Transcript Highlights:

• Would those funds still be accessible by the program? Yes, okay.
• I mean, could this program still work?
• <00:43:06.520> is terms of you know however the program is terms of you know however the program
• the special fund but your the program the special fund but your the program sell<00:44:06.760>
• g-104 subsections B3 to add evaluate g-104 subsections B3 to add evaluate instead<01:03:19.960><

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 818 HD1, which would establish the Waiawa Community Development District. The Attorney General’s office said the bill may not comply with requirements for a special fund, and DLNR asked for further amendments so lease revenues would remain with DLNR while it continues managing the lands. DLNR cited ongoing costs, including the Uncle Billy’s demolition debt and management needs at Banyan Drive/Banyan Country Club. HCDA/Waiawa representatives supported the bill, agreed that DLNR should keep lease revenues while it remains the land manager, and said a future transfer of land management would change where revenues should go. Members focused on whether removing lease revenue would undercut the bill and on how existing and future revenues should be allocated. The committee then took up HB 338 HD1 and HB 339 HD1 on renewable energy-related utility transactions and procurement. Testimony came from the Consumer Advocate, the State Energy Office, the Public Utilities Commission, Hawaiian Electric, IBEW Local 1260, Ulupono Initiative, and Life of the Land. Supporters generally backed the measures, while some asked for labor-related strengthening language. Discussion centered on how the PUC should handle competing bids or offers in utility merger or acquisition situations, with concerns raised about NDAs, timing, and whether the original version or amended language better allowed public and intervenor participation. A witness from Life of the Land argued that utilities should not negotiate under NDA in a way that blocks later public competition, and a PUC-related witness said the current language was changed from the original to address PUC testimony. Finally, the committee heard HB 1467 HD1 on housing resiliency. OIP was not present, while B&F raised concerns about placing federal funds into a special fund, saying federal grant money should remain in a separate P fund for transparency, accountability, and single-audit compliance. State agencies and groups including OPSD, Hawaii Emergency Management Agency, the Climate Advisory Team, and Hawaii Realtors supported the measure. Testimony emphasized that many older roofs lack hurricane clips and that strengthening homes could reduce disaster sheltering and temporary housing costs. IBEW Local 1260 supported the bill but argued that building to current standards upfront is preferable to retrofitting later. Members questioned funding structure, eligibility, and whether the program should be needs-based; the bill was described as limited to households under 140% AMI. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• , evaluate, and propose adjustments to this program to ensure that it's working as intended and delivering
• It is not the primary goal for the program. It is not the primary goal for the program.
• It would require staff to monitor, evaluate, and assess how the program is working and ensure that it
• Thank you. ...programs and the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program.
• Low Carbon Transit Operations Program, and the transit intercity capital program.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Environmental Quality Committee and Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 2 held a joint hearing on CARB’s proposed amendments to the cap-and-invest regulations. Opening remarks from senators emphasized the 2025 reauthorization of the program through AB 1207 and SB 840, and focused on whether CARB’s April revisions faithfully implement legislative intent while balancing climate ambition, affordability, leakage prevention, and the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF). Several senators raised concerns that the proposal could reduce GGRF revenues, weaken funding for transit, affordable housing, wildfire prevention, drinking water, and other community programs, and shift too much support toward industry. Others stressed the need to protect businesses and consumers from higher costs and to avoid leakage and refinery closures. Senator Cortese’s statement, read into the record, warned that the proposal could jeopardize transportation funding commitments. CARB Chair Lauren Sanchez said the amendments respond to legislative direction and public comment, and described four main changes: increased electric bill credits, a larger manufacturing decarbonization incentive (MDI), additional compliance support for industry, and removal of post-2030 allowance allocations from the current rulemaking. She said the proposal keeps the cap aligned with 2030 and 2045 targets, maintains affordability protections, and is intended to reduce emissions while minimizing leakage and supporting in-state jobs. CARB staff also said the MDI would have guardrails, require applications and reporting, and be tied to emissions-reducing facility upgrades. The Department of Finance explained that GGRF revenue estimates are highly uncertain and are updated periodically based on auction data. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the amendments are significant and could materially affect environmental ambition, industry support, utility credits, and GGRF revenues. LAO highlighted that the MDI could add allowances above the cap, potentially reducing certainty that 2030 targets will be met, and noted that the proposal appears to shift more allowances to industry and fewer to GGRF than current regulations. LAO also said the proposed GGRF estimate of about $8 billion through the decade could be insufficient to fully fund lower-priority tiers of programs. In questioning, senators pressed CARB on whether the proposal would raise consumer costs, whether free allowances or MDI funds would actually lower prices at the pump, how leakage is measured, and whether the Legislature’s budget assumptions would need to be revised before final action. No votes were taken during the hearing; the discussion was informational and focused on questioning CARB and fiscal staff ahead of the board’s planned May 28 consideration of the amendments.

Transcript Highlights:

• performance evaluations.
• performance evaluations.
• Evaluation Evaluation amends<00:12:35.600> Medicaid<00:12:36.120> related<00:12:36.520
• require peer performance evaluations. require peer performance evaluations.
• <00:14:06.920> to corporation work initiative program to corporation work initiative program

Keywords: Accountability, Efficiency, Transparency - Room 210, 3 March, 2026; 2:30 P.M., 925, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 1596, which Senator Johnson explained as a companion to another crypto-kiosk bill. He said the measure was being used to open the code and remove new kiosk language temporarily while lawmakers work on a regulatory framework for crypto kiosks, which are being used in scams involving callers posing as law enforcement and directing victims to deposit cash into kiosks. Members discussed the lack of reporting and registration data, the estimated number of kiosks in the state, and whether regulation might require identification and registration of the devices. The committee adopted the motion for title sufficient, do pass as amended, and reported the bill out. The committee then considered House Bill 859, which would eliminate the in-person absentee voting envelope while keeping the 45-day in-person absentee voting period and existing excuse requirements. Senator England said voters would still complete an affidavit and cast the ballot directly into an OMR machine, and he noted that circuit clerks preferred this version. The committee asked a few clarifying questions and then passed the bill, reporting it out. Next was House Bill 925, the CLEAR Act, which Senator McMahan described as a revised PEER-related bill that had been worked on with the governor’s office after a prior veto. He outlined provisions creating a PEER review program for agency rules, Medicaid transportation evaluations, a State Board of Health Professions, changes to the corporation work initiative program, and PEER subpoena and enforcement language. An amendment was adopted to delete the subpoena-related sections that had raised constitutional concerns and to retain the reverse repealer. After questions about the advisory role of the new board, the committee passed the bill as amended. The committee also heard House Bill 1171, a strike-all that Senator Sparks said would mirror a Senate bill on grant transparency. The measure would require clearer grant objectives, objective eligibility criteria, disclosure of conflicts and board relationships, reporting by grantees and subgrantees, and signed documentation under penalty of perjury with CPA review. Members asked about enforcement, and Senator Sparks said improper reporting could lead to loss of funds, audits, and possible criminal consequences. The committee adopted the strike-all and reported the bill out. Finally, the committee considered House Bill 1393, which would create an energy development fund at the Mississippi Development Authority for long-term infrastructure planning tied to large industrial energy users. Members asked whether the fund would cover water resources as well as electricity; the sponsor said it was intended for energy infrastructure, not water, and was aimed at large industrial projects such as steel mills. The committee adopted the strike-all and moved to report the bill out.

Transcript Highlights:

• Can you explain what that program is? Sure.
• <00:16:52.519> that not joined this very simple program that not joined this very simple program
• helpful the belonging to that program helpful the belonging to that program has<00:23:28.760>
• In Hudson, we always send out notices of value in regard to re-evaluation when we do a townwide re-evaluation
• In Hudson, they always send out notices of value in regard to re-evaluation when they do a townwide re-evaluation

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We issued an unmodified opinion on the federal program, a clean opinion on the federal program.
• The three programs that we audited this year were the mortgage insurance program, the Ginnie Mae program
• And so really the way we evaluate this: yes, is it capacity? And then we evaluate skill set.
• How do we evaluate income levels? Right now some of these programs, it's stated income.
• How do we evaluate income levels? Right now some of these programs, it's stated income.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It created a revolving loan program and then it directed OPAGA to review that program, the first report
• The first is program evaluation.
• evaluation and policy analysis.
• And a major federal program is defined as one of the entities— A major federal program is defined as
• the complexity of the program.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Auditing Committee met to receive annual overviews of its oversight responsibilities and the work of the Auditor General and OPAGA. Committee staff reviewed the committee’s authority over state and local governments, enforcement of audit-report filing requirements, repeated audit findings, Transparency Florida reporting, and lobbying compensation audits. Auditor General Cheryl Norman described her office’s independence, audit standards, quality control, and major audit areas, including the state’s annual financial and single audits, school district and university audits, operational and performance audits, and attestation work. She also noted staffing shortages, recruitment efforts, and a request for carry-forward funds to study salaries. Members asked about whether audits can quantify recoverable dollars, how school district spending comparisons are handled, and how to raise concerns about DCF-related audits or a local city audit that has been pending for years. Norman said her office can quantify findings when possible, sometimes compares costs across districts in operational audits, and that members can bring specific concerns to the appropriate deputy auditor general or the committee. She also explained that citizen or local-government audit requests may require payment of audit costs. OPAGA Coordinator Kara Collins-Gomez outlined OPAGA’s role as a legislative research unit that conducts studies directed by law, the presiding officers, or the committee, and described its policy areas, methodologies, contract monitoring, and recurring statutory reports. Deputy Auditor General Matthew Tracy explained how to read operational audit reports, including findings, criteria, condition, cause, effect, recommendations, and management responses. Deputy Auditor General Greg Senators explained financial audit reports, including audit opinions, required supplementary information, internal control and compliance findings, federal program compliance, and management letters. The meeting concluded with thanks to the presenters and a motion to adjourn, which passed without objection.

Transcript Highlights:

• This expanded program. to launch this expanded program on an ongoing basis.
• delivery costs, where these funds are actually in support of the actual program design, such as program
• training for the College Corps members, evaluation of the actual program itself, and education outreach
• that the program does.
• program oversight on this project?

Summary: The subcommittee held an informational budget hearing covering several GovOps, CDT, CPPA, and DGS items. GovOps reported that most deliverables under the Governor’s generative AI executive order have been completed, including guidelines, procurement tools, community-impact guidance, and a new project delivery lifecycle for Gen AI projects; one workforce-related deliverable remains. Members and public commenters raised concerns about privacy, labor impacts, and how the state will explain and oversee Gen AI use. The committee also heard a proposal to create a California Education Interagency Council with $5 million ongoing and 16 positions to coordinate workforce and education systems; LAO questioned duplication and recommended limited-term funding, while supporters said a neutral convening body is needed to improve coordination and student outcomes. GoServe presented the College Corps budget proposals, describing the program as a paid service and career-development opportunity for undergraduate students that helps reduce college costs while supporting communities through tutoring, food insecurity work, climate and disaster response, and other service. The administration sought one-time and ongoing funding to expand the program to more campuses and students, while LAO objected to the high administrative costs and recommended rejection. Several students and alumni testified that College Corps provided financial support, professional experience, and career pathways. The committee also heard a $5 million proposal for a Belonging Campaign to address loneliness and social isolation through research, outreach, and local grants; LAO said the proposal lacked clear goals and measures, while supporters said the effort is needed for youth, seniors, and community resilience. The Department of Technology updated the Middle Mile Broadband Initiative, saying construction is underway on the statewide open-access network and the project remains on track for the 2026 deadline, though LAO noted a required business plan had not yet been submitted. The California Privacy Protection Agency presented its Delete Act implementation request for the DROP platform, which will let consumers request deletion of personal information held by data brokers; LAO flagged oversight concerns because CDT is both developing the system and involved in project support. Public commenters from business groups urged caution on CPPA’s rulemakings, warning of compliance costs and job impacts. The Department of General Services then discussed implementation of Proposition 2 school facilities bonds, requesting staffing and administrative funding to manage the new bond program and continue school facility work. Officials said the program can also help districts affected by the January wildfires, including interim site funding and expedited assistance. Finally, DGS requested authority and positions to operate Building 18 for labor-agency tenants relocating from older Capitol Mall space; SEIU Local 1000 criticized the state’s four-day return-to-office policy and said telework has improved productivity and retention. No formal votes were taken; the hearing concluded after public testimony and member questions on each item.

Transcript Highlights:

• helps to offset the cost of the program helps to offset the cost of the program to<00:53:04.000>
• enabling statute of the site evaluation enabling statute of the site evaluation committee<01:31:
• she regards the site evaluation she regards the site evaluation committee<01:33:09.239> as
• pursuant to the site evaluation pursuant to the site evaluation committee's<01:42:49.119> uh<
• this morning at the site evaluation this morning at the site evaluation committee<01:46:43.199><

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• schools to use program monies to ...program provisions, including authorizing schools to use program
• Additionally, with regard to the efficacy of the program, we don't evaluate the program to determine
• I would want to see a more robust evaluation of the program versus this grant makes me feel... ...of
• I don't know if that's good enough for us to evaluate whether the program is working. Mr.
• I know that two of the FTE positions are program evaluator specialists.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The Education Committee met as a committee of reference to complete required sunset reviews and hear a performance audit. Members and staff introduced themselves at the start of the session, and the chair outlined committee procedures, including limits on public testimony and the goal of adjournment by 5 p.m. The committee then heard the sunset review of the Credit Enhancement Eligibility Board. A governor’s office representative explained that the board was created in 2016 to help qualifying schools, mostly charter schools, lower borrowing costs through a credit enhancement fund. He said the board has approved 15 projects, has no dedicated staff or budget, and is now at its statutory leverage limit, so it is mainly monitoring existing obligations. Members voiced support, and the committee voted by voice vote to recommend continuation of the board for 10 years, until July 1, 2036. The committee next reviewed the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE). WICHE leadership described the interstate compact, its student exchange programs for undergraduate, graduate, and professional health care education, and related cost-savings and workforce benefits for Arizona. Testimony emphasized tuition savings for Arizona students, the return of many professional students to practice in Arizona, and the role of the compact in supporting higher education access and workforce needs. Commissioners from Arizona’s Board of Regents and Eastern Arizona College also spoke in support. The committee then voted by voice vote to recommend continuation of WICHE for 10 years, until July 1, 2036. The committee also received the Arizona Auditor General’s performance audit of the Arizona Department of Education school safety program. The audit found that while the program has grown substantially and now funds more than 1,000 school safety positions, ADE did not ensure many sampled schools complied with requirements such as operational plans, safety teams, annual training, activity logs, and expenditure documentation. The Auditor General said the department relied too heavily on written attestations and reduced monitoring as the program expanded, and recommended stronger oversight, written procedures, and better reimbursement controls. ADE’s school safety director responded that the department accepts the findings, has already begun improving monitoring, and is moving to require uploaded documentation and more risk-based reviews; he also said the department will seek additional staffing and will meet with the Auditor General and ASU to strengthen evaluation of the program. Finally, the committee took up House Bill 2142, which would establish a school safety center within ADE, assign it responsibility for administering the school safety program and providing technical assistance, and allow up to 10% of program appropriations for administration. Members discussed whether the bill should also require monitoring of emergency operations plan compliance, better address students with disabilities, and clarify coordination with other state agencies. The sponsor said he planned to offer a floor amendment to make monitoring expectations clearer. The bill was discussed but no final committee action was recorded in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:14:39.839> but at a couple of specific programs but at a couple of specific programs but
• Evaluation Division.
• > years program evaluations within recent years program evaluations within recent years in<00:
• state agencies and Grant programs state agencies and Grant programs themselves<00:25:55.039>
• administer those programs administer those programs we<00:29:29.159> also<00:29:29.399>

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee held its first meeting on February 10, 2025, with member and staff introductions and opening remarks from Chair Kristin Robbins about the committee’s bipartisan mission to address state fraud and improve oversight of executive branch spending. Robbins said the committee would focus on both legislation and informational oversight hearings, likely in coordination with standing policy committees, and emphasized concerns about reported fraud in state government and the need to prevent waste before it occurs. Members from both parties generally expressed support for the committee’s work and interest in learning more about the issues. The sole agenda item was a presentation from the Legislative Auditor on the 2023 report, “Oversight of State-Funded Grants to Nonprofit Organizations.” Legislative Auditor Judy Randall and Deputy Legislative Auditor Jodi Munson Rodriguez explained that the report reviewed how comprehensive Minnesota’s grants management policies are and how well agencies follow them. They said the policies cover the grant lifecycle but often lack detail, and the office found widespread noncompliance in recent years. The presentation included examples such as limited standards for progress reports, flexible monitoring requirements, and no required timeline for closeout reviews. The auditors also noted that state agencies spent an average of about $514 million annually on nonprofit grants from fiscal years 2018 through 2022, with about 2,400 nonprofit organizations receiving grants. The auditors said several factors contribute to compliance problems, including inconsistent funding for grants management, limited training, and uneven use of electronic grants systems. They also noted that statutes gave little authority to enforce compliance. Since the report was released, the Department of Administration has taken some steps, including changes to pre-award financial review policies and a timeline for closeout reviews, but the auditors said other recommendations remain only partially implemented. No votes were taken and no bills were acted on at this meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• . program.
• The statewide program is fairly new compared to the district programs.
• , the ZAP program.
• Program.
• the program.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• identify the trends and eval evaluate identify the trends and eval evaluate whether<00:24:22.240
• We also through the crime programs.
• And one of my money into that program.
• I mean, do we do some of these programs already through the Office of Justice programs?
• I mean, do we do some of these programs already through the Office of Justice programs?

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee heard House File 3668, authored by Chair Beerman, which would create a state Office of Gun Violence Prevention. Beerman and several supporters framed gun violence as a public health crisis, arguing the office would improve research, coordination, data collection, and evidence-based prevention. Supporters cited firearm deaths among children and adults, the trauma experienced by survivors and families, and Minnesota’s need for a centralized structure to guide policy and prevention efforts. Testifying in support were representatives of the Minnesota Medical Association, Protect Minnesota, a parent affected by the Annunciation school shooting, family physicians, an OB-GYN, and a pediatric emergency physician. They described gun violence as a daily clinical and community reality, pointed to rising firearm deaths and injuries, and said Minnesota should apply the same public health approach used for motor vehicle safety, tobacco, and other crises. Several witnesses emphasized the impact on children, suicide prevention, maternal health, and the need for Minnesota-specific research and coordinated responses. Opposition came from the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus, which argued the bill would create a taxpayer-funded bureaucracy that could be used to advance gun control policy and treat lawful firearm ownership as a public health problem. The group said the state should focus instead on enforcement, prosecution, and victim services. Vice Chair Nidau offered an A2 amendment to move the office from the Department of Health to the Department of Public Safety, citing data-sharing and accountability, but withdrew it after discussion with Chair Beerman. The hearing ended with additional member discussion, including concerns about existing violence-prevention spending and whether school safety investments would be a better use of funds; no final vote was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• The petition requires, alongside of that, a medical evaluation.
• We were forced to petition him for involuntary court-ordered evaluation.
• This bill still allows due process and requires an evaluation...
• We operate school programs, community programs, student coalitions, leadership opportunities, positive
• There’s nothing in here about some sort of treatment program. There’s no way to address...”

Bills: SB1095, SB1127, SB1170, SB1208, SB1211, SB1237, SB1239, SB1240, SB1243, SB1244, SB1259, SB1283

Keywords: gender transition, minors, irreversible surgery, health professionals, puberty-blocking drugs, medical procedures, prohibition, Arizona Revised Statutes, reporting abuse, child neglect, mandatory reporting, child safety, medical treatment, faith exemptions, penalties, narcotic drugs, fentanyl, sentencing, drug offenses, juvenile justice

Summary: The committee first approved the January 21, 2026 minutes and held SB 1208. It then heard SB 1211, which would allow victims of felony aggravated harassment involving domestic violence to seek a lifetime injunction against the convicted defendant. The sponsor said the bill came from fellowship participants, and supporters from the Arizona Coalition to End Sexual and Domestic Violence, Amberle’s Place, and survivor advocates testified that repeated harassment and re-traumatization justify permanent protection. The committee voted 7-0 to give SB 1211 a do pass recommendation. Next, the committee considered SB 1239, which removes the statute of limitations for failing to register as a sex offender. The sponsor said DPS requested the change to close a loophole and hold offenders accountable even years later. Opponents from Arizona Attorneys for Criminal Justice argued existing warrant and registration processes already address the problem and that eliminating the time limit raises due process concerns and risks stale prosecutions. After discussion, the committee approved SB 1239 on a 4-3 vote. The committee also heard SB 1240, which excludes probationers convicted of dangerous crimes against children from the probation incentive payment formula. The sponsor tied the bill to a recent child sexual assault case and said the incentive system should not count these offenders. Opponents warned it could push probation departments to send more people to prison instead of treatment and that the bill’s language is broad. The committee passed SB 1240 on a 4-3 vote. It then took up SB 1095, as amended, which bans gender transition procedures and referrals for minors and limits public funding and use of public facilities for such care; supporters framed it as protecting children and parental rights, while opponents called it discriminatory and medically unsound. The committee adopted the amendment and gave the bill a 4-3 do pass as amended recommendation. Finally, the committee heard SB 1243 and SB 1244, both dealing with court-ordered mental health treatment. SB 1243 requires notice to guardians when a patient may be released early or when treatment may not be renewed, and allows guardians to seek an independent evaluation and petition for continued treatment; supporters said it helps families prevent dangerous gaps in care, while opponents raised due process concerns about non-medical guardians initiating petitions. The committee passed SB 1243 unanimously. SB 1244 creates a continuing court-ordered treatment process after a second consecutive annual review, reducing repeated renewal hearings while preserving annual reporting and objections; supporters said it prevents dangerous lapses in treatment for the sickest patients, while opponents warned it could weaken due process and allow indefinite confinement. The committee adopted an amendment and passed SB 1244 on a 6-1 vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• Hospitals should evaluate those prices that are above 500%.
• We asked the treasurer to evaluate a...
• We asked the treasurer to evaluate a public insurance program that would have included VHI and VSEA.
• President, this is a spending bill that has about 93 programs, $6 million in program spending.
• Fiscal year 2027 transportation program. H9. Sorry about that.

Keywords: 927, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Yes, that will meet their needs and they administer the arc use through the programs.
• If process is important to you then processes significant percentage in the evaluation.
• That's what Miss McGinley's talking about an evaluation. Got you.
• They know our vendors. talking about an evaluation. Got you. They know our vendors.
• The statutes require that we have an evaluation team or that we go through a process.

Transcript Highlights:

• We also have a program.
• We will evaluate those immediately.
• evaluating.
• That program was to EPA, and EPA's program was cut.
• And AANAPISI programs, the federal funding, and the programs exist to close these gaps.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee on Economic Development held a hearing on the DRIVE Act, a proposal to invest $400 million in Massachusetts research and innovation without new taxes. Governor Healey and administration officials said the bill would direct $200 million to public higher education research and regional partnerships and $200 million to a research funding pool for hospitals, universities, and other institutions, with the goal of retaining talent, leveraging private and philanthropic dollars, and offsetting major federal R&D cuts. They argued that research is a core economic engine for the state, supporting jobs across labs, construction, services, and surrounding businesses, and said the bill would help protect the Commonwealth’s tax base and competitiveness during a period of federal uncertainty and cuts to SNAP, Medicaid, and other programs. Committee members raised concerns about whether Fair Share surtax dollars should instead be used for K-12 and other community needs, whether the proposal is enough given the scale of lost federal grants, and how the money would be allocated. The governor responded that the funds are one-time surplus dollars, that most surtax revenue already supports education, and that the bill is meant as a bridge to stabilize public higher education and research. She also said the legislation includes a review board and could support a revolving or matched-fund approach in some cases. Several members pressed for more detail on selection criteria, future funding, and whether private companies and large endowments should contribute more. University of Massachusetts leaders and researchers testified that federal grant cancellations and delays are already causing layoffs, furloughs, rescinded admissions, and lost research capacity. UMass officials said the bill would help preserve faculty, postdocs, graduate students, and research programs in medicine, climate science, marine science, Braille instruction, and AI decision-making. They emphasized that the funding should be merit-based and that the state needs to act quickly to prevent talent from leaving Massachusetts. Business, labor, and industry groups, including MassBio, the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, AIM, the AFL-CIO, and Building Trades, supported the bill, saying it would protect jobs, sustain the innovation ecosystem, and reinforce Massachusetts’ national leadership in research and life sciences. No vote was taken in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• of both of the programs, create a new program.
• Like, how can I evaluate programs if you guys aren’t giving us information?
• program.”
• program.
• And so a demand response program like that is going to be performing better on a cost-effectiveness evaluation

Summary: The committee first heard Issue 1 on trailer bill language to redirect funding for emergency demand-response programs. The Department of Finance proposed using about $26.9 million in General Fund originally set aside for the Distributed Energy Backup Assets program to bolster the Demand-Side Grid Support Program for summer 2026, and using about $70 million in CalCHAP interest to support ratepayer-funded demand response in summers 2027 and 2028. The CEC and CPUC said they are working on a transition from DSGS to ELRP or a successor program, while the LAO noted the General Fund money would otherwise revert to savings. Members pressed the administration on whether demand response remains important, whether DSGS has been successful, and whether the state should keep funding it through the CEC rather than shifting to a ratepayer-funded CPUC program. The CEC and CPUC said the programs are not directly comparable, emphasized different cost structures and enrollment metrics, and said a CPUC rulemaking is underway with a proposed decision expected in Q3 2026. No vote was taken in the transcript. The committee then took up Issue 2, a budget proposal tied to SB 254 and the new transmission accelerator. GoBiz and the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank described a five-year, roughly $26 million request to staff and administer the accelerator and manage Proposition 4 and AB 1207 funds for transmission financing. Members asked about state liability, ownership of financed lines, FERC revenue requirements, and whether the program would help underserved regions and offshore wind development. Staff explained that the accelerator would only consider projects already identified through CAISO’s competitive transmission planning process, and that state financing would be a small portion of large projects intended to lower overall costs to ratepayers. The LAO said it had no specific concerns but urged the Legislature to ensure the final language matches its intent. The committee also heard Issue 3 on petroleum market oversight. The CEC and its Division of Petroleum Market Oversight requested additional positions and funding to implement ABX2-1 and continue work on supply stabilization, refinery monitoring, and transportation fuels analysis. Members questioned why the work was funded through the Energy Resources Programs Account, whether existing staff from the paused price-gouging work could be reassigned, and whether the program had produced evidence of price gouging or improved supply conditions. CEC and Finance said the new positions are needed because the workload has expanded, while some existing staff remain on related analysis and reporting duties. The discussion ended without a vote in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• IHSS is a very large program.
• IHSS is a vital program. It's not an optional program for those who use it.
• residual program.
• This is a growing program. This is a growing program.
• Part C programs.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The subcommittee heard an overview of the governor’s IHSS budget proposals and then took public testimony from the administration, LAO, county representatives, labor, consumer advocates, and an aging/disability advocacy group. The administration described IHSS as a large Medi-Cal long-term services program serving more than 900,000 recipients and proposed three changes: shifting some growth costs tied to authorized hours per case to counties, eliminating the statewide backup provider system, and aligning IHSS terminations with Medi-Cal terminations. The administration also discussed the earlier CFCO reassessment penalty change for counties and said overdue reassessments had dropped significantly. LAO said the governor’s overall IHSS cost estimates appeared reasonable, but raised concerns about the hours-per-case cost shift, including unclear root causes for growth, limited county control over statewide averages, and uncertainty about the eventual savings. County Welfare Directors Association, SEIU, and consumer/advocacy witnesses opposed the hours cost shift, arguing counties use state tools, the proposal would pressure counties to cut services, and it could harm older adults and people with disabilities by increasing institutionalization and shifting costs elsewhere. The chair and members repeatedly questioned the rationale for the proposal, the lack of a defined baseline, and whether the current assessment tools or MOE structure should instead be revisited. On the backup provider system, the administration said the program is underused and costly to administer relative to service spending, while LAO suggested the Legislature consider whether administrative costs could be reduced instead of eliminating it. County, labor, and consumer witnesses opposed the cut, saying the system is a critical emergency safety net even if utilization is low, especially for rural areas and people with complex needs. Members also asked about data quality, county backup systems, and whether consumers know the program exists. On the Medi-Cal/IHSS alignment proposal, the administration said automation would stop General Fund-only spending when recipients lose Medi-Cal and restore IHSS automatically when Medi-Cal is regained; LAO and others noted the proposal had been rejected before and urged better notices and safeguards. Witnesses warned that automatic termination could create gaps in care and unpaid work for providers, while the department said counties already manually terminate in some cases and that automation is ready if approved. No votes were taken in the excerpt, and the chair indicated the committee would continue with public comment and later items before a hard adjournment time.

Transcript Highlights:

• This program provides an objective evaluation of each entity's information security program effectiveness
• The California cybersecurity maturity matrix program The California cybersecurity maturity matrix program
• Our advisory program assists our statewide risk and program and provides tailored guidance to departments
• That was a federally run program.
• But that was, the program was a federal program. But this is the last year of the program.

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Cybersecurity and the Assembly Committee on Emergency Management held a joint informational hearing focused on maximizing the value of state cybersecurity investments, especially by fully using security features already included in existing vendor contracts. The first panel included representatives from Microsoft, Zscaler, and Palo Alto Networks, who described the products and services they provide to California and generally agreed that agencies often have strong adoption in some areas but still face challenges from tool overlap, limited staff, lack of awareness of available features, and the need for ongoing training and configuration support. They also discussed major threats such as ransomware, data loss, attack-surface exposure, IoT/OT vulnerabilities, and the growing role of AI in both attacks and defenses. Members pressed the vendors on whether state departments underuse purchased cybersecurity tools, how to improve utilization, and how to address the cybersecurity workforce shortage. The vendors said utilization is often constrained by staffing, procurement complexity, and the need to align tools with agency missions and maturity levels, but emphasized that training, leadership buy-in, and regular vendor-agency collaboration can improve results. They also discussed how AI can help with phishing triage, data-loss prevention, and security operations, while warning that agencies must manage AI safely and with human oversight. The second panel featured officials from the Department of Technology, Cal OES/CalSIC, and the California Military Department. They described statewide oversight efforts including audits, independent security assessments, continuous monitoring, advisory services, vulnerability disclosure programs, and workforce development initiatives such as the Information Security Leadership Academy and Cybersecurity Education Summit. Officials said some underutilization is real, but it is often tied to differing agency maturity, overlapping tools, and deliberate feature restrictions to reduce attack surface and complexity; they emphasized a balanced approach using people, process, and technology, with plans of action and milestones to hold departments accountable. They also noted federal uncertainty around MS-ISAC and the state and local cybersecurity grant program, saying California is advocating through federal partners and monitoring the impact. The hearing ended after public comment and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Minnesota paid leave program. Minnesota paid leave program.
• in the program, but we did not receive any funding for the employer share of this program.
• It's a research project to evaluate.
• actually administer this program.
• Uh these program will will use.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all