Transcript Highlights:

• So it is worth saying one thing about how APS credits are awarded.
• So it is worth saying one thing about how APS credits are awarded.
• name is Lindsay Griffin, and I am testifying on behalf of Vote Solar, a nonprofit advocating for equitable
• Thank you for your consideration and for your leadership in advancing a just and equitable future for
• Federal, state, and local government policy actually contributed to all of this, failing to ensure equitable

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy held a hearing on grid transmission and distribution, green financing, environmental justice, renewable portfolio standards, and clean energy workforce policy. Testimony on H. 352/S. 2268 focused on eliminating or scaling back the Alternative Energy Portfolio Standard, with Green Energy Consumers Alliance arguing it costs ratepayers about $30 million annually and largely subsidizes fossil-fuel combined heat and power, biodiesel blending, and woody biomass. Committee members raised concerns that a full repeal could affect heat pumps and solar thermal projects that currently receive APS credits, and the witness acknowledged those technologies are the strongest part of the program but said Mass Save would be a better home for them. Renew Northeast supported H. 3497 on renewable portfolio standard review and clean energy procurements, but urged an indexed renewable energy credit model like New York’s rather than an attribute-only arrangement, arguing it would reduce financing risk and consumer costs. Vote Solar and Senator Liz Miranda testified in support of H. 3540/S. 2303 on clean energy equity, saying environmental justice communities and renters receive too few benefits from clean energy spending and need stronger tracking, tenant protections, and measurable benefit allocation. Miranda described long-standing environmental harms in Roxbury and called for data and accountability to ensure benefits reach environmental justice communities. A major portion of the hearing was devoted to H. 3475/S. 2276 on just transition and clean energy workforce standards. Labor representatives from the pile drivers, building trades, electrical contractors, SEIU, United Steelworkers, the AFL-CIO, and Climate Jobs Massachusetts Action backed the bill, emphasizing prevailing wage, project labor agreements, apprenticeship requirements, workforce transition plans, and protections for gas workers and other fossil-fuel employees as the state shifts to clean energy. They argued the bill would create family-sustaining jobs, support training, and prevent workers from being left behind during the transition. The hearing concluded after all sign-ups were heard, and the committee voted to close the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• panels about the real-world impact of food insecurity and what is needed to build a more resilient, equitable
• The Food Business Center has $4.1 million to release in competitive and non-competitive direct awards
• Arizona, Nevada, and Utah have launched their Business Builder Competitive Awards.
• We were awarded a $20 million grant there, of which, you know, 75 to 80 percent of that money ends up
• We were awarded an RFSI grant, which is a regional food... RFSI on the screen.

Summary: The joint oversight hearing focused on food insecurity in California and how state and federal nutrition programs, agricultural production, and food distribution systems intersect. Assemblymembers emphasized that many Californians, including farmworkers, seniors, children, and communities of color, remain food insecure despite California’s agricultural abundance. Panelists and members discussed CalFresh, WIC, school meals, Sun Bucks, food banks, and the impact of federal policy changes, including possible nutrition cuts, tariffs, and immigration enforcement, on access to food and the agricultural workforce. Secretary Karen Ross described CDFA programs aimed at improving access to fresh food and supporting local agriculture, including the senior farmers’ market program, California Nutrition Incentive Program, Healthy Refrigeration Grant Program, Community Food Hubs, Farm to School, urban agriculture, and a proposed tribal food sovereignty program. She said these efforts help connect local producers to consumers, expand healthy food access, and build infrastructure such as refrigeration, mobile markets, and aggregation hubs. Department of Social Services Deputy Director Alexis Fernandez Garcia outlined CalFresh, CFAP, Sun Bucks, CACFP, emergency food programs, and tribal nutrition assistance, noting that CalFresh and related programs significantly reduce poverty and food insecurity, but participation gaps remain for non-English speakers, some Asian American communities, and undocumented households. PPIC researcher Tess Thorman presented data showing that 13% of California households experienced food insecurity in 2023, with higher rates among households with children and Latino, Black, and other households. She said nutrition programs reduce poverty and food hardship, but federal rules, income thresholds, immigration restrictions, and high living costs limit their reach. Members asked about simplifying applications, improving call center access, increasing outreach in multiple languages, and adjusting benefits for inflation. Officials said the state has used available federal options to streamline enrollment, improve customer service, and target outreach, but many core rules and benefit levels are set federally. The second panel shifted to food production and market access. A farmer, a UC food systems leader, and a produce distributor described efforts to connect small and medium farms with food banks, schools, universities, and Medi-Cal food-as-medicine programs. They highlighted programs such as Farms Together, the USDA Southwest Regional Food Business Center, Farm to School, food hubs, and climate-smart infrastructure grants as ways to create stable markets for local growers while improving food access. Speakers also raised concerns about land tenure, consolidation, regulatory burdens, labor constraints, and the loss of federal funding, and members discussed whether state investments and Prop. 4 funds could help sustain and expand these efforts.

Transcript Highlights:

• DOT awarded $13.5 million in Safe Streets and Roads for All grants to 14 recipients across the Commonwealth
• In January, the Federal Transit Administration awarded the MBTA $78.6 million to buy new hybrid buses
• main streets of many of these cities and towns, but they are locally owned, and communities that are awarded
• This legislation represents a thoughtful and equitable approach to supporting cities and towns of all
• and new reporting requirements, and an official commission to study a comprehensive and regionally equitable

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 4987, the administration’s transportation bond bill centered on Chapter 90 roadway funding and related capital programs. Administration officials described the bill as a roughly $5.5 billion package that would continue $300 million per year for Chapter 90 over four years, with part of the funding distributed by the traditional formula and an additional $100 million based solely on road miles to better support rural and smaller communities. They also highlighted authorizations for municipal pavement work, Shared Streets and Spaces grants, accelerated bridge and pavement repairs, MBTA rail modernization and reliability, housing-related transportation improvements, and a new DCR-focused PRISM program for parkways and related infrastructure. Officials emphasized that the bill is financed through the Commonwealth Transportation Fund and Fair Share revenues, and said it would help municipalities plan more predictably, speed project delivery, and support housing, safety, and climate goals. Committee members and witnesses discussed the bill’s broader scope beyond traditional Chapter 90, especially the $200 million for transportation projects that support housing development and the $200 million for MBTA modernization and rail reliability. Members asked about the rationale for a four-year authorization amid fiscal uncertainty, federal funding volatility, and the status of commuter rail electrification. Administration officials responded that the capital authorization is backed by dedicated transportation revenues rather than the operating budget, and said multi-year certainty helps cities and towns make better long-term repair decisions. They also said the MBTA’s rail modernization funds would support locomotive procurements, including battery-electric and Tier 4 diesel locomotives, as part of a longer-term regional rail and electrification strategy. Municipal officials and regional advocates strongly supported the bill. The Massachusetts Municipal Association, along with town and city officials from Sherborn, Conway, and Yarmouth, said the increased Chapter 90 funding and road-mile-based distribution are especially important for small and rural communities with limited local revenue capacity, and that multi-year funding would let them bundle projects, bid at better prices, and address backlogs more proactively. A Better City and MAPC also supported the bill but urged the committee to treat it like a traditional bond bill by adding policy provisions and considering new transportation revenue tools, such as TNC fee changes, road pricing, parking taxes, and other mechanisms. The committee took no vote during the hearing and adjourned after testimony concluded.

Transcript Highlights:

• federal judge to ensure that all who come before the department and before me are treated fairly. equitably
• Since they have signed and award those funds immediately?
• Would working with awarding funds or otherwise engaging with one of those associations, those irrigation
• That is why today's efforts to increase equitable participation in our farm lending program by farmers
• How do we make sure that there is some equitable distribution of resources so that specialty crop farmers

Keywords: USDA, nominations, Judge Vaden, Tyler Clarkson, agriculture policy, rural America, tariffs, farmer advocacy

Summary: The meeting focused on the nominations of Judge Stephen Alexander Vaden for Deputy Secretary of Agriculture and Mr. Tyler Clarkson for General Counsel at the USDA. Members expressed concerns regarding the challenges farmers and ranchers face, especially in navigating the impacts of recent tariffs imposed by the President. Significant attention was given to how these nominations could influence agriculture policy and support rural communities amidst economic uncertainty. The committee emphasized the necessity for strong leadership in the USDA to advocate for farmer needs and ensure the proper implementation of assistance programs.

Transcript Highlights:

• to consider this bill favorably and ensure that the Commonwealth leads in building a resilient, equitable
• Finally, this bill simplifies and reforms grant programs, ensuring they're more equitable, accessible
• As a former awardee, we were awarded a delivery van that has enabled us to attend farmers' markets and
• As a former awardee, we were awarded a delivery van that has enabled us to attend farmers' markets and
• As a former awardee, we were awarded a delivery van that has enabled us to attend farmers' markets and

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Agriculture and Fisheries held a public hearing on 19 legislative proposals, with testimony limited to three minutes per speaker and seven minutes per panel. The hearing opened with testimony on bills promoting urban agriculture and vacant-lot conversion, including H.121/S.61, which Green Roots staff and community members supported as a way to turn vacant lots in environmental justice communities into urban farms and gardens that improve food access, health, community cohesion, and climate resilience. Rep. James Arena-DeRosa also spoke in support of H.109/S.56, the PFAS bill, describing it as a measure to protect soil and farms from contamination and to create relief for affected farmers. A major portion of the hearing focused on H.109/S.56, which would ban land application of sewage sludge/biosolids, provide liability protection and relief funds for farmers, and address PFAS contamination in soil, water, crops, and animals. Testimony came from environmental groups, farm organizations, and individual farmers, including the Mass Food System Collaborative, Conservation Law Foundation, Clean Water Action, CEMAP, NOFA, Sierra Club, and several farmers who described contamination in Maine and Massachusetts and urged the committee to act. Witnesses emphasized that PFAS poses serious health risks, that farmers should not bear responsibility for legacy contamination, and that the bill should be paired with funding for testing, remediation, and assistance. Committee members asked questions about farm liability, the scope of the bill, contamination in different ownership situations, and the costs and timelines of remediation, with Senator Comerford and others clarifying that the bill is intended to protect farms and farmers rather than non-agricultural landholders. The committee also heard strong support for H.416, a farm-to-institution pilot program, from Rep. Lee Davis, Berkshire Agricultural Ventures, and Berkshire Bounty. They said the pilot would connect Massachusetts farms to schools, hospitals, correctional facilities, and other institutions, creating new markets, strengthening local supply chains, and supporting food-is-medicine efforts. Members discussed whether the model could be statewide and referenced existing programs such as Island Grown Initiative and local hospital and insurance partnerships. Another agricultural bill, H.1058, was supported by Rep. Mark Sylvia and the Cape Cod Cranberry Growers’ Association as a way to allow unused cranberry water rights to be transferred within the same watershed for municipal mitigation while helping growers retire or consolidate bogs. The hearing also included testimony on the broader farm omnibus bill H.112/S.55 and related measures, with the Massachusetts Farm Bureau and others praising the committee’s work on agricultural resilience, food security, agritourism, workforce development, and farmland access, while suggesting additional transportation-related fixes for farmers. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• As of date, we know that 49 of these were intended to be multi-year awards, but due to the late award
• We have awarded one And the conditions for that.
• General release awards, which are the non-apprenticeship awards, and then we have about $5 million that
• And those things can sometimes delay those awards.
• Issue those awards out.

Summary: The Higher Education Budget Subcommittee met to review funding models for the Florida College System and district workforce education programs, with an emphasis on how new dollars are allocated in the program fund and how performance and targeted funding are incorporated. Chancellor Hebda explained the Florida College System model, including base program funding, student success and pipeline funds, performance incentives for industry certifications, and the 2022 president-developed formula that weights enrollment, workforce enrollment, completions, small-college factors, and regional cost differences, plus a targeted funding floor for colleges below a minimum per-FTE level. Vice Chancellor Goodman then outlined the district workforce model, which uses lagged enrollment, program cost weights, local revenue offsets, small-district adjustments, and unmet-need calculations to distribute lump-sum appropriations to school districts offering workforce education. The department also provided updates on several grant programs and funding delays. Goodman said the Workforce Development Incentive Grant, Pathways to Career Opportunities Grant, Graduation Alternative to Traditional Education Startup Grant, and teacher apprenticeship/mentor bonus programs all involve multi-year awards and often require reversions and reappropriations because projects are delayed, extended, or not fully obligated by year-end. She said the department is moving toward an electronic grants system and had already adjusted internal deadlines to speed awards, while acknowledging some reimbursement delays and explaining that mentor bonuses for teacher apprentices will not be paid until the first cohort reaches the statutory timing requirement. Members asked about tracking whether CTE students work in their trained fields, how Xello is used to inform students about career pathways, how FTE is calculated, whether the funding formulas could encourage growth over quality, and how students with disabilities are counted in workforce funding. Questions also focused on tuition, enrollment trends, and the gap between college and university funding. The committee heard that tuition has remained flat for more than a decade, enrollment has rebounded from COVID and is projected to exceed pre-pandemic levels, and the college system’s funding per FTE varies widely. Valencia College President Kathleen Plinsky testified in support of the proposed formula and an additional $200 million for the Florida College System, saying Valencia is the second-largest college in the state but ranks last in per-FTE funding, which has made it difficult to recruit and retain faculty and admit qualified students in high-demand programs like nursing. The committee took no vote and adjourned after the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• , training, inclusive access, And equitable AI use, prioritizing governance, training, inclusive access
• First, equitable access.
• Responding to the Generative AI Committee's recommendation for equitable access, much as we do for other
• On June 25, the Chancellor's Office awarded $3 million to 63 faculty-led projects, selected from over
• Additionally, some of the AI educational innovations challenge grants awarded to faculty at San Jose

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Higher Education and the Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee held an oversight hearing on the California State University’s AI-empowered initiative, including the systemwide rollout of ChatGPT EDU and broader AI integration across CSU campuses. Opening remarks emphasized both the promise of AI for student success, workforce preparation, and access, and the need to address risks such as bias, privacy, misinformation, environmental impacts, and mental health harms. CSU representatives said the initiative grew out of Academic Senate recommendations and a systemwide generative AI committee, and that the goal was to provide equitable access, training, governance, and workforce alignment across the 23-campus system. CSU officials described systemwide contracts for AI tools, the AI Commons training hub, and faculty grant programs supporting AI-related curriculum innovation. They said more than 93,000 ChatGPT EDU accounts had been activated, over 4,300 faculty had taken voluntary training, and $3 million had been awarded to 63 faculty-led projects from more than 400 submissions. San Jose State University highlighted its own AI-focused programs, courses, orientation training, faculty fellows, student ambassadors, and interdisciplinary efforts to build AI literacy and responsible use into instruction and co-curricular programs. CSU also said it was tracking metrics on adoption, academic outcomes, workforce outcomes, and environmental impacts. Faculty, staff, and student representatives welcomed the educational potential of AI but raised concerns about the rollout, saying it had moved quickly and without enough consultation or consistent systemwide policy. They urged stronger protections for academic freedom, intellectual property, privacy, equity, and worker input, and warned about bias, surveillance, job displacement, and the environmental cost of AI. Legislators pressed CSU and OpenAI representatives on training requirements, data privacy, bias reporting, discipline for misuse, liability, sycophancy, and safeguards against harmful uses such as non-consensual imagery or self-harm-related interactions. CSU said interactions in the licensed tool are private, data are not used to train models, and campuses retain their own conduct processes; members also asked CSU to follow up on systemwide training, policy consistency, and additional safeguards.

Transcript Highlights:

• The first was an impact award, and that was for the Office of Privacy and Data Protection.
• Special education formulas and funding at a study from 2025, and these awards are given by whom?
• So the equitable access to credit program is our next tax review.
• The equitable access to credit program is a business and occupation tax credit.
• The program uses contributions to award grants to community development financial institutions.

Summary: The committee met on July 15, 2026, but initially lacked a quorum, so it could not adopt prior minutes. Chair Jerry Pollett welcomed new member Senator Victoria Hunt and new JLARC staff, and noted national recognition for recent JLARC reports. The meeting then moved into a series of preliminary audit presentations and an agency strategic management update, with committee members asking questions after each item. JLARC presented a preliminary audit of DCYF’s Juvenile Rehabilitation programs. Staff concluded that crowding, staffing shortages, weak risk assessments, and inconsistent programming combine to create unsafe conditions. The report found that most youth are housed in two large secure facilities operating near or above capacity, incidents rise as population rises, 47% of frontline staff leave within a year, current assessment tools are not valid for the population, and program access depends more on facility than individual need. JLARC made one recommendation to the legislature to address crowding and seven to DCYF, including improving retention, training, incident response procedures, validated assessments, program alignment, and data quality. DCYF Secretary Ross Hunter said the agency agreed overcrowding is a serious problem, described ongoing efforts to improve staffing and safety, and said a detailed response would be provided later. Committee members raised concerns about education access, retaliation against staff or youth who participated in the audit, and whether JR-25 has helped or worsened conditions. JLARC then presented a preliminary audit of Labor and Industries’ enforcement of farm worker labor laws. The audit found that L&I generally meets inspection timelines for health and safety complaints, but not for wage and hour or retaliation complaints, where delays are driven largely by time before assignment to an investigator. Staff said complaint volume exceeds capacity, though the agency has added staff, created screening processes, and reorganized workloads, and 2026 legislation now allows prioritization of complaints and broader investigations. JLARC recommended that L&I report back in December 2026 and December 2027 on backlog reduction and implementation of the new law. An L&I representative said the agency is hiring additional staff and will provide a formal response later. The committee also received a JLARC overview and Department of Health strategic management plan update on hospital data reporting, inspections, complaints, and adverse event reporting. DOH reported measurable progress on inspection compliance, new staffing and licensing systems, translated complaint forms, and plans for future work on language access, adverse event reporting, and financial data dashboards. After lunch, JLARC began its 2026 tax preference performance reviews. The first review covered the Main Street tax credit, which JLARC said has helped increase the number of Main Street communities and businesses, with positive growth near designated districts; JLARC recommended continuing the preference and improving business-count data. The second review covered the equitable access to credit program, which JLARC said appears to support underserved communities by funding loans through CDFIs; JLARC recommended continuing the preference beyond its 2027 expiration. The committee began questions on the program mechanics and the role of the Community Reinvestment Act, and the presentation was still underway when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• law, certified small businesses, micro-businesses, and disabled veteran business enterprises may be awarded
• The Small Business Procurement and Contracts Act has enabled state agencies to streamline awards to small
• Forty-six of those contracts, totaling $13 million, were awarded to DVBEs.
• But these investments alone do not guarantee equitable outcomes.
• So this idea of targeted community benefits and hiring and equitable metrics is ...about 20 years old

Summary: The committee heard several measures focused on economic development, procurement, workforce equity, federal infrastructure funding, and food security. SB 1044 by Senator Reyes would raise and then index to inflation the cap for streamlined state contracts awarded to certified small businesses, microbusinesses, and disabled veteran business enterprises for services and IT work; supporters said the current cap is outdated and limits access, while opponents representing goods suppliers and some small business groups argued the bill could disadvantage goods contractors and should preserve lower thresholds for those contracts. After discussion about the ceiling versus floor effect of the cap and the impact on different types of businesses, the bill was approved as amended and sent to Appropriations. SB 247 by Senator Smallwood-Cuevas would create a bid preference for projects that hire workers from disadvantaged communities; supporters framed it as a way to connect public infrastructure spending to family-sustaining jobs, while union construction employers opposed it because they said they cannot control worker dispatch through hiring halls and the bill would be difficult to implement. The committee advanced the measure to Appropriations despite those concerns. The committee also approved SJR 6 by Senator Cortese, which urges the federal government to honor commitments under the bipartisan infrastructure law, CHIPS and Science Act, and Inflation Reduction Act, with supporters emphasizing the importance of certainty for California infrastructure, clean energy, and semiconductor investments. SB 1025 by Senator Hurtado would establish an Office of Food Security and Affordability to coordinate food assistance efforts and develop a statewide food security strategy; supporters from a Kern County food bank and the University of California said the state’s response to hunger is fragmented and needs better coordination, while committee members asked about deliverables and timelines. The bill was sent to Appropriations. The committee also took up consent items SB 700 and SB 1340, which were moved on consent to Appropriations, and the hearing ended with the remaining votes recorded and the bills advanced. Throughout the hearing, members repeatedly discussed the need for clearer implementation details, data on program impacts, and how to balance equity goals with operational realities for state agencies, contractors, and small businesses.

Transcript Highlights:

• My question is: were any of these programs already awarded and committed to projects?
• So can you tell us how much, in which programs, have future awards and how much money is at stake?
• In other words, take the continuous appropriations that we gave future awards to based on our belief
• So can you tell us how much in which programs have future awards and how much money is at stake?
• In other words, take the continuous appropriations that we gave future awards to based on our belief

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee hearing focused on the governor’s May Revision, especially the proposed extension of the cap-and-trade program to 2045 as “cap-and-invest,” the related greenhouse gas reduction fund (GGRF) spending framework, and several trailer bill proposals. Department of Finance staff outlined budget solutions including a $1.5 billion annual General Fund-to-GGRF shift for Cal Fire that would grow to $1.9 billion by 2029-30, continued support for high-speed rail, climate bond implementation, and various environmental and water-related statutory changes. The administration also described proposals affecting the Delta Conveyance Project, water quality planning, groundwater bulletin timing, Exide cleanup funding, and other agency-specific items, though the chair repeatedly asked staff to keep the presentation high-level and save details for the next hearing. Members from both parties raised strong concerns about the cap-and-invest proposal, arguing that it could reduce or displace funding for transit, affordable housing, active transportation, wildfire prevention, zero-emission vehicles, and other previously committed programs. Several members questioned whether the administration was effectively shifting essential ongoing services like Cal Fire onto a temporary carbon market fund, how the General Fund backstop would work if auction revenues fall short, and whether the proposal would leave enough money for continuous appropriations and future awards. Members also criticized the inclusion of cap-and-invest reauthorization in the budget process and asked for clearer information on the impact to high-speed rail, transit, and other GGRF priorities. The Delta Conveyance Project and related trailer bill language drew significant opposition from members and public commenters, who argued the proposal would fast-track the project, weaken CEQA-related review, and authorize revenue bond financing without sufficient legislative oversight. Public testimony also included support for maintaining or expanding funding for transit, affordable housing, AB 617 community air protection, offshore wind infrastructure, and ignition interlock programs, while environmental and community groups opposed cuts to wildfire prevention, housing, and school climate-related programs. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational, and the chair said the committee would continue the discussion and receive more detailed responses at the follow-up hearing on Tuesday.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Senate amendment requires a director subject to legislative appropriation or award of a federal grant
• The Senate amendment requires a director subject to legislative appropriation or award of a federal grant
• structure, but also changes the refund structure to 20% per year for the five years, so it makes it equitable
• , and it also clarifies... ...per year for the five years, so it makes it equitable, and it also clarifies

Summary: The caucus reviewed several bills and Senate or conference committee amendments, with members generally noting whether the sponsor intended to concur. HB 2749 would let courts enter a Class 1 misdemeanor conviction for certain lower-level felony convictions, with the Senate amendment requiring at least five years since completion of sentence before eligibility. HB 2082 would create a childhood cancer and rare childhood disease research commission and adjust funding rules, including a five-million-dollar threshold tied to appropriations or federal grants. HB 2096 would allow counties to seek WIFA assistance for cesspool remediation, with the Senate adding an alternative compliance path using ADEQ’s nonpoint source management plan. HB 4001 would regulate alternative nicotine products through the Department of Liquor Licensing and Control; members discussed whether some tobacco-related products remain outside the bill, tribal enforcement limits, and the absence of a tax provision. The presenter said the AG and governor support the bill. The caucus then shifted to conference committee bills. HB 2003 would lower the learner’s permit age from 15.5 to 15 and increase supervised driving time, but several members raised safety concerns and questioned whether the change was needed; the conference amendment would let current instruction permit holders qualify for a license after six months, while still requiring age 16 for licensure. HB 2133 would impose content-verification requirements for commercial websites publishing sexual material, with conference changes exempting pre-effective-date motion pictures and television programming. Members noted the Motion Picture Association still had concerns, though the changes addressed some retroactivity issues. HB 2874 would change campaign finance penalty rules, including a five-day publication requirement for committees owing late-filing penalties, a $5,000 cap on penalties per late report, and retroactive relief for certain inactive committees that filed no-contribution/no-expenditure reports and later terminated; one member said they still had not received the outstanding fee totals requested on the floor. HB 2010 would regulate digital goods sellers and refunds for revoked access to licensed digital content; the conference version kept a five-year refund structure but changed the refund amount to 20% per year, clarified refund procedures, and removed the refund requirement if alternative access is provided. The caucus took no votes in the transcript and ended after the bill presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• And that would come of our annual award.
• So we would be expecting our award right around now.
• <01:41:37.119> And<01:41:37.360> that's previous year's award.
• And that's previous year's award.
• starts this process of getting awards starts this process of getting awards out<01:42:00.560>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So we are not awarding students $6 million in average awards.
• So, we are not awarding students $6 million in average awards.
• 00:07:09.280> further<00:07:09.919> by average award reductions further by average award
• They award the same dollar in the Pell Grant award.
• They award the same dollar in the PEL<00:57:37.280> grant<00:57:37.520> award.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The Higher Education Conference Committee reviewed differences among the Governor’s, House, and Senate proposals for state grant parameter changes and their effects on state grant spending, North Star Promise spending, and average student awards. Nonpartisan staff explained that the proposals use different combinations of parameter changes, with the Governor’s and Senate plans modeled to avoid or minimize rationing, while the House plan would require rationing to balance the program. Staff reported projected biennium balances of a positive $29.836 million for the Governor’s proposal, a negative $60.758 million for the House proposal without rationing, a positive $994,000 for the House proposal with rationing, and a positive $3.623 million for the Senate proposal; North Star Promise balances also varied, with the Senate showing a positive balance and the Governor and House with rationing showing negative balances. Staff also said the Senate proposal would extend availability of the state grant appropriation and suspend surplus procedures through fiscal year 2029, allowing the balance to carry forward. The committee then focused on the House-only tuition and fee cap provision, which would limit the tuition recognized for state grant purposes for four-year programs to the University of Minnesota Twin Cities level, with 1% annual increases in fiscal years 2026 and 2027. House members said the cap was intended to address rising tuition, especially at the University of Minnesota, and to produce savings in the state grant program. The governor’s office confirmed the provision was not included in the Governor’s bill. Representatives from the University of Minnesota and the Minnesota Private College Council opposed the cap, arguing it would reduce awards for low-income students and shift costs to students rather than address underlying tuition pressures; they also said it could discourage enrollment at higher-cost institutions. Supporters from Minnesota State argued the cap would improve fairness because students at lower-tuition institutions are effectively capped lower, while students at more expensive institutions receive larger awards, and they said the legislature should intervene in a variable that has grown substantially over time. Committee members questioned how the cap would work and whether it was tied to the Twin Cities campus rate. Testifiers clarified that the state grant formula is tied to the University of Minnesota level, but because Minnesota State institutions are below that level, the cap effectively limits their students to their own lower tuition while allowing higher awards at the University of Minnesota and private colleges. No formal vote or final action was taken in the portion of the meeting provided; the chair indicated the committee would continue with item-by-item review of the remaining parameter changes and hear additional testimony from agencies and institutions.

Transcript Highlights:

• which helps prevent the grant awards which helps prevent the program<00:57:36.640> for<00:57:
• proportional to income and awards proportional to income and institutional<01:30:16.000> cost.
• It's much better to leave this in the hands of OHE that can do things a bit more equitably.
• Um I know things a bit more equitably.
• equitably, we need to figure that out. equitably, we need to figure that out.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up House File 4252 and first heard a walkthrough of a DE2 amendment that largely incorporated Office of Higher Education technical and statutory cleanup items, including reporting consolidations, updates to postsecondary registration and licensing statutes, and an anti-fraud provision. New provisions in the DE2 would require public postsecondary institutions to explain developmental courses before enrollment and obtain a written acknowledgement, revise the state grant tuition cap, add a $1.5 million ongoing appropriation in FY 2027 for an identity verification system to combat enrollment fraud, and provide $5,000 one-time funding for reforestation at Bemidji State University. Fiscal staff also noted additional special revenue fund revenue and expenditures tied to licensing and registration litigation response. The main debate centered on the A8 amendment offered by Representative Rarick, which would require the governor to appoint University of Minnesota regents only from candidates recommended by the joint legislative committee if the legislature fails to elect regents. Rarick argued the amendment was needed to address what he described as conflicts of interest and pay-to-play concerns in recent gubernatorial appointments. Several members questioned whether the language was constitutional, whether it actually addressed conflicts of interest, and whether it should instead refer to ARCAC-screened or ARCAC-recommended candidates. Nonpartisan staff said the governor’s appointment power is addressed in the university charter, not directly in the constitution, but could not definitively assess constitutionality if challenged. Members were divided: some supported the goal of cleaner governance but said the amendment was not ready or did not match the problem being described; others argued the legislature had failed to complete its own regent appointments and that the amendment was a response to that failure. No vote on the A8 amendment or the bill was reached in the portion provided, though a roll call was requested on the amendment and the chair indicated the bill would continue through amendment consideration before final discussion and vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• At the same time, the court ruled for the districts and ordered the state to create a uniform, equitable
• PSFA awards certain amounts and types of spaces.
• to be awarded projects such as this. Members Mr. My name is Larry.
• Critical need one includes equitable access to high-quality instruction.
• Need three is equitable access to academic, social, well-being, and behavioral services.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill restores the Cal Grant A and B award amounts to their 2001 level.
• Cal Grant A and B award amounts to their 2001 levels.
• by 4%, while awards for UC and CSU students have increased significantly.
• The Cal Grant Award is something that I entirely recognize, as Senator Cabaldon noted.
• DAS identifying that they have received an award of that project.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The committee first heard AB 402, which would increase Cal Grant award amounts for students attending private nonprofit colleges and allow community college transfer entitlement awards to be used at those institutions. The author and supporters said the bill would restore award levels to their 2001 value and improve access for low- and middle-income, working, military, and transfer students. Several witnesses from private nonprofit universities, community college districts, and advocacy groups supported the measure. Senators raised concerns about the prior Cal Grant agreement tied to Associate Degree for Transfer participation and about the need to fund broader Cal Grant reforms, but the bill advanced on a unanimous due-pass vote to Senate Appropriations and was placed on call. The committee then took up AB 2067, a sunset extension for lease-lease-back authority for TK-12 school construction through July 1, 2032. The author and supporters from school housing and contractor groups said the method provides flexibility, early collaboration, cost control, and legal certainty for school construction projects. Senators asked how often lease-lease-back and other alternative delivery methods are used, and whether the skilled-and-trained workforce provisions limit competition. Some members objected to the skilled-and-trained requirement, while others said the bill simply preserves an existing tool without changing labor rules. The bill passed on a 6-1 vote, with Senator Ochoa Bogh voting no, and was placed on call. AB 1204, which would revise the Local Control Funding Formula by increasing supplemental and concentration grants, lowering the concentration threshold, adding regional cost adjustments, and setting a minimum annual COLA floor, drew extensive testimony on both sides. Supporters said the bill better reflects regional costs, inflation, and student need, especially for low-income, multilingual, and unhoused students. Opponents, including several school district leaders, argued it would widen funding disparities and divert money from the LCFF base grant, which they said should be the priority. Committee members also questioned the fiscal impact, the proposed 4% COLA floor, and whether the bill had enough research and stakeholder consensus. Despite those concerns, the bill was advanced to Appropriations on a due-pass vote and placed on call. Finally, the committee heard AB 1235, which would require a skilled-and-trained workforce process for CSU design-build projects to align CSU with UC and community college construction rules. Supporters said it would improve training and project quality, while opponents from contractor groups argued it would reduce competition, increase costs, and impose mandates without evidence of better outcomes. Several senators objected to the skilled-and-trained requirement as limiting opportunities for contractors who comply with state law, while others noted the issue was already common in higher education construction. The discussion was still underway when the transcript ended, and no final vote on AB 1235 was captured.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our next item before you is the 2026 Election Security Federal Grant Award.
• Of that amount, California received an award of $1.93 million, with a required state match of 20%, or
• Department of Treasury formally announced approval of California's plan to use its total award on the
• This helps departments deliver more efficient, effective, and equitable service for Californians.
• And so our BCP requirements, equitable service for Californians.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee 5 on State Administration held a May Revise hearing focused on state administration proposals, with the chair noting no actions would be taken and all items would remain open. The committee heard presentations on a range of budget proposals, including technical adjustments for the Governor’s Office of Service and Community Engagement and the California Workforce Development Board, security and election-related funding for the Secretary of State, modernization and loan-backfill requests for the Department of Consumer Affairs, and multiple Employment Development Department updates covering EDD Next, UI and DI/PFL benefit estimates, workforce funding, and an EMT training reappropriation. Several items drew discussion from the LAO and committee members. The LAO generally supported technical or modernization items such as PERB’s implementation requests, GoServe’s College Corps adjustment, the Secretary of State’s security and HAVA grant items, and the Board of Pharmacy modernization proposal, but raised concerns about the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education’s proposed $10 million General Fund backfill and interest-free loan language. For EDD, the LAO flagged the size of the DI/PFL benefit adjustment and the unusual structure of the document management system proposal within EDD Next, while EDD said the changes reflected higher participation and benefit levels after SB 951 and ongoing modernization needs. The Department of Industrial Relations drew the most extensive questioning. It proposed funding for legal unit reclassifications, EAMS and Cal/OSHA data modernization, a new Cal/OSHA emerging technologies unit, a COYA reappropriation, and trailer bill changes requiring electronic payment of employer assessments and adjusting the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board timeline. Members pressed DIR on high vacancy rates, long wage theft and workers’ compensation backlogs, low collection rates for fines, and the need for clearer workload and outcome measures. DIR said the requests were intended to improve efficiency, support audits and corrective action plans, and better address emerging workplace risks, while the LAO said the workload drivers behind delays remain unclear. The hearing also included support for CalHR’s employee assistance program consolidation and CDT’s proposal to expand “Poppy,” a statewide generative AI assistant for state employees.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so I'm just asking members to vote no, because we need a fair and equitable tax system.
• And so I'm just asking members to vote no, because we need fair and equitable tax, we need a fair and
• equitable tax system.
• Again, we live in a state where fair and equitable taxation is what we strive to do, and so I think it
• It allows WIFA to award financial assistance using monies from the Clean Water Revolving Fund or the

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The caucus began with introductions from pages and interns, followed by a procedural reminder on consent calendars and how bills can be pulled for floor debate or amendment. Members were told that third-read consent bills bypass caucus debate, while caucus consent bills may have committee amendments adopted together unless pulled. The meeting then moved into Minority Caucus Calendar No. 2. A large number of bills were briefly presented, with several members pulling measures from consent or voicing opposition. Topics included appropriations and federal monies accounting (HB 2148), a Buffalo Soldiers memorial (HB 2062), school library funding restrictions (HB 2008), prayer at school governing body meetings (HB 2110), school safety center administration (HB 2142), parental rights and social transitioning disclosures (HB 2249), insurer assessments (HB 2091), agricultural property classification and inspection rules (HB 2104 and HB 2105), firefighter workers’ compensation definitions (HB 2138), truth-in-taxation bond notices (HB 2289), late tax filing penalties (HB 2016), engineering and professional licensing reciprocity (HB 2122), felony murder involving an unborn child (HB 2043), body concealment and mutilation penalties (HB 2044), domestic violence order-of-protection service rules (HB 2048), mandatory reporting of partial-birth abortions (HB 2074), unlawful flight sentencing enhancements (HB 2108), weapons trafficking and fentanyl sentencing changes (HB 2131 and HB 2132), drive-by shooting forfeiture rules (HB 2045), probation review notice changes (HB 2046), venue changes for cases involving court employees (HB 2126), and child support for pre-born children (HB 2144). Members repeatedly criticized several abortion-related bills, the library bill, and the tax and agriculture measures as harmful, unnecessary, or unfunded mandates. The latter part of the meeting focused on water and election legislation. Water bills included snowpack augmentation funding (HB 2024), water conservation grant disclosures (HB 2029), removal of education/research as an eligible water grant use (HB 2030), stormwater recharge mapping with an appropriation (HB 253), cesspool remediation assistance (HB 2096), groundwater pumping limits in INAs (HB 2097), Colorado River litigation funding (HB 2116), and natural resource conservation board changes (HB 2117). Election-related items included moving the primary date earlier and changing signature cure timelines and observer rules (HB 2022), a memorial urging designation of the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization (HCM 2001), a memorial urging review of CAIR for terrorist designation (HCM 2002), and a constitutional amendment on citizenship, voter ID, foreign contributions, and early voting limits (HCR 2001). Members raised concerns about voter access, anti-Muslim rhetoric, and the practical effects of the election changes. The caucus concluded with birthday acknowledgments and an announcement for Muslim Day at the Capitol before adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our next item before you is the 2026 Election Security Federal Grant Award.
• Of that amount, California received an award of $1.93 million, with a required state match of 20%, or
• Department of the Treasury formally announced approval of California's plan to use its total award on
• This helps departments deliver more efficient, effective, and equitable service for Californians.
• And so our BCP requirements, Equitable service for Californians.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee held a May Revision budget hearing on state administration and related issues, hearing presentations from multiple departments and agencies. Early items included the Public Employment Relations Board on funding for implementation of AB 1 and a reduced request tied to AB 288, the Governor’s Office of Service and Community Engagement on a technical College Corps adjustment, and the Secretary of State on building security upgrades, election security grant matching funds, and payroll system readiness costs. The Department of Consumer Affairs presented a Board of Pharmacy modernization request and a General Fund backfill for the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education; the LAO raised no concerns on the pharmacy item but recommended rejecting the private postsecondary backfill and questioned interest-free loan language. The Employment Development Department outlined several large workload and benefit adjustments, including EDD Next document management funding, UI loan interest, DI/PFL benefit increases, WIOA adjustments, school employee benefits, an EMT training reappropriation, and a technical reversion correction; the LAO flagged the size of the DI/PFL increase and the expansion of the document management scope, while members asked about program impacts and timelines. The California Workforce Development Board presented an April adjustment to reimbursement authority for an interagency agreement with Caltrans, which the LAO said raised no concerns. Public comment on that item and others included support for workforce and apprenticeship initiatives, including the Jails to Jobs proposal and renewal of the Apprenticeship Innovation Fund, though those were not part of the May Revision package. The Department of Industrial Relations then presented several proposals: reclassifying legal positions, continuing modernization of the workers’ compensation EAMS system, Cal/OSHA data modernization, creating a Cal/OSHA emerging technologies unit, reappropriating funds for the California Opportunity Youth Apprenticeship program, and trailer bill changes requiring electronic payment of employer assessments and adjusting the statutory treatment of the workers’ compensation administrative director’s salary. The LAO generally found the IT and salary proposals reasonable but urged close monitoring of the new emerging technologies unit. Committee members, especially Assemblymember Ortega, pressed DIR on long vacancy rates, wage theft claim delays, low collection rates for Cal/OSHA fines, and whether new resources would improve outcomes; DIR said it was pursuing recruitment, classification reviews, and process modernization, while the LAO noted that staffing alone may not explain the delays. The Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board also sought to make permanent a 2024 change to the 60-day reconsideration clock, saying it had reduced backlog and interim orders; the LAO had no concerns. Finally, the Department of Human Resources presented a statewide Employee Assistance Program contract consolidation that would lower costs compared with renewing separate contracts and requested one program manager position to oversee the contract and first responder services; the hearing continued with Finance’s response after the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• core workings of the Legislature, such as how and to what extent the Legislature is ensuring an equitable
• Presumably you... ...including an audit on an equitable mode of making laws.
• How do you define equitable mode of making laws?
• Walker Excellence in Government Performance and Accountability Award in 2018.
• written, or that the legislature engaged in an equitable process for developing that law?

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The subcommittee hearing focused on whether the Office of the State Auditor may constitutionally audit the Massachusetts Legislature under Chapter 250 of the Acts of 2024 and what such an audit could include under generally accepted government auditing standards. Chair Cindy Friedman opened by explaining the background: voters approved Ballot Question 1 in November 2024, the law took effect in January 2025, and the Auditor then initiated audits of both chambers. The chair said the subcommittee was seeking expert testimony because the proposed audit scope, constitutionality, and possible bias concerns remained unresolved. Public testimony was invited, but no members of the public pre-registered; written testimony remained open for a short period after the hearing. The hearing then proceeded with invited experts on constitutional law/state government and auditing-related issues. Professor Lawrence Friedman testified that the ballot initiative’s approval by the Attorney General and by voters did not resolve constitutional questions, and he argued Chapter 250 violates the Massachusetts Constitution. He said the Legislature has constitutional authority to set its own rules and manage its proceedings, and that an executive-branch audit would intrude on legislative deliberation, speech and debate protections, and separation of powers. He also warned that even audits of supposedly administrative matters could become a vehicle for repeated document demands and litigation that would indirectly burden legislative functioning. In questioning, senators pressed him on the line between administrative and deliberative functions, the role of the Attorney General versus the courts, the possibility of retroactive audit scope, and whether prior legislative consent to audits mattered; he said prior consent would not bind future legislatures and that constitutionality is ultimately for the courts. Professor Ray La Raja also opposed the audit, framing it as a threat to institutional independence and representative democracy. He argued that allowing an executive-branch official to audit the Legislature without consent would upset separation of powers, chill internal debate, and create a precedent for broader executive intrusion. He said voters often support “transparency” reforms without fully appreciating institutional consequences, and that legislatures should defend their autonomy, especially amid what he described as broader executive overreach nationally. Senators asked about chilling effects, the practical distinction between administrative and core legislative functions, and whether the courts or the Legislature should resolve the issue; he said the courts would ultimately adjudicate disputes, but the Legislature should not waive its constitutional authority lightly. Jean Kempthorne took the opposite view, arguing the audit is permissible and should proceed. She said the state auditor is a constitutional officer accountable directly to the people, that the audit power can be expanded by statute, and that separation of powers does not require watertight compartments. She contended the audit would not displace core legislative powers because the auditor can only evaluate operations, report findings, and make recommendations. She also argued the Legislature itself already conducts audits of other branches, so it is inconsistent to claim an audit of the Legislature is unconstitutional. In response to senators’ questions, she said there are guardrails against truly intrusive requests, but that the administrative-versus-legislative distinction is not a workable bright line; she suggested disputes should be handled case by case, with objections, negotiation, or litigation if specific requests go too far. No votes or formal actions were taken at the hearing.