Transcript Highlights:

• We are working on permits that are necessary for this program, both local permits as well as federal
• us build out the program.
• program.
• program...
• program.

Summary: The committee met jointly with the Washington-Oregon Legislative Action Committee for an update on the Interstate 5 Bridge Replacement (IBR) program. Members first adopted the proposed committee rules, then received program updates from staff on environmental review, permitting, design, tribal consultation, and public engagement. Staff said the project remains in the supplemental EIS process, with a final supplemental EIS and amended record of decision expected in early 2026, which would allow construction to begin. They also described ongoing work on Coast Guard navigation clearance, Section 106 historic-property coordination, and architectural guidelines for the bridge and five-mile corridor, emphasizing that the visualizations shown were conceptual and that public and partner feedback has already influenced design considerations such as accessibility and shared-use path connections. Members raised concerns about schedule delays, rising costs, and whether the project is being designed to be functional, safe, and economical. Staff acknowledged that the timeline has slipped from earlier expectations and said the delay reflects the complexity of the environmental and federal review process, as well as the need to avoid redoing steps. They said the updated cost estimate is being prepared now that design has advanced to roughly 30 percent, and that it will account for inflation, risk factors, and both fixed-span and movable-span options. Staff estimated a movable span would add more than $400 million and said the first construction work after environmental approval would likely be preliminary freeway and retaining-wall work in late 2026, followed by the bridge procurement. The committee also received funding and tolling updates. Staff reported that major federal grants have been executed, including Mega and Bridge Investment Grant agreements, and that state STIP amendments are advancing to allow access to federal funds. The tolling team described Level 3 traffic-and-revenue work, a bi-state tolling subcommittee process, and possible toll scenarios aimed at supporting either about $1.24 billion or $1.6 billion in toll revenue. Members questioned low-income toll relief timing, truck toll rates, and the effect of tolls on freight users. Staff said low-income discounts are being analyzed for both revenue and operational feasibility, that tribal exemptions and other policy exemptions are under review, and that the commissions expect to move into public outreach on toll rates and policies in 2026, with tolling on the existing bridges currently projected to begin in spring 2027.

Transcript Highlights:

• States and D.C. challenged their directive from the Federal Office of Management and Budget to all federal
• The programs in question included the Migrant Education Program, which supports the educational needs
• Now that program has been suspended.
• research programs.
• I know there's one program in particular that's very near and dear to me, that's the NMSU CAMP program

Transcript Highlights:

• There's some federal requirements.
• Our GoTexan program, our marketing program, again, is very successful. Thank to you.
• Our food and nutrition, we operate 12 of the federal nutrition programs plus the state programs. including
• Also, we have a Young Farmer Startup Program that the state funds, and we have the STAR Program, which
• In terms of the unmet need, because our child nutrition feeding programs are all federally subsidized

Bills: SB1, SB 1

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

Transcript Highlights:

• And so without these funds to match and without federal funds that were not promised, these programs
• And so without these funds to match and without federal funds that were not promised, these programs
• And so without these funds to match and without federal funds that were not promised, these programs
• And so without these funds to match and without federal funds that were not promised, these programs
• Without federal funds that were not promised, these programs would not be able to continue.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Attendance Roll Call 00:00:07 Chair Comments 00:00:36 Approval of Minutes 00:04:01 Volunteers of America 00:04:21 Soil and Water Conservation/Energy and Environment Cabinet 00:14:52 Kentucky Office of Drug Control Policy/Justice & Public Safety Cabinet 00:21:05 Kentucky Department of Agriculture 00:26:01 Early Childhood Advisory Council 00:45:18, 958, all

Summary: The Tobacco Settlement Agreement Fund Oversight Committee met to review how tobacco settlement dollars are being used and to press recipients for detailed information on total funding, administrative versus program spending, and measurable outcomes. The chair emphasized that the committee was not there for general program overviews, but to assess return on investment and whether each program should continue to receive tobacco settlement support. The committee approved the minutes from its December 22, 2025 meeting and then heard presentations from several agencies and organizations. Volunteers of America Mid-States described its southeastern Kentucky restorative justice program, which uses an evidence-based New Zealand model for juvenile cases in nine counties. The group reported tobacco settlement funding of $516,000 in FY24 and $233,500 in FY25, representing about 17% and then about 5% of the program budget, respectively. It said the funding helped expand the program from 13 cases in 2021 to 180 youth served, and cited an independent evaluation showing recidivism of 24.5% compared with 40.4% in AOC data, along with a cost of a little under $20 per day versus detention and other placements. Some members questioned whether the program fit the tobacco settlement funding categories and suggested it might be better supported through other justice-related funding sources. The Energy and Environment Cabinet’s Division of Conservation explained that tobacco funds support $1 million in direct aid to conservation districts and $2 million in cost-share projects for farmers, with 5% of the cost-share appropriation allowed for administration, or about $100,000 in FY26. Officials said the direct-aid line was moved into tobacco funding in 2019, reducing money available for farmer cost-share, and described a multi-year project approval and reallocation process. Senator Webb asked for a more specific breakdown of the $850,000 direct-aid amount, and the cabinet said it would provide that information. The Kentucky Office of Drug Control Policy reported that in FY24 it expended just under $30 million across tobacco funds, general funds, restricted funds, and a one-time federal grant, with less than 2% used for administration. Officials said most tobacco settlement money goes to Kentucky ASAP local boards in all 120 counties, supporting prevention, treatment, and some law enforcement work. The Department of Agriculture then began its presentation, describing strategic investments, loan programs, county funding, administrative costs, and a reported return of about $2.30 for every dollar spent, but the transcript cuts off before that presentation was completed.

Transcript Highlights:

• Grant Program process, where we are seeking a billion dollars from the federal government.
• grant program process where we are seeking a billion dollars from the federal government.
• Capital Investment Grant Program process where we are seeking a billion dollars from the federal government
• , called the Puget Sound Gateway Program, is another federally funded program, a mega program within
• With federal funding, the disadvantaged business enterprise program at the federal level is going through

Keywords: 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We fund a significant amount of our programs with federal funds, and most of those federal funds, upwards
• A significant portion of HSEM's funding is derived from federal grant programs administered by the Federal
• > are a federal program those positions are a federal program those positions are generally<04
• <04:39:40.440> for<04:39:40.600> the federal program um it's good for the federal program
• <04:42:03.360> Loan<04:42:03.840> program some money from a Federal Loan program some

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Division 2 Finance Committee heard an overview and budget presentation from New Hampshire Fish and Game, led by new Executive Director Stephanie Simi and Business Division Chief Kathy Leonti. The agency described its mission to conserve and manage fish, wildlife, and marine resources, and emphasized growing pressures from disease, climate impacts, habitat change, and increased public demand. Simi said the department is largely funded by hunting and fishing license revenue and federal grants, is reviewing staffing and internal processes, and faces critical needs including permanent funding for environmental review staff, infrastructure and IT modernization, and possible service reductions if additional support is not found. Members asked about specific program and policy issues, including chronic wasting disease in deer, hemorrhagic disease in rabbits and hares, moose population decline, and a proposed bait-disease bill. The department said it is actively monitoring diseases and did not see a need for the bait bill at this time. Legislators also discussed the Hike Safe program, which the department said has grown from an expected $100,000 annually to more than $300,000, and a possible boating version of that program, which the department said remains under consideration but would involve complex logistics and multiple agencies. Questions were also raised about rescue costs, out-of-state hikers, and whether boat registrations could be used as a revenue source; Fish and Game said boat registration is handled by the Department of Safety, though the department receives $5 per registered boat for the public boat access program. The budget discussion focused on revenue projections, use of unrestricted Fish and Game funds, and dependence on federal reimbursements. Leonti said the department met the governor’s general fund target but not the Fish and Game fund target without using surplus unrestricted funds, leaving only about $100,000 in the fund by the end of the biennium. She said the budget uses more than $18 million in Fish and Game funds annually against about $14 million in unrestricted revenue, and that five of 193 full-time positions remain unfunded. The department warned that if federal grants were halted, it could cost about $5 million over five months and force the Fish and Game fund to cover the gap. Committee members also requested that future presentations be sent electronically in advance, and the department agreed to do so.

Transcript Highlights:

• The federal 340B program was established by Congress in 1992 to help safety net.
• The 340B program is a comprehensive federal program that is governed Exclusively by federal law.
• There are issues with fraud and those kinds of things, but it's a federal program.
• this bill that they're somehow not benefiting fully from this federal program?
• program, and we acknowledge that it's a federal program.

Transcript Highlights:

• I already mentioned the federal cuts and the freezes, which really disrupted state federal programs,
• The OMB memo clarified and actually provided an Excel sheet with thousands of federal programs that were
• for Medicaid program costs, specifically changes to the federal match or Federal Medicaid Assistance
• When it comes back all together with that federal match, it's a total program of 1.5 billion dollars,
• from the federal government for a $4.72 program.

Transcript Highlights:

• The trailer, Processes for approving programs based on the federal requirements.
• clarified whether federal funding will be forthcoming to states for administering this new federal program
• The program itself technically goes into effect in early July at the federal level.
• So when I referenced the program being available in July, it's available at the federal level.
• and to fully leverage these new federal dollars, align Cal Grant C to workforce programs.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up the May Revision update on Proposition 98 and the school rainy-day fund. The Department of Finance said the minimum guarantee rises by $6.4 billion over the Governor’s Budget across the three-year window, with lower average daily attendance projections offsetting some of the revenue gains. Finance also described a reduced $3.9 billion settle-up proposal, increased deposits into the Public School System Stabilization Account, and an ending reserve balance of about $10.3 billion. The LAO said the revenue and LCFF adjustments were reasonable, but urged the Legislature to be cautious about delaying settle-up payments and to consider more budget resiliency, including larger cushions or other tools to protect ongoing programs. Members then questioned the administration and LAO about the size of the settle-up, the rationale for the reserve deposit, declining enrollment, and how lower attendance is creating savings that can be redirected to other school priorities. The LAO said the May Revision’s mix of one-time and ongoing spending was generally reasonable but recommended keeping a strong cushion and considering alternatives such as advance payments or pension-related savings. Questions also focused on how the May Revision’s funding mix affects districts if revenues weaken, and on the treatment of special education, discretionary block grants, and paid family leave costs for LEAs and community colleges. The committee next heard the community colleges portion of the budget. Finance described a higher SCFF COLA, increased apportionment costs, a student support block grant, deferred maintenance, Common Cloud, Calbright, credit for prior learning, and a one-time adult learner demonstration project. The Chancellor’s Office supported the core investments but asked for more funding for enrollment growth, changes to the SCFF growth formula, and a COLA for Student Equity and Achievement. The LAO recommended funding the statutory COLA increase, noted a $52 million current-year apportionment shortfall not yet included in the May Revision, and suggested the Legislature could instead direct some funds to enrollment growth, categorical COLAs, or one-time uses. Members also clarified how COLA and hold-harmless rules apply to different community college districts. Finally, the committee reviewed the proposed state implementation of the federal Workforce Pell program. Finance proposed one-time funding for the Student Aid Commission and Cradle to Career data work, plus trailer bill changes to set up state approval of eligible programs. CSAC said the program is promising but highly complex, with new federal rules just released and significant data, regulatory, and systems work still needed; it said the state will not be ready by July 1 and that ongoing funding will likely be necessary. The LAO agreed that implementation will require careful trailer bill language and noted that ongoing administrative costs remain unresolved. Members asked about other states’ approaches and the practical effect on short-term workforce programs in California.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so that's sort of more modernly reflected in federal law, where federal law now says government to
• Section 1115 of the Social Security Act enables the Secretary of Federal HHS to waive certain federal
• The demonstrations also must be budget neutral to the federal government, meaning that federal spending
• , and reduce state expenditure by allowing federal management. residential SUD programs and reduce state
• The passage of HR1, the federal budget reconciliation bill passed last The passage of HR1, the federal

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This is a federal bill affecting federal royalties that are shared with the states.
• From federal policy changes.
• We're more reliant on federal money than ever before, between the labs and the federal government.
• funding to implement evidence-based programs in the federal Title IV-E Clearinghouse.
• Which we did, and we found the Firstborn program to be a commendable program.

Transcript Highlights:

• relevant federal data due to the federal relevant federal data due to the federal government<00:
• We estimate that these programs make up 2/3 of the funds we receive from the federal government.
• 48.360> programs Federal funding for entitlement programs has been more volatile in recent months
• This is the federal agency that oversees our medical assistance program.
• it to federal law. it to federal law.

Bills: HF3425

Keywords: supportive housing, grants, housing assistance, funding, Minnesota Statutes, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• We are also looking at reduced federal funding to administer the SNAP program.
• Our whole agency is cost-allocated across these federal programs, so it will change the way that the
• In safety net programs.
• And again, that's only through Be Well and for those federal programs.
• the federal government.

Transcript Highlights:

• programs.
• the federal government matches state dollars to support the Medicaid program.
• Every state has a Medicaid program. It's an entitlement program under federal law.
• So, two different programs.
• For programming that's not just continuously asking for TSROC money to support ongoing programs as an

Transcript Highlights:

• So currently, the structure includes the federally designated coalition, which there is a federal statute
• So currently, the structure includes the federally designated coalition, which there is a federal statute
• So, for example, the federally designated coalition is required and funded by the federal government
• They might run the legal program. They might run a transitional housing program.
• But I struggle with our program as we interact with individuals But I struggle with our program as we

Summary: The committee held a panel discussion on Florida’s domestic violence system, focusing on how state and federally funded services are coordinated, the role of the Florida Partnership to End Domestic Violence (FPEDV), the Florida Domestic Violence Collaborative, DCF, and certified domestic violence centers. Members reviewed the post-2020 restructuring after the dissolution of FCADV, the current hotline, legal services, training, and technical assistance contracts, and the Legislature’s recent work on lethality assessments under SB 1224. Panelists also described prevention, shelter, counseling, child advocacy, and legal support services, along with the statewide network of 41 certified centers serving all 67 counties. Testimony highlighted both collaboration and tension. FPEDV and Women in Distress described overlapping training and technical assistance roles, but FPEDV said its relationship with DCF has been difficult and at times obstructive, while DCF said communication and coordination are ongoing. Women in Distress and other providers emphasized the importance of direct services, the statewide hotline, injunction assistance, child welfare co-located advocates, and prevention programs. Several members asked about funding flows, certification, and whether the current structure is sufficient for rural counties; witnesses said federal FVPSA funds are formula-based, DCF contracts directly with centers, and rural programs face staffing and fundraising challenges that limit beds and services. A major portion of the discussion centered on the lethality assessment work group and implementation of the new statewide tool. FDLE explained that the work group concluded the Maryland model was copyrighted and costly to replicate exactly, so Florida adopted a statutory assessment that is not evidence-based in the same way, with training available online and 46 of about 400 law enforcement agencies having completed it so far. Senators raised concerns about multiple assessments, redacted police reports, and whether the tool will be useful without better coordination and data collection. Witnesses also discussed rising domestic violence, teen dating violence, and strangulation cases, with providers reporting increased demand, full shelters, and greater use of hotels and mobile crisis responses. No formal votes or actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• In authorizing the program on an ongoing basis, DSH will be able to Thank you. ...four-year program.
• And in one case, not on this program but also a similar program, like I said, the CCE program, the letters
• who operates the BrightLife Kids programs, and Coots, that operates the Soluna program, have a long
• We believe these programs are critical tools that are needed now morning. federal immigration efforts
• program from two hearings 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:

• Businesses can deduct sales taxes from federal income, so this is the tax that the federal government
• the federal share.
• Under the federal government, California and other states are still able to claim federal dollars for
• Do we still get federal dollars?
• It anticipated that federal policy changes may be required to change the current MCO tax program and

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• By the way, this program is funded with federal dollars through GUSNIP.
• The 24% is what we help fund our program with, in addition to various grants. and contracts, federal
• So the total program activity proposed. $10.3 million for this program.
• So, maybe after a little while the dust settles with the federal programs with weather and climate,
• It's a federal agency.

Transcript Highlights:

• , but for all federal programs.
• In some ways, this makes the census a more high-profile event than many other federal programs might
• All of that allocated based on the And so. dollars through these programs from the federal government
• Although the census is federally operated, all of the programs the Bureau administers, those optional
• Although the census is federally operated, all of the programs the Bureau administers, those optional

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee held a hearing on census preparation, focusing first on testimony from U.S. Census Bureau staff James Whitehorn and Andrea Grace Johnson. They described the Bureau’s decade-long geographic and redistricting programs, including the Boundary and Annexation Survey, School District Review Program, Participant Statistical Area Program, and Local Update of Census Addresses (LUCA), along with the Block Boundary Suggestion Project and voting district collection. They emphasized that Massachusetts has been a strong partner in these efforts and explained how the Bureau is using updated street data, building footprints, machine learning, and change detection to improve address lists and track new housing. Whitehorn also reviewed the 2030 redistricting data program, the legal basis for it under PL 94-171, the role of state nonpartisan liaisons, and the expected timeline for data delivery. He noted that OMB’s revised race and ethnicity standards will merge those questions into one and add a Middle Eastern/North African category. Committee members asked about the new standards, state contacts, and how boundary updates are submitted, and the witnesses said they would provide the slide deck and contact information. Wendy Underhill and Helen Brewer of NCSL then testified about why census preparation matters for states, stressing its impact on data, federal funding, and political representation. They outlined optional steps states can take before 2030, including staying in touch with Census Bureau staff, identifying state and local personnel involved in census work, supporting local participation in Bureau programs, and creating complete count committees or commissions. They cited Massachusetts’s prior complete count committee and grantmaking efforts as an example and said such efforts can improve self-response and overall accuracy. They also noted that state legislatures can act as conveners and trusted messengers, and they discussed broader issues such as privacy protections, differential privacy, budget uncertainty, and the possibility of future litigation or a citizenship question. Secretary of State William Galvin then gave extended remarks on Massachusetts’s 2020 census experience and the need to prepare early for 2030. He said the state faced major challenges in 2020 from the pandemic, litigation, and rhetoric about citizenship, and that Massachusetts relied heavily on local records, university data, and community outreach to document residents, especially students and non-native-born populations. He argued that the state should strengthen local recordkeeping now through LUCA, annual resident lists, assessors’ and zoning records, and other local data sources, and he urged support for a proposed $500,000 appropriation for census-related grants and technical assistance. Galvin said better preparation is needed because housing patterns, population shifts, and local administrative capacity have changed since 2020, and he emphasized that the goal is to improve the completeness of the records the Census Bureau will use in 2030.

Transcript Highlights:

• funding to implement evidence-based programs identified in the federal Title IV-E Clearinghouse.
• Head Start is a federally funded program.
• Within our program, we are sponsors of the summer food program.
• There are state-funded Head Start programs, so it doesn't all have to be federal.
• RESA plans, other programs serving American Indians, and several other federal health insurance programs