joaquin Valley, and that smaller counties and less launch-ready applicants faced barriers. For bridge housing, DHCS said more than $1.1 billion had been awarded, serving over 5,000 people and supporting more than 2,000 operational beds, but the Governor’s budget proposes to eliminate Round 4 funding as the administration weighs other statewide investments and Proposition 1 implementation workload. Public commenters and members urged more accountability, better regional equity, stronger labor and community involvement, and caution about funding for for-profit psychiatric facilities. Finally, the committee heard on the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative. CalHHS and DHCS described CYBHI as a broad prevention- and equity-focused effort with more than 1,300 organizations funded, over $2.1 billion awarded, and multiple work streams spanning schools, community programs, workforce, and digital supports. DHCS highlighted school-based services, the fee schedule rollout, and digital platforms BrightLife Kids and Soluna, which it said are reaching users statewide and providing low-barrier access to coaching and support. Members and public commenters raised concerns about delays in school fee schedule implementation, the large share of funding going to digital tools, the need for more in-person services, and whether the initiative is sufficiently tracking outcomes and equity impacts. No formal votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• to the ABC funding.
• So, you know, maybe that would be helpful if you talk about funding, the differences in funding K-12
• Is that funding that's being, I think what I was told by someone at the department was that funding was
• And I guess it's all going to be funded out of SRA funds. Is that right? Very close.
• funds and if we can braid and blend dollars to support students and not try to fund a bunch of siloed

Summary: The committee met to review the minutes and then held a workshop-style discussion with Arkansas Department of Education early childhood officials about the state’s early learning programs, funding, and access. Officials explained that the state-funded ABC program has been largely flat for years, rising from $11 million to about $14 million in 2018, while the federally funded SRA/CCDF side is much larger. They described differences between the programs, including ABC’s 10-month school-year structure, current enrollment of about 23,000 children in ABC and about 14,871 in SRA, and a SRA wait list that has grown to roughly 2,971 children. Members raised concerns about rural access, school-based versus community-based providers, reimbursement rates, and the need to align early childhood funding with K-12 and kindergarten readiness goals. A major topic was the recent $14.741 million PDG B-5 competitive grant. Officials said it is a one-year systems-building grant, not a direct services grant, and will support local leads, CLASS observations, workforce efforts, and data systems while helping offset some costs that otherwise would have been paid through CCDF. Members also discussed the end of a federal pre-K funding stream in June, with children either moving into ABC slots or requalifying for SRA, and the state’s new enrollment-based payment approach, which officials said saved about $576,000. The committee also heard that the current cost-of-care study is about three years old and that a new market-rate survey is being planned. Several members questioned dual enrollment in home visiting/HIPPY and ABC, with officials saying about 1,200 children are enrolled in both and that limiting double enrollment could save about $2.4 million and affect roughly 470 children. Members also asked about provider closures after rate changes; officials said eight providers cited funding as a reason for closing, while 26 new providers have been added under the new rates. The discussion ended with broad agreement that the committee should continue regular updates, keep providers and families informed, and explore policy changes, waivers, and possible state investments to improve stability, access, and quality in early childhood education.

Transcript Highlights:

• So those funds had essentially remained dry. There was still funding happening then.
• Currently, these default reserve funds are allocated across multiple accounts, resulting in increased
• Being proposed for drastic funding reductions, a drastic cut in those funds.
• allocations.
• One C, so we have for three years now funded this with the one-time allocation from that period ago.

Summary: The Assembly Subcommittee on State Administration held a budget hearing focused heavily on housing, homelessness, and related administrative proposals. HCD reported that California housing production has increased, with 2023 completions up 13% from 2022 and entitlement and construction timelines improving, while members and advocates criticized the Governor’s January budget for zeroing out or sharply reducing several housing programs. Public testimony urged funding for affordable housing production, preservation, youth housing, CalHome, LIHTC, HAP, and related programs, and several speakers argued the state should not pull back after recent progress. A major policy item was trailer bill language to allow HCD to access “excess equity” in existing affordable housing projects and recycle those funds into new or preserved housing. HCD and the LAO said the proposal could unlock tens or hundreds of millions of dollars, but members wanted guardrails and clearer statutory direction to ensure the funds stay within the intended housing purposes. The committee also discussed encampment resolution funding; HCD said the proposal would shift expenditure deadlines to the date of award rather than appropriation, while the LAO raised concerns about limited outcome data and urged the Legislature to use upcoming reporting before deciding on future funding. The hearing also covered HCD trailer bills to consolidate default reserve funds into a centralized continuously appropriated account and to clarify reporting requirements for early rounds of the Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention program. HCD requested funding to implement chaptered legislation, including a new tribal housing program and reporting-related bills, and also sought extensions for certain reappropriations, including Homekey and REAP 2 deadlines. Public commenters and regional agencies supported flexibility for REAP 2 timing and other housing-related adjustments. Finally, the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency presented the Governor’s reorganization proposal to split the current agency into a Housing and Homelessness Agency and a Consumer Protection Agency. The administration said the change would improve focus, efficiency, and coordination, but the LAO and several members questioned whether it would truly save money or improve accountability, especially given the need for new leadership, possible staffing changes, and the fact that the plan had not yet been formally submitted for review. No votes were taken during the hearing.