Transcript Highlights:

• Immigration is a federal issue, and the federal government is taking the lead.
• Federal issue, and the federal government is taking the lead.
• The board will serve as a resource to the federal government to assist in the enforcement of federal
• That is federal law.
• Immigration is a federal issue, has always been a federal issue, will continue to be a federal issue.

Committee: Senate Appropriations

Summary: The Senate Appropriations Committee took up SB 2-C, a major immigration enforcement bill sponsored by Senator Gruters and co-introduced by Senator Fine. Gruters described the measure as a broad crackdown on illegal immigration that would replace a single immigration officer with a State Board of Immigration Enforcement, create a $250 million grant program for local law enforcement, fund additional Department of Agriculture interdiction staff and facilities, expand pretrial detention for certain unauthorized immigrants, increase criminal penalties, require more cooperation with ICE, and eliminate in-state tuition eligibility for undocumented students. He and supporters framed the bill as a way to support law enforcement, deter illegal immigration, and align Florida with federal enforcement efforts. Committee questioning focused heavily on the bill’s education, detention, and enforcement provisions. Senators pressed Gruters and Fine on why the bill did not address employer sanctions or E-Verify, whether the tuition changes would affect students who had grown up in Florida, how sanctuary-policy enforcement would work, and whether the bill would create practical burdens for prosecutors, jails, and local officials. Gruters said he was open to working on E-Verify in regular session but not to amending this bill, and Fine argued the tuition repeal would apply to undocumented students who had qualified under existing law. Sheriff Bob Gualtieri testified in support, saying ICE bed capacity was still insufficient and that county jails needed more resources to honor detainers. Mark Schlachman of FSU Law offered historical context, noting prior state-federal cooperation efforts and warning of unintended consequences, while several public witnesses opposed the bill as unconstitutional, costly, and harmful to immigrant families and the economy. Opponents from the Southern Poverty Law Center, ACLU of Florida, Florida Center for Fiscal and Economic Policy, Florida Policy Institute, AFL-CIO, and immigrant advocacy groups argued the bill would invite litigation, encourage racial profiling, harm the workforce and higher education, and punish law-abiding immigrants and their families. They emphasized that immigration is a federal matter, that K-12 education must be provided regardless of status, and that removing in-state tuition would reduce access to college and hurt Florida’s economy. Some speakers urged the committee to grandfather current students if the tuition waiver is repealed. The meeting ended with continued public testimony and no final vote reflected in the transcript provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the federal government requires you to fill... Already federally mandated.
• It's based on what federal law says.
• So E-Verify is the federal program, and you're talking about the federal I-9, right?
• That's a federal violation.
• An overseas federal election voter would be eligible to vote in the federal elections, and those are

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 4198, which would require employers to use E-Verify to confirm new hires’ work authorization and impose escalating penalties for violations, including warnings, debarment from state contracts, loss of business licenses, and other sanctions. Counsel and senators raised extensive drafting concerns, including circular language, conflicts with existing record-retention provisions, unclear references to “seeks to employ,” possible application to babysitters, lawn care, and other casual or household arrangements, and uncertainty about how the bill would work for employers who never actually complete a hire. The bill sponsor defended the measure as a way to strengthen compliance with existing law, protect employers who use E-Verify in good faith, and deter illegal hiring. After debate, a motion to table the bill failed on a roll call vote, 6 in favor and 10 opposed, and the chair then announced the bill would be sent to a subcommittee to be cleaned up, with instructions to resolve the drafting conflicts and other ambiguities. The committee then turned to House Bill 4710, with an amendment, which would require a person to be registered with a political party or as an independent 210 days before filing a certificate of candidacy. Counsel explained that the change would lengthen the current 60-day requirement and would affect both party-switching and independent candidacies, making it harder for candidates to change affiliation shortly before an election. Senators asked about how the 210-day period would work relative to the primary and general election filing deadlines, and counsel clarified that it would be measured backward from the relevant filing dates. The discussion focused on the practical effect of the bill as a “sore loser” measure and on the timing rules for candidacy filings.

Transcript Highlights:

• a lower federal pass-through amount because we're assuming those enhanced federal tax credits will not
• </c><00:13:02.199><c> tax</c> assuming uh those enhanced federal tax assuming uh those enhanced federal
• </c> program it's the enhanced Federal program it's the enhanced Federal credits<00:15:15.800><c> right
• So when we lowered our federal tax credits that were that the federal government was paying to Minnesota
• When we lowered our federal tax credits that were that the federal government was paying to Minnesota

Committee: House Commerce Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• These positions would be fully federally funded through our federal base grant and these reallotment
• The second adjustment is an increase of $4.6 million federal funds due to an estimated increase in federal
• And that's under a federal law option that does not require us to pay the federal share, which is 50%
• And that's under a federal law option that does not require us to pay the federal share, which is 50%
• cuts. ...federal cuts.

Summary: The hearing began with an overview of the California Health and Human Services Agency, which described its 2026-27 budget, major departments, and strategic priorities, including behavioral health, housing and human services integration, children and youth, and aging/disability services. The agency also explained a technical CalHHS/CalHires budget adjustment tied to HR1 compliance and eligibility system work. No LAO concerns were raised on that item. The committee then heard from the Office of Youth and Community Restoration on its budget, its SB 823 realignment report, and related issues. OYCR said county-based realignment has generally succeeded but outcomes and readiness vary widely, and it recommended more climate surveys, youth advisory councils, stronger behavioral management, better programming, improved transition planning, and integrated longitudinal data systems. Members pressed OYCR on “net widening,” county-by-county trends, and the gap between the detailed recommendations discussed in hearing and the more general recommendations in the public report. OYCR also described problems with federal Title II grant timing and a pending $14 million administrative funding adjustment, and discussed implementation of the juvenile justice realignment block grant formula. The Ombudsperson division separately requested two new positions due to rising complaints, site visits, and records-access disputes with counties; LAO noted the proposal would create ongoing General Fund costs. Several other departments presented budget change proposals. The State Council on Developmental Disabilities requested $730,000 General Fund ongoing to cover an interagency administrative support gap with DSS; LAO had no concerns. EMSA presented its department overview, said its AB 716 ambulance-rate report has been delayed after resources were reduced, and requested funding for disaster-response vehicle replacement, IT security assessment work, and additional HR/legal staff; members questioned delays, compliance, and the ongoing General Fund impact. The Department of Community Services and Development sought reappropriation of LIWIP funds and explained a new Proposition 4 process for continuing the farmworker housing component. The Department of Rehabilitation requested authority for $60 million in additional federal funds and 54 positions to meet growing vocational rehabilitation demand, with no General Fund impact. The Department of Child Support Services presented its budget and a supplemental report on full pass-through of child support collections. Members questioned why local agency funding was being restored despite declining caseloads, and staff explained that staffing costs have risen faster than caseload declines and that additional funding is needed to maintain service levels. The supplemental report estimated full pass-through would cost about $150 million General Fund annually, or about $80 million for a state-and-county portion, with $3 million to $5 million in automation costs. Finally, the Department of Public Health gave a broad overview of its $5.1 billion budget and its State of Public Health report, highlighting improved mortality and life expectancy, declining overdose deaths and STI rates, persistent racial and regional disparities, and increasing public health emergency demands. CDPH also warned that federal funding threats and policy changes are creating major uncertainty for state and local public health systems.

Transcript Highlights:

• The state received federal awards from 31 different federal agencies.
• DHS improperly drew down federal funds in advance, and unused funds were not returned to the federal
• Sub-awards for four federal programs were not reported correctly to the Federal Funding Accountability
• Then the other one deals with the federal awards and federal funds we get to make sure we continue getting
• those federal funds each year.

Committee: All LEGISLATIVE JOINT AUDITING

Transcript Highlights:

• Where I spent about 25, 26 years in federal government.
• Of course, they don’t get any federal tax credits.
• poverty, they will lose eligibility for federal tax credits.
• There's a federal rural health transformation application.
• We still do not have detail from the federal government.

Committee: Joint Joint Select Committee on Health Care and Behavioral Health Oversight

Summary: The committee first welcomed new DSHS Secretary Angela Ramirez, who introduced herself and described her background in public service, federal and state legislative work, and health and human services leadership. Members emphasized the importance of building strong relationships with her and noted her focus on protecting services, using strategic approaches in a tight budget environment, and improving partnerships with the Legislature. Ramirez said she wanted to keep communication open and that her priorities would be shaped by what she learns from lawmakers and agency partners. The next work session focused on the West Coast Health Alliance and the broader Governor’s Public Health Alliance. Department of Health and governor’s office staff said the West Coast alliance, involving Washington, Oregon, California, and Hawaii, was formed to coordinate science-based public health guidance, especially around vaccines, return-to-work guidance, and responses to federal changes. They said the alliance is intended to reduce confusion, counter misinformation, and preserve access to evidence-based recommendations, with early actions including vaccine guidance for COVID-19, flu, and RSV, a statement rejecting any vaccine-autism link, and preparation for possible ACIP changes. Members asked about workload and coordination with other regional alliances, and staff said there is informal coordination but no formal regular meetings. The committee then heard from the Washington State Health Benefit Exchange about open enrollment and the effects of federal policy changes. Exchange leaders said the expiration of enhanced premium tax credits, HR1 provisions, and immigration-related eligibility changes are affecting affordability and enrollment, with some customers facing large premium increases and some counties becoming harder to serve. They reported early open-enrollment traffic increases, nearly 10,000 new sign-ups, and nearly 12,000 active coverage drops so far, while noting that many more people may disenroll later if subsidies are not extended. They also described mitigation efforts such as silver loading, Cascade Care Savings, outreach through navigators and community partners, and planning for future HR1 requirements like ending auto-renewal and adding verification steps. In the final work session, staff from the Health Care Authority and Insurance Commissioner’s office reviewed Washington’s health reform history and the state’s current affordability and access efforts. They highlighted past ACA-related coverage gains, continued work on prescription drug affordability, PBM oversight, primary care and behavioral health access, and a pending legislative proposal to preserve access to preventive services. They also discussed federal changes affecting Medicaid and the exchange, including work requirements, six-month redeterminations, and the need to coordinate across agencies to implement new rules. Members raised concerns about network adequacy, provider access, and the complexity of the health care system, while staff said they are trying to mitigate harm, simplify administration, and keep coverage and access as stable as possible.

Transcript Highlights:

• We administer federal grant funding, Federal Transit Administration funding that comes into the department
• Those Federal Transit Administration grants, depending on the type of project, are either an 80-20 federal-local
• That's also federally funded.
• For federal funding, the majority of...
• The federal funding that we get goes to two areas, both of which support federally required programs.

Transcript Highlights:

• pay federal taxes.
• pay federal taxes.
• federal taxes.
• federal taxes.
• federal taxes.

Bills: HF3490 , HF4040

Committee: House Education Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• Percent of federal poverty level, according to Senate Bill 241.
• And we have a state and a federal version.
• And then there's the new federal... ...percent of what you pay.
• There is no first-come, first-served language in federal law.
• We are in full compliance with federal law. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Summary: The committee met late in the evening and announced that Senate Bill 132 would be rolled until the next day. The only bill heard was Senate Finance Committee substitute for Senate Bill 241, which would codify New Mexico’s Child Care Assistance Program in statute, establish eligibility, payment, wait-list, and co-payment rules, require reporting and transparency, and tie reimbursement rates to a cost-estimation model and wage scale/career lattice. The sponsor and administration described the bill as creating a durable framework for universal child care, with protections for program integrity, inclusion of children with developmental needs, and requirements to maximize state and federal child care tax benefits. Public testimony was largely supportive of the bill’s child care expansion goals, with endorsements from State Police, firefighters, early childhood advocates, and women’s policy groups, but many providers and educators said they could not support it without stronger wage and career-ladder protections and clearer guarantees that funding would reach staff salaries rather than owners or institutions. The committee adopted Vice Chair Dixon’s amendment, which lowered the proposed transfer from the Early Childhood Education and Care Trust Fund from $1 billion to $700 million and added reporting requirements on the wait list, consultation requirements for rate-setting, additional facility reporting, a prohibition on supplanting certain public education funds, tribal facility participation, and food program reporting. A separate amendment from Representative Duncan to require first-come, first-served enrollment was debated at length but was tabled by a 9-7 vote after the sponsor and secretary said it conflicted with federal prioritization rules and the bill’s targeted access goals. Members also questioned how the bill would affect public entities, nontraditional-hour providers, co-pay triggers, and whether the wage scale would adequately compensate educators. After debate, the committee voted 10-7 to give the amended bill a do-pass recommendation. Supporters said the bill would strengthen workforce stability, improve access for working families, and help sustain New Mexico’s universal child care system; opponents warned about the long-term fiscal impact, the potential growth of the program, and whether the bill sufficiently protected early childhood educators’ wages and other state priorities. The meeting adjourned with notice that the committee would reconvene at 8 a.m. the next day to hear the Senate’s actions on House Bill 2.

Transcript Highlights:

• The federal CRA has its limitations.
• But these entities are not covered by federal CRA.
• Credit unions were not included in that federal legislation and can continue to be excluded federally
• or the credit union into the federal law?
• The federal CRA does not affect independent mortgage banks.

Summary: The Assembly Banking and Finance Committee met to hear several bills, beginning with a consent calendar that included AB 665 and AB 866, both adopted on a do pass basis and referred to Appropriations. The committee then took up AB 801, which would create a California Community Reinvestment Act to require covered financial institutions, including state-chartered banks, credit unions, residential mortgage lenders, and money transmitters, to meet the financial needs of low- and moderate-income communities and communities of color. The author and supporters argued the bill would close gaps left by the federal CRA, address redlining and discriminatory lending, and expand investment in housing, small business, and community development. Support came from community groups, CDFIs, labor, and housing advocates, while opposition from mortgage bankers and credit unions argued the bill would impose costly new reporting and regulatory burdens, especially on institutions they said already serve underserved borrowers well. Committee members discussed the scope of the bill, the experience of other states with state CRA laws, and possible carve-outs or tiered treatment for smaller credit unions. AB 801 was passed as amended and referred to Appropriations, with the roll left open and later completed; one member voted no and others were not voting or voted aye as the roll was finalized. The committee also heard AB 743, which would require licensing and surety bonds for commercial lawsuit financing and bring those transactions under DFPI oversight. The author said the bill was aimed at a largely unregulated, multi-billion-dollar industry and was intended to increase transparency and address concerns about foreign interests, fraud, and abusive litigation funding practices, while not affecting consumer legal funding. Supporters, including Unified Patents, the Civil Justice Association of California, the California Chamber of Commerce, the California Trucking Association, and the American Property Casualty Insurance Association, said the bill was an important first step toward disclosure and regulation. There was no opposition testimony. AB 743 passed unanimously as amended and was referred to Appropriations, with the roll held open briefly for absent members before the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• It didn't get federally picked up and didn't get on the FIA, the federal FIA. Gotcha.
• million which is federally funded fed federally<00:13:09.519><c> funds</c><00:13:10.240><c> 10.5</c>
• <00:13:11.200><c> million</c><00:13:12.000><c> is</c> federally funds 10.5 million is federally funds
• </c> didn't get on the FIA the federal FIA. didn't get on the FIA the federal FIA.
• </c> Federal Aviation Administration. Federal Aviation Administration.

Summary: The Capital Planning Advisory Board met with a quorum, approved the May 21 minutes, and welcomed a new executive branch member, Secretary Keith Jackson of the Justice and Public Safety Cabinet. The board also received two informational items: agency responses to prior questions and amendments made to capital plans after the last meeting. It then heard the Commonwealth Office of Technology’s report on executive branch IT capital project scoring, which reviewed 16 IT requests totaling about $330.5 million. COOT said projects were ranked through an independent panel using standardized criteria focused on feasibility, statewide alignment, readiness, impact, and risk; the CIO recommended moving an enterprise application and artificial intelligence inventory system from rank 11 to rank 4 because of its enterprise-wide impact and connection to Senate Bill 4. The Department of Military Affairs presented its capital plan, describing 43 million in projects for the current period and 13 projects totaling $65 million for 2026–2028, with most funding coming from federal sources and restricted agency funds and no general fund request in the latter period. Its projects included maintenance pool adjustments, a statewide Army master plan, the Somerset readiness center, Shelbyville and Ashland armories, a future home for the Kentucky Army National Guard band, and other facility upgrades. Members asked about the Somerset project’s cost growth and federal delay; the department said the project remains in conceptual design, is awaiting federal MILCON action, and would require a state match of about $9.8 million against $29.6 million federal funding if it is approved. Members also asked about staffing levels, and the department said state employee and Title 32 numbers have been relatively steady, while technician positions have declined. The Department of Veterans Affairs outlined seven projects for 2026–2028, led by a Radcliff Veterans Center HVAC replacement that needs an estimated additional $16 million to finish phase two after phase one was already funded. Other requests included a maintenance pool increase, renovations and exterior upgrades at Eastern and Western Kentucky veterans facilities, a cooling tower replacement at Thompson Hood, and parking lot and lighting improvements. The department said some projects were already in the six-year plan and that the Radcliff phase two could be bid in June 2026 if funded. Members confirmed that a columbarium wall project at Grayson is federally funded. The Kentucky Infrastructure Authority presented its six-year capital plan, citing more than $3 billion in loan commitments since 1988 and over $5 billion in supported infrastructure projects. KIA requested $298.439 million in the first biennium, including $27.742 million in state match for federal clean water and drinking water revolving funds, $25 million for its state Infrastructure Revolving Fund, $185.697 million in federal capitalization grants, and $30 million in leverage bond authorization for each year of the two federally assisted loan programs. Members asked about drinking-water quality, and KIA said that function is handled by the Energy and Environment Cabinet’s Division of Water, not KIA. KIA also said its loan rates currently range from 0.5% to 2.25%, averaging just under 1%, and that its revolving loan programs have had no defaults. The Tourism, Arts, and Heritage Cabinet began its presentation at the end of the transcript, with staff identifying themselves, but no project details or board action from that presentation were included in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• immigration authorities and carrying out federal immigration enforcement. ...and carrying out federal
• The federal government...
• The federal government...
• The federal government...
• The federal government...

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House File 16, and the chair moved the bill with a recommendation that it be re-referred to Elections Finance and Government Operations. Representative Rymer said the bill would require reporting to ICE when an illegal immigrant is arrested on suspicion of a violent crime, even if the county attorney does not prosecute, and would bar state and local entities from blocking federal immigration enforcement. He described the bill as narrowly focused on serious offenses such as murder, assault, robbery, kidnapping, and criminal sexual conduct, and said it was intended to improve communication with federal authorities about dangerous offenders. Supporters argued the bill would improve public safety and cooperation with federal law enforcement. David Zimmer, a former local law enforcement official, said cooperation with ICE is consistent with law enforcement practice and helps with information-sharing, warrants, consulate notifications, and locating individuals. Several other supporters, including a crime victim family member and a security officer, said the bill would help identify dangerous criminals and protect communities. Opponents said the bill would reduce trust in local law enforcement and discourage victims and witnesses from reporting crimes. Testifiers from the Immigrant Law Center of Minnesota, The Advocates for Human Rights, Violence Free Minnesota, the Minnesota Council on Latino Affairs, the Northstar Alliance, the City of Minneapolis, and others said mandatory ICE notification could deter domestic violence and trafficking victims from seeking help, harm due process, and undermine community safety. Some also warned it would interfere with local separation policies, burden local agencies, and have negative economic and civil rights impacts. The committee also heard emotional testimony from individuals describing domestic abuse and immigration-related fears, and from family members of a murder victim who supported the bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• We've been asked today to please share an overview of federal...
• These are pieces that insurance has to cover if they're recommended by certain federal... ...federal
• As a marketplace under the ACA, we are subject to federal law and rules.
• We are very closely watching and waiting for federal rules that will give more bones around the federal
• We also have in Oakland our federally qualified health center.

Summary: The joint informational hearing focused on the cost of uncertainty in California health care, especially the effects of federal policy changes on coverage, access, and affordability. Opening remarks from committee leaders and members emphasized that California’s uninsured rate had fallen to historic lows under the Affordable Care Act and state policies, but that the expiration of enhanced federal subsidies, H.R. 1, and other federal regulatory changes could reverse those gains. Members repeatedly cited rising premiums, skipped care, medical debt, and the strain on low-wage workers, families, clinics, hospitals, and public programs. The first panel reviewed the federal landscape and state response. A federal policy analyst described the ACA’s coverage gains and consumer protections, then outlined current threats: H.R. 1’s Medicaid and marketplace cuts, the end of enhanced premium tax credits, shorter open enrollment, more verification requirements, and changes affecting preventive services and vaccines. Covered California reported that the loss of subsidies is expected to nearly double average monthly premiums, reduce enrollment, and push more consumers into bronze plans with higher deductibles; it also noted that California’s $190 million affordability fund is helping the lowest-income enrollees. HCAI’s Office of Health Care Affordability explained its work on spending targets, market consolidation review, and primary care investment, saying the goal is to slow spending growth rather than impose price caps. Committee members pressed witnesses on the practical effects of bronze plans, administrative burdens, immigration-related disenrollment, provider taxes, uncompensated care, and whether California can sustain current coverage levels without new revenue. Witnesses said bronze plans preserve essential benefits but shift more costs to consumers, and that H.R. 1’s verification and auto-renewal changes will likely reduce enrollment. They also said provider tax reductions could significantly weaken state financing over time, and that higher uninsured rates may increase uncompensated care and pressure premiums elsewhere in the system. The second panel, featuring UC Berkeley Labor Center and California Health Care Foundation experts, highlighted broader affordability problems across job-based coverage and Medi-Cal, citing medical debt, skipped care, and the role of underlying system costs, administrative waste, and lack of competition. They pointed to medical debt relief efforts such as Los Angeles County’s program as a short-term mitigation strategy while the Legislature considers longer-term policy and budget responses.

Transcript Highlights:

• to the Federal Register by January 29.
• to the Federal Register by January ancestors for return to the Federal Register by January, 29.
• We know that there are many reasons for that, and we have the limitation in federal law that non-federally
• California's law was written to close the exact federal gap NAGPRA left open for non-federally recognized
• federal level from tribal governments.

Transcript Highlights:

• aligning state and federal regulations. aligning state and federal regulations.
• </c> program or expand federal control. program or expand federal control.
• </c> geothermal facilities on federal land. geothermal facilities on federal land.
• government and non-federal the federal government and non-federal partners.<04:27:35.359><c> Catastrophic
• and non-federal lands.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> seeking federal grant assistance. seeking federal grant assistance.
• </c> requires a 20% non-federal match. requires a 20% non-federal match.
• </c> federal grant. federal grant.
• </c><00:26:55.840><c> grants</c> we do go up for federal grants we do go up for federal grants the<00
• We applied for a federal grant in 2019 and were awarded $7.5 million in federal funding.

Committee: Senate Capital Investment

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> the priority is set by the federal the priority is set by the federal government<00:05:11.520><c
• </c> the the change because of the federal the the change because of the federal government's<00:29:45.520
• </c> we've been blaming the federal we've been blaming the federal government<00:32:03.240><c> since<
• </c><00:32:13.920><c> government</c> we were blaming the federal government we were blaming the federal
• The whims of the federal government.

Committee: Senate Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• in state law, even if the federal standard is repealed or lowered.
• Also, this circumvents legal challenges to federal PFOS regulation.
• So if this is already a federal standard, why do we need this bill?
• So if this is already a federal standard, why do we need this bill?
• Well, we hope to get our federal money back. You know how I said federal money back.

Summary: The committee heard several environmental and consumer-safety bills. AB 405, the Fashion Act, would require fashion companies to disclose and manage toxic chemicals in their supply chains; supporters said it would reduce worker and consumer exposure and align with existing industry frameworks, while retailers and business groups argued it would duplicate existing laws and raise costs. After questions about DTSC workload, international standards, and affordability, the bill was moved on a due-pass-as-amended motion to Natural Resources and held on call with three votes. AB 762 would ban the sale and distribution of disposable vape devices; supporters emphasized battery-fire risks, recycling contamination, and waste impacts, while cannabis and convenience-store interests warned it would push consumers to illicit markets and harm legal businesses. The bill passed on a due-pass motion to Business and Professions with three votes and was held on call. The committee also adopted the consent calendar with six votes. AB 794 would direct California to keep in place the federal PFAS drinking-water standard if federal protections are weakened, with supporters citing health risks and the need for certainty, and water agencies opposing the emergency-rulemaking authority and potential costs. Members debated whether the bill was too broad and whether federal funds would cover implementation; the bill passed on a due-pass-as-amended motion to Appropriations with four votes and was held open. AB 1148, the Safer Food Packaging Act, would restrict certain chemicals in food packaging; supporters cited cancer and reproductive-health concerns, while chemical, beverage, and manufacturing groups argued the bill should go through existing regulatory processes and that some chemicals lacked feasible alternatives. The author said she would remove antimony trioxide later in the process after hearing opposition concerns; the bill passed on a due-pass motion to Judiciary with four votes and was held open. Finally, AB 1338 would allow local air districts to recover costs for implementing fence-line air monitoring at metal shredding facilities, building on prior legislation and local air district efforts in AB 617 communities. The author said the bill would preserve local control and improve efficiency, and the South Coast Air Quality Management District testified in support. The transcript ends as the district witness begins testimony, with no vote yet taken on AB 1338.

Transcript Highlights:

• Matroni replied that, under the Section 106 process, if federal funds, federal land, or federal permits
• She explained that if federal funds, federal land, or federal permits are being used, the process is
• So in the Section 106 process, if federal funds, federal land, or federal permits are being used, it
• This is a federal law. This is federally mandated. We do not, we do not mandate this.
• Can we guarantee that they're not going to use these federal funds, federal grants or federal lands or

Committee: House Business

Transcript Highlights:

• However, they rely heavily on federal Medicaid funding to support ongoing services.
• federal government has stated in H.R. 1 and federal law that they will have until June 1st of this year
• It's just layers and layers of red tape that our federal government has.
• Just because of the difference in the federal rules, we can never align 100%.
• We do urge the administration and legislature to not amplify federal homes.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Accountability and Oversight held a hearing on how H.R. 1’s new federal work and community engagement rules will affect Medi-Cal and CalFresh, especially for Californians with behavioral health needs, people experiencing homelessness, and justice-involved individuals. The Legislative Analyst’s Office outlined the scope of the changes, including Medi-Cal work requirements beginning in January 2027 and CalFresh changes beginning in June 2026, and estimated large potential coverage losses if people cannot document exemptions or comply with reporting rules. State departments said they are still awaiting some federal guidance but are already building implementation plans, data matching, outreach campaigns, and system changes to reduce disruption and automatically identify exemptions where possible. Department of Health Care Services and Department of Social Services officials described efforts to use existing data, CalSAWS, and cross-program coordination to streamline exemption screening, including for medical frailty, serious mental illness, substance use disorders, and student status. They said outreach will include text messaging, webinars, county training, and community-based partners, while also acknowledging that many people will still need direct worker contact. County representatives stressed that the new rules will create major administrative burdens, require significant new staffing, and could lead to coverage loss if counties are not adequately funded. They urged the Legislature to release the $20 million in current-year General Fund for CalFresh implementation and to consider a much larger county augmentation next year. Assembly members pressed the administration on outreach strategy, county funding, consistency across counties, and how to avoid harming eligible people through overly aggressive implementation. They also asked about coordination with universities, CDCR, and community-based organizations, and about how exemptions would be documented for mental health and substance use conditions. Department officials said they are working with counties, education institutions, and correctional agencies, and that they are trying to align Medi-Cal and CalFresh rules where possible, but not all federal definitions match. Public commenters from legal aid, counties, labor, and public hospitals warned that work requirements do not increase employment, will worsen food insecurity and health outcomes, and will strain county systems unless the state provides more funding and support.