Transcript Highlights:

• We have an 850 square mile radius of outreach that we cover, and I'd be happy to take questions.
• That face small budgets, long distances to hospitals, and not enough ambulances to cover those emergencies
• As stated, Senator Perry mentioned that a lot of our state is covered by rural EMS providers.
• One of the most significant challenges we face as a rural EMS agency... is our limited budget.
• As Judge DeLoach said, we are facing staffing challenges across the state.

Bills: SB868, SB1337, SB1371, SB1377, SB1426, SB1620, SB2064, SB2065, SJR4, SJR 4

Keywords: SB 868, rural volunteer fire department assistance program, volunteer fire department assistance fund, Texas Government Code, wildfire, wildland fire, high-risk wildfire area, fire suppression, rural fire departments, volunteer firefighters, emergency response, public safety, grant allocation, appropriations, disaster preparedness, tax penalties, interest calculation, overpayment, tax law, refund process

Transcript Highlights:

• Issue one, we're going to cover the Racial Justice for All Act implementation.
• We recently had a senior, 76 years old, who was facing an $80 rent increase.
• We recently had a senior, 76 years old, who was facing an $80 rent increase.
• the types of services that they used to cover.
• So, in addition to covering increased costs and contributions, we had to cover our portion of the debt-related

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Families seeking ASD services are facing unprecedented delays.
• Families seeking ASD services are facing unprecedented delays.
• A lot of these plans are not covering the 20% out of pocket.
• And yet, despite knowing what I needed, I faced significant barriers.
• Massachusetts also faces a severe workforce shortage in our field.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Health Care Financing held a public hearing on several health care bills focused primarily on autism services and kidney disease coverage. Committee chairs John Lawn and Cindy Friedman opened by outlining hearing procedures, testimony rules, and filing deadlines, and noted the hearing would be recorded and written testimony accepted. They said the day’s topics included affordability and access to behavioral health services, provider reimbursement, Medicare coverage for vulnerable populations, and MassHealth eligibility asset exemptions. A major portion of the hearing concerned House Bill 4623, which would add board-certified assistant behavior analysts (BCABAs) as a recognized mid-level supervisory role in the MassHealth reimbursement framework to help address long wait lists for autism spectrum disorder services. Representative Lisa Field, actuaries, clinicians, and autism service providers testified that the current two-tier model limits workforce capacity, contributes to long delays, and leaves families waiting months for care. Supporters said the bill could expand access, improve retention, and potentially reduce MassHealth costs, while also helping providers meet growing demand and new administrative requirements. The committee also heard testimony on House Bill 4425 and Senate Bill 2737, which would allow Massachusetts residents under 65 with end-stage renal disease to purchase Medigap coverage. Legislators, dialysis advocates, and patients described high out-of-pocket costs under Medicare, barriers to kidney transplant eligibility without secondary insurance, and the financial strain on patients and families. Testifiers said the change would affect about 846 residents, could modestly increase premiums, and might reduce Medicaid spending by preventing asset spend-downs. Senator Gomez and others spoke from personal experience with dialysis and transplant care. Finally, the committee heard testimony on House Bill 4353 and Senate Bill 2587, which would require regular data-driven review of MassHealth ABA reimbursement rates. Providers and association representatives argued that reimbursement has not kept pace with inflation, workforce shortages, accreditation costs, and new 2026 MassHealth policy requirements, and said the bills would improve transparency and ensure rates reflect the true cost of care. No votes were taken; the hearing concluded with the chairs thanking participants, inviting additional written testimony, and adjourning the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Turning to what the bill does, it requires a covered provider, It requires a covered provider to make
• A covered provider must include a latent disclosure in AI-generated images, videos, or audio.
• If a covered provider licenses its generative AI system to a third party, the covered provider must require
• I don't want to face the burden of paying more in replacement of a data center's dues.
• I don't want to face the burden of paying more in replacement of a data center's dues.

Bills: HB2338, HB2367, HB2426, HB2606

Keywords: weatherization, energy efficiency, community projects, sustainability, environment, coal-fired plant, preferential treatment, energy policy, electric generation, regulatory reform, pollution control, efficiency, appeals process, environmental regulation, hearing board, data protection, privacy, performance measures, reporting requirements, office of privacy

Transcript Highlights:

• The health plan must arrange care and cover any out-of-network costs.
• And we know that households that are experiencing food insecurity are also facing barriers to meeting
• Nice to see you have a face.
• Of course, I had enough savvy to ask my carrier to find me somebody that was covered.
• Locked out of Covered California because of my immigration status.

Summary: The Assembly Health Committee heard a long series of health-related bills, with most measures focused on access to care, administrative simplification, and behavioral health. Early items included AB 583, allowing nurse practitioners to sign death certificates; AB 492, requiring DHCS to notify local governments when new alcohol or drug recovery facilities are licensed; and AB 280, which would tighten provider directory accuracy requirements, add enforcement benchmarks, and allow use of a centralized database. Testimony on AB 280 highlighted the harms of “ghost networks,” while insurers and some provider groups opposed the bill as written, arguing it placed too much responsibility on plans and did not fully address provider-side data problems. AB 280 passed on a roll call vote, and several other bills were placed on consent and approved. The committee also advanced AB 636, expanding Medi-Cal coverage for medically necessary diapers for children up to age 21 and lowering the age threshold for access; AB 1041, streamlining physician credentialing with a uniform form and 90-day review deadline; and AB 787, requiring health plans to help enrollees find in-network providers quickly when directories fail. Supporters of these bills emphasized family financial strain, delays in care, and the burden of administrative red tape, while opponents of AB 1041 and AB 280 raised concerns about provider participation, accuracy, and liability. All three measures were approved and sent to Appropriations. The committee then took up AB 4 and AB 29. AB 4 would allow income-eligible Californians to buy Covered California coverage regardless of immigration status, and AB 29 would authorize Medi-Cal reimbursement for community health workers and doulas conducting ACE screenings. Both bills drew strong support from immigrant-rights, health access, and community-based organizations, and both passed on roll call votes, with AB 4 receiving some no votes. The committee also approved AB 416, which would allow emergency physicians to place 5150 holds in certain circumstances; supporters said it would reduce delays and overcrowding in emergency departments, while Disability Rights California and others warned it could increase unnecessary involuntary hospitalization and transfers to locked facilities. Despite those concerns, the bill passed and was sent onward for further consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are facing a salmon extinction crisis.
• We are facing a salmon extinction crisis.
• So what’s a covered policy?
• Covered political subdivisions must submit these covered policies to the Attorney General to obtain a
• jurisdictions and limiting the number of covered practices.

Summary: The committee first suspended the five-day notice rule and then heard House Bill 2521 on firearm background check fees. Staff explained that the bill would remove the $18 fee cap and allow Washington State Patrol to set fees based on actual program costs, which could be about $33 to $35 per check. Supporters said the change was needed to keep the background check system operating and avoid delays and layoffs; opponents argued it would burden lawful gun owners and amount to an unconstitutional tax or barrier to a constitutional right. No vote was taken in the hearing. Members then heard Substitute House Bill 2475 on language-accessible public programs, which would direct the Office of Equity to develop uniform language-access guidelines, address interpreter and translator shortages, and require agency implementation reporting. Testimony was strongly supportive, emphasizing the need for consistent access for limited-English-proficient residents and the benefits for schools, families, and state services. The committee also heard Second Substitute House Bill 2479 on wage recovery, which would create a wage recovery fund to provide partial advance payments to low-wage workers with meritorious unpaid wage claims and adjust wage penalty provisions. Employers, labor advocates, and legal services representatives largely supported the bill as a bipartisan, worker-protection measure funded by penalties rather than the general fund. The committee next took up Engrossed Third Substitute House Bill 1960 on renewable energy tax incentives, which would replace existing property tax and excise tax provisions with a new state and local renewable energy excise tax structure and related grant programs for local governments and tribes. Counties, utilities, developers, and tribal representatives generally supported the bill’s goal of stabilizing tax treatment for renewable projects, though several witnesses said they wanted amendments to address rates, timing, and late-stage project impacts. The committee also heard Substitute Senate Bill 5932 on alternative jet fuel incentives, which would change the timing and duration of existing tax preferences; supporters said it would provide certainty for emerging sustainable aviation fuel projects, while one refinery sought clarification and a broader county threshold. Later, the committee heard Engrossed Substitute House Bill 2238 on statewide food security, directing the Department of Agriculture to monitor food system performance and develop a statewide food security strategy. Agricultural groups, grocers, anti-hunger advocates, and farmers supported the bill as a coordination effort to improve food access, affordability, and supply chain resilience. The committee then heard Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill 1903, which would create a statewide low-income energy assistance program through the Department of Commerce; supporters said it would address growing unmet need and complement existing utility programs, while opponents said it did not address the root causes of rising energy costs. Finally, the committee heard Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill 2416 on waste-to-energy facilities under the Climate Commitment Act and Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill 2515 on large energy-use facilities (data centers), both of which drew mixed testimony centered on balancing emissions, ratepayer impacts, reliability, and environmental or tribal concerns. No final votes were taken in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• in trying to make sure that people show back up to face the criminal charges that they face in terms
• There are admitted carriers now that do cover BFRAs currently.
• We're always trying to cover this.
• We're always trying to cover this.
• We're always trying to cover this.

Summary: The committee heard three major insurance-related bills. SB 1209 by Senator Allen would give the Insurance Commissioner new authority to require insurers to implement corrective actions found in market conduct and financial exams, with penalties for failure to comply. Supporters, including Commissioner Ricardo Lara and his deputies, said current law leaves CDI without a direct way to compel remediation of repeated violations or obtain needed financial information, while opponents argued the bill expands CDI authority too far, could duplicate existing penalties, and should be limited to legal violations rather than recommendations. After discussion, members and the author agreed to narrow the bill through amendments, including tying it to legal violations, applying penalties per exam rather than per policy, and clarifying accounting language; the committee then passed the bill 5-1 to Appropriations, with one member on call. SB 1301, also by Senator Allen, would reform residential property insurance non-renewals by requiring clearer written explanations, giving homeowners a chance to mitigate correctable issues, and prohibiting certain unfair non-renewal bases such as claims below deductible or claims not paid by the insurer. The author and supporters said Californians face unusually high non-renewal rates and often receive vague notices that make it hard to keep coverage, while opponents warned the bill’s original 180-day notice period and reporting requirements were too burdensome and could worsen availability. Senator Richardson said he would support the bill after the author agreed to reduce the notice period to about three months and continue working on a mitigation-based process; the committee then approved the bill 4-1, with one member on call. The committee also considered SB 1026 by Senator Gonzalez, which would strengthen regulation of bail fugitive recovery agents by allowing CDI to suspend or revoke licenses without a criminal conviction, expanding prohibited conduct, and tightening insurance and appointment requirements. Supporters, including Commissioner Lara, said the 2022 licensing law left loopholes that allow misconduct to continue and that the bill would improve public safety and accountability. Opponents from the bail industry and crime victims groups argued the bill requires unavailable or impractical insurance coverage, including coverage for willful acts, and could reduce the number of recovery agents and delay justice. Members raised concerns about the insurance language and availability, and the author said the bill was still being worked on with opposition; the committee passed it 4-1, with one member on call. Finally, the committee heard SB 982 by Senator Wiener, the Affordable Insurance and Recovery Act, which would let the Attorney General seek recovery from fossil fuel companies for climate-related costs affecting the Fair Plan and private policyholders. The author said Californians are paying rising insurance and disaster costs while fossil fuel companies that contributed to climate change are not, and witnesses from flood and wildfire communities and climate policy experts supported the bill as a way to fund recovery and resilience. Opponents, including business and labor representatives, argued the bill would impose broad liability, invite litigation, and harm jobs and energy affordability. The hearing included extensive testimony, but no vote was taken on SB 982 in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're already facing federal and potential state funding cuts.
• Washington, however, will face no comparable expenses.
• coverings.
• For example, it does not cover symphony musicians.
• Others have covered the issue of double-taxing victims.

Summary: The Ways and Means Committee held a public hearing on multiple bills, beginning with a motion to suspend the five-day notice rule for a long list of Senate bills, which passed on a voice vote. The committee first heard Substitute Senate Bill 6026, a governor-request housing bill that would require cities and counties over 30,000 population to allow residential uses in commercial and mixed-use zones, limit mixed-use/ground-floor commercial requirements in some areas, and allow added height where such requirements are imposed. The lieutenant governor testified strongly in support, arguing the bill would add needed housing capacity without requiring ground-floor retail burdens. The hearing on SB 6026 was then suspended so the committee could move through the agenda. The committee then heard Senate Bill 6294, a broad local government finance measure with eight parts, including expanded uses for certain REET revenues, a new county public utility tax, a new local sales tax for children and family services, expanded housing-related tax uses, changes to county levy structure, longer lid lift periods, and expanded use of rental car tax revenue. Local government, housing, and public health witnesses largely supported the bill, emphasizing flexibility for affordable housing, rental assistance, children’s services, and county fiscal stability. Opponents, including wireless industry, water/sewer district, auto dealer, realtors, energy, and cannabis representatives, objected to specific tax provisions as regressive, costly, or likely to raise consumer prices. Several witnesses requested amendments, including adding public health clinic funding and flood recovery language from House bills. The committee also heard Substitute Senate Bill 5400 on local news sustainability, which would create a state grant program funded by a surcharge on large search engines and social media platforms to support journalism jobs and the Murrow Fellowship program. News organizations, the League of Women Voters, open government advocates, and local journalism supporters testified in favor, saying local news is essential to civic life and that the bill would help sustain reporting without using general fund dollars. Technology industry representatives opposed the bill, arguing it unfairly singles out tech companies and could face legal challenges. The committee then heard Senate Bill 6211, which would let opt-in GMA jurisdictions impose REET-2 without voter approval; cities and counties supported it as a parity and infrastructure funding measure, while Realtors opposed the loss of voter approval. Senate Bill 5650, authorizing local cannabis excise taxes, drew support from some local officials but strong opposition from cannabis businesses, which argued Washington’s cannabis taxes are already too high and drive sales to the illicit market. Senate Bill 6033, waiving penalties and interest for taxpayers who failed to collect new sales tax on certain services, was supported by NFIB as a compliance and fairness measure. Senate Bill 6297, exempting temporary staffing services for nonprofit behavioral health providers from sales tax, drew strong support from behavioral health organizations citing workforce shortages and unsustainable costs. Finally, Senate Bill 6343, extending and expanding tax relief for disaster-damaged property and repairs, was presented as aid for flood recovery; local officials testified in support. No final committee votes on the bills were taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Anne laid out nicely some of the issues that we're facing.
• Gig workers, unfortunately, are not covered by many of the benefit systems.
• And we have to face that directly. I also don't like the rainy day fund name.
• There are huge issues that we have to face.
• , not covered, and so on, to give us a little more knowledge.

Summary: The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee held an informational hearing on California’s Budget Stabilization Account, or Rainy Day Fund, with presentations from the Legislative Analyst’s Office, the Department of Finance, Practical Idealism Economics, and the California Budget and Policy Center. The LAO explained that California’s revenue volatility is driven largely by the personal income tax and high-income capital gains, and described how Proposition 2 deposits work, the 10% cap on the BSA, and the LAO’s evaluation that the current policy would cover only about 30% of funding shortfalls over 50 years in an unfavorable benchmark scenario. The LAO recommended raising the cap to 50% over time and either adopting broader deposit rules or depositing all excess capital gains. Finance said the administration had proposed raising the cap to 20% and excluding reserve deposits and withdrawals from the state appropriations limit. The Budget Center supported reserve reform but stressed balancing savings with current service needs and noted other tools such as revenue changes, borrowing from special funds, and the new Projected Surplus Temporary Holding Account. Committee members debated the purpose and adequacy of reserves, the role of the state appropriations limit, and whether reserves should be paired with broader fiscal reforms. Several senators argued that reserves are needed to preserve core services during downturns and that the current system is too complicated and too small, while others emphasized the need to protect spending on health care, child care, and other services for working Californians. There was also discussion of infrastructure spending as a possible countercyclical tool and whether deposits for infrastructure should be treated differently under reserve and SAL rules. The LAO said the Legislature has flexibility in defining infrastructure spending and suggested an infrastructure fund could function as a separate reserve-like mechanism. A significant portion of the hearing turned to broader tax and budget policy, including repeated references to Proposition 13, the state’s revenue structure, business departures, unemployment insurance financing, and the impact of inequality on California’s fiscal resilience. Some members argued Prop. 13 was driven by affordability concerns for homeowners, while others said it created loopholes that benefit corporations and constrain local revenue. The hearing did not take any vote or formal action; it remained informational, with the chair indicating the committee would continue questions and public comment after the panel discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Even after the deductible is met, some families face a copayment of $40 or more per visit for a primary
• Fifty-eight percent of California children are covered as dependents under employer-based coverage.
• services, with exceptions for preventive care. ...before their plan pays for covered services, with
• Both parents work, and their teenage daughters are covered under their employer's insurance.
• Now their daughter faces needing surgery on her other hip, and they face choosing whether one of them

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The Assembly Health Committee met on January 13, 2026, and first heard AB 634 by Assembly Member Jeff Gonzalez, which would prohibit the manufacturing, distribution, or sale of tianeptine in California. Gonzalez described the substance as a dangerous, opioid-like product sold in retail settings and said the bill had been narrowed through amendments to shift penalties from criminal to civil, limit impacts on employees without sales authority, allow cost recovery, and avoid constitutional issues. The California Narcotic Officers Association testified in support, and there was no opposition testimony. The committee members expressed support for the public health goal and the bill was passed out of committee on a do pass motion to the Judiciary Committee. The committee then heard AB 298 by Assembly Member Bonta, which would eliminate out-of-pocket cost sharing for covered health care services for children under 21 in large-group commercial health plans. Bonta and supporters, including Health Access California and Family Voices of California, argued that deductibles, copays, and coinsurance create barriers to pediatric care and can force families into debt or delay treatment. Several medical and child health organizations testified in support, some in a supportive amended position, while the California Chamber of Commerce, the Association of California Life and Health Insurance Companies, and other insurance groups opposed the bill, warning it could raise premiums, shift costs to employers and other enrollees, and affect the large-group market. Bonta said he would continue working on amendments, including possible cost-saving changes for CalPERS and clarifications on provider reimbursement. The committee approved the bill on a do pass motion to Appropriations, and later completed add-on votes and the consent calendar, sending the consent bills AB 96, AB 1126, and AB 1366 forward as well.

Transcript Highlights:

• in trying to make sure that people show back up to face the criminal charges that they face in terms
• Insurance did not come close to covering the cost of rebuilding.
• Insurance did not come close to covering the cost of rebuilding.
• We're always trying to cover this. We're always trying to cover this.
• But we are facing another fear: that we won't be able to get insurance.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We also cover several state agencies.
• So we will conduct outreach, and we will do a face-to-face initial visit within five days of enrollment
• Sometimes it was, yeah, absolutely, let's arrange a time where we could sit down face to face.
• And that is that we have done our initial visit and our face-to-face...
• We also saw a great return for face-to-face.

Summary: The Health and Human Services Committee received an overview of Florida’s intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) managed care pilot, created by legislation in 2023 to test whether a managed care model could integrate Medicaid medical services with iBudget waiver home- and community-based services for adults in pre-enrollment categories. AHCA explained the existing system, the pilot’s scope in Regions D and I, and the rollout timeline, including federal approval, contract execution with Florida Community Care, and the October 2024 go-live. Officials reported that, as of early February, 370 individuals had been sent for onboarding and 168 more were in queue, with about $35.8 million of the appropriation remaining. APD also clarified the difference between the pre-enrollment categories and the waiver waitlist, and noted that crisis cases can be enrolled more quickly depending on eligibility and funding. Florida Community Care described the pilot as a comprehensive managed care model offering medical, long-term care, and iBudget services, plus enhanced benefits such as bed-hold days, caregiver transportation, and help with legal guardianship costs. The plan said it uses one care coordinator, a 1:18 coordinator ratio, a face-to-face assessment within five days of enrollment, and 180 days of continuity of care for existing providers. The company emphasized that it is recruiting providers by offering higher rates than some iBudget rates, lower administrative burden, and network adequacy incentives, while APD said it continues to monitor provider supply and demand and recruit across service types and regions. Members repeatedly questioned whether the pilot’s costs, provider rates, and service levels were truly comparable to the iBudget system, and AHCA and APD said it was too early to draw firm conclusions because claims data are still lagging. Committee members also raised concerns about communication, enrollment delays, provider shortages, and whether the pilot could scale statewide. APD said it has used letters, phone calls, texts, emails, and community meetings to reach eligible individuals, and that some delays stem from required assessments, Medicaid eligibility checks, and level-of-care determinations. Several members asked for more detailed comparisons of costs and provider reimbursement between the pilot and iBudget, and APD said it would provide additional data. Public testimony at the end was strongly critical of managed care, with a participant and his mother describing poor service, transportation failures, and loss of control under prior managed care arrangements, and urging the committee not to expand such a model without safeguards. No votes or formal committee action were taken before adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our state continues to face some hard choices in this budget, and in making these hard decisions, the
• And this budget does not have spending reductions sufficient to cover.
• We now see we have a UIS, our asylees, our refugees, who now are not covered.
• are taxed, they have to raise prices in order to cover their losses or their taxes as well.
• There is no insurance product that you can purchase to cover this type. Thank you very much.

Summary: The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee heard AB 109, the Budget Act of 2026, as the main item. Committee leaders described the legislative budget agreement as a balanced two-year plan with about $355.9 billion in total spending, $253 billion from the General Fund, and $36.5 billion in reserves. The Legislative Analyst and Department of Finance said the package assumes about $5.5 billion in higher revenues than the May Revision and uses those resources for a mix of spending changes, including higher Proposition 98 support, additional child care slots, housing and homelessness funding, delayed Medi-Cal reductions, and added support for counties, public hospitals, and distressed hospitals. The administration said the plan resembles the May Revision’s overall structure but includes new spending and revenue assumptions, and members noted that separate revenue trailer bills would be heard later in the week. Much of the committee discussion focused on Medi-Cal, H.R. 1, and the impact on immigrants, low-income workers, counties, and hospitals. Several senators criticized the budget for locking in savings from delayed or reduced Medi-Cal coverage and for not including a mechanism to restore eligibility, while administration and LAO staff said the package delays some reductions but does not automatically reinstate coverage. Finance staff said roughly 1.5 million to 2 million people with unsatisfactory immigration status would move from managed care to fee-for-service, with coverage largely unchanged except for certain services not federally allowed. Members also discussed county administrative funding, indigent care, public hospital support, and the expected rise in uncompensated care. Other topics included In-Home Supportive Services, child care, homelessness funding, Prop. 36, courthouse construction and new judgeships, transit and cap-and-invest/GGRF funding, local journalism, and workforce or reentry programs. Committee members split along party lines in their comments. Democratic members generally supported the agreement as a difficult but responsible compromise that protects core services, preserves reserves, and makes targeted investments in education, housing, health care, and justice system capacity. Republican members argued the budget relies on unrealistic revenue assumptions, does not sufficiently reduce spending, and includes costly policy choices and tax increases. Public testimony largely came from advocates and stakeholders who supported IHSS, Medi-Cal, child care, domestic violence services, hospitals, transit, and other programs, while some business and health plan representatives raised concerns about tax proposals and the shift from managed care to fee-for-service. The chair then moved the committee to public comment and indicated that the revenue bills would return later in the week; no final vote on AB 109 is reflected in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are faced with a number of primary care physicians retiring or leaving the profession.
• As you've heard, these programs both cover very similar activities.
• They cover existing slots, but also new growth in slots.
• As of January 31st, we had 1.98 million Californians enrolled in Covered California plans.
• These enhanced federal subsidies have made Covered California affordable.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The priority for us in focusing on these units as full-funded, cover the costs, meant that we had to
• The costs of doing everything that we currently do exceeded what that could cover.
• These grants have also covered things like training and technical assistance.
• I think the biggest challenge facing our agency is actually not about our federal funding.
• It will cover the cost of the vendors, contracted services.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee heard budget testimony from Department of Mental Health Commissioner Brooke Doyle, who said DMH serves about 29,000 people and is facing rising demand, higher operating costs, and uncertainty about federal funding. She explained that the FY26 budget prioritizes fully funding the state-operated inpatient system, which is at 100% occupancy and often serves people transferred from Bridgewater State Hospital, while making reductions in other areas to balance the budget. Those reductions include a 50% cut to case managers, a pause on closing the Pocasset unit pending a working group on Cape access, and changes to youth and contracted services such as right-sizing IRTP and CIRT, reducing Youth PACT from seven teams to three, scaling back flex and jail diversion grants as ARPA funds wind down, and preserving the behavioral health helpline and community-based crisis services. Members from Western Massachusetts and the Cape raised concerns about access, staffing, and the impact of cuts, and Doyle said the department would continue operating IRTP services, improve the referral process, and work with stakeholders on the Pocasset review and other access issues. The committee also discussed school-based mental health, 988, loan forgiveness for workforce recruitment, and the role of co-response programs for law enforcement. Secretary Robin Lipson then testified for the Executive Office of Aging and Independence, describing a proposed FY26 budget increase of about 21% to support councils on aging, home care, elder abuse investigations, caregiver support, care transitions, and nutrition programs. She said the agency is managing rising demand, especially from the growing 80-plus population, and noted uncertainty around federal Older Americans Act funding after the federal disbursement agency was disbanded. To control costs, the office will manage intake and caseload growth in a fully state-funded home care program, but current clients will not lose services. Lipson also highlighted a new $1 million line item for local mini-grants to support age-friendly initiatives. In questions, members focused on elder scams, and Lipson said scams are increasing and the agency is working with banks, district attorneys, and public awareness campaigns. The Health Policy Commission’s Executive Director David Seltz presented the agency’s FY26 request and said the biggest challenge is health care affordability, with family premiums near $29,000 annually and many residents delaying care because of cost. He emphasized that recent legislation significantly expands HPC’s role through a new Office of Pharmaceutical Policy and Analysis, which will examine the drug supply chain and pricing, and a new Office of Health Resource Planning, which will support statewide planning around closures and access gaps. The new law also creates task forces on maternal health access and primary care, and adds transparency and oversight for private equity in health care. Members asked about pharmaceutical costs, GLP-1 weight-loss drugs, 340B, and maternal health closures; Seltz said the data show rapid growth in GLP-1 spending and that the new offices will help the state better understand cost drivers and access problems. The Center for Health Information and Analysis then began its testimony, describing its role as the state’s data hub for health care spending, utilization, quality, and affordability analysis.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:04:27.680><c> unit</c> HO6 supplemental policy to cover unit HO6 supplemental policy to cover
• Face value is 38.
• </c><00:45:48.880><c> Face</c> the Turf Club is listed at $63. Face the Turf Club is listed at $63.
• Tickets uh face value tickets St. Paul. Tickets uh face value tickets were<00:46:00.720><c> $25.
• It relies on an original face was.

Bills: SF1750, HF4250, HF3938, HF3904, HF3642

Keywords: common interest community, CIC, homeowners association, HOA, condominium, planned community, cooperative, unit owner, association board, declarant, declarant control, special declarant rights, assessment lien, foreclosure, late fees, fines, attorney fees, resale disclosure, annual report, maintenance plan

Transcript Highlights:

• No. $7.4 million covers year one of phase one and then also will cover a couple of years of phase two
• No. 7.4 covers year 1 of phase 1 and then also we'll cover a couple of years of phase 2.
• So that should cover the $233.6 million award.
• I think you're going to cover number seven.
• We'll cover hours increased up to 0.7 percent.

Summary: The committee heard opening budget remarks from the Department of Finance and the Legislative Analyst’s Office on the May Revision for Health and Human Services. Finance said the proposal significantly reduces projected out-year operating deficits through a mix of revenue increases and program cost reductions, while the LAO warned that even with booming revenues the state still faces a structural deficit and should prioritize reserves and avoid new ongoing commitments. The chair and members echoed concern about cuts to vulnerable populations, but also noted the need to maintain the overall level of budget solutions and add to reserves. The hearing then moved through a series of CalHHS and HCAI proposals, mostly held open after presentation. CalHHS requested additional legal support to respond to federal H.R. 1-related issues and a net-zero transfer of positions for a shared eligibility/data-sharing platform. Other items included ongoing funding for the 988 Behavioral Health Crisis Service Fund and a request for EMSA to fund maintenance of its enterprise data management system. HCAI presented proposals for hospital fair pricing implementation, the data exchange framework, the all-payer claims database, CalRx insulin development, the diaper access initiative, distressed hospital grants, opioid settlement fund reversion, and the Rural Health Transformation Program. Members questioned funding sources, special fund use, contracting exemptions, timelines, and whether some proposals should be more targeted or supported by alternative funding. A major discussion centered on HCAI’s diaper access initiative and the use of a Public Contract Code exemption to continue contracting for free diapers distributed through hospitals. The chair and some members criticized the optics of the selected vendor and questioned the lack of an income threshold, while HCAI said the program was designed to be universal and administratively simple, with future phase-two direct-to-consumer purchasing to be handled by a different vendor. Another extended exchange focused on distressed hospital funding, where HCAI said the May Revision would provide up to $50 million for hospitals at immediate risk of closure, but members argued the repeated annual need shows a structural problem and asked for broader reforms to hospital payment and care transitions. The final major topic was the Behavioral Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission’s budget. The Commission opposed the May Revision’s reduction of the Innovation Partnership Fund from $20 million to $10 million and a $6.7 million cut to community advocacy contracts, arguing both are core Proposition 1 tools for statewide innovation and community engagement. Finance responded that the proposal is within Proposition 1’s allowable maximums and that prior unspent appropriations could be redirected if the Legislature wanted to restore the full amount. No votes were taken; items were generally held open for later action.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, again, it's not covering full costs.
• So, again, it's not covering Medicare. So, again, it's not covering full<00:16:28.399><c> costs.
• </c><00:20:53.919><c> discrimination</c> Ohana had already faced discrimination Ohana had already faced
• </c> growing problem clinicians are facing growing problem clinicians are facing across<00:37:18.000>
• </c> legal, providers are increasingly facing legal, providers are increasingly facing retaliatory<00

Bills: SB2936, SB2850, SB2851, SB2521

Keywords: accessible parking, disability, kupuna, public accommodations, small business exemptions, Hawaii Revised Statutes, parking permit, blind, deaf, accessibility, deafness, traffic safety, law enforcement, vehicle registration, communication, emergency services, commercial driver's license, first responders, public safety, authorized emergency vehicle

Summary: The joint hearing covered House Bill 251, which would require hospitals to report costs associated with Medicare and uninsured patients, and House Bill 1875, which would expand protections for gender-affirming health care services. On HB 251, the Department of Health said it supported the intent but described the bill as complicated and potentially impractical as drafted because the department lacks the expertise to produce the required analyses without outside help. Hawaii Health Systems Corporation echoed those concerns, while the Queen’s Health System said it was willing to work with the department to provide the information. In committee discussion, officials explained that hospital support in Hawaii includes public hospital appropriations and the provider tax program, which uses hospital and nursing home contributions to draw federal matching funds; a department witness estimated the net benefit at about $150 million for hospitals and $20 million for nursing facilities, though exact figures would be provided later. On HB 1875, the Insurance Division testified with concerns that the bill’s language on prohibited actions by malpractice insurers was broad and vague, and that a rate-increase prohibition could conflict with actuarially based insurance pricing. The division also noted it was not the primary enforcement agency for the statute. In contrast, many testifiers strongly supported the bill, including the Hawaii State Commission on the Status of Women, the Hawaii State LGBTQ+ Commission, the Hawaii Public Health Institute, PFLAG Oahu, the ACLU of Hawaii, the Drug Policy Forum of Hawaii, the Hawaii County Democratic Party, and others. Supporters argued that gender-affirming care is medically necessary, evidence-based, and protected by privacy and bodily autonomy principles, and that the bill would protect patients and providers from outside political interference. No votes or final committee actions were taken during the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Specifically, Medicare does not cover most long-term care services, Specifically, Medicare does not cover
• However, Medi-Cal does not cover middle-income older adults.
• And I've seen firsthand the tough choices older adults face.
• Medi-Cal reimbursement rates do not cover CBAS costs.
• So without HomeSafe, he might really be facing the streets.

Summary: The joint Assembly Budget Subcommittee hearing focused first on long-term services and supports for older adults, especially the “forgotten/overlooked middle” who earn too much for Medi-Cal but cannot afford private long-term care. Administration witnesses from DHCS, the Department of Aging, and Social Services described Medicare’s limited long-term care coverage, Medi-Cal’s role, the elimination of the Medi-Cal asset test, and ongoing state studies and listening sessions on financing options. Testimony from advocates and researchers emphasized rising homelessness among older adults, the need for better navigation and coordination across health, aging, housing, and social service systems, and short-term policy steps such as share-of-cost reform, housing stability supports, and protecting home- and community-based services. Members highlighted the need for a coordinated, no-wrong-door approach and asked for the most impactful budget investments to address affordability and homelessness risk. The second major topic was the Community-Based Adult Services (CBAS) program. CDA reported that CBAS helps participants remain in the community, that 304 centers operate statewide serving about 42,000 people, and that demand is stable but access gaps remain in some regions. DHCS explained that a 2024 rate increase authorized by SB 159 became inoperative after Proposition 35, and that a separate 10% rate change on the fee schedule was the result of a DHCS system error; the department said it would not require recoupment, though managed care plans may act under their contracts. CBAS providers and advocates warned that reimbursement rates have not kept pace with costs, that several centers have closed, and that clawbacks could trigger more closures. They requested $74.8 million ongoing General Fund to close part of the rate gap and preserve the program, while members expressed concern about closures and the cost savings of keeping people out of more expensive institutional care. The hearing then moved to In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) and statewide collective bargaining. CDSS reviewed provider recruitment and retention efforts, including electronic timesheets, direct deposit, and the now-completed IHSS Career Pathways program, which trained more than 59,000 providers. CDSS also summarized its AB 102 workgroup report on statewide versus regional bargaining, saying the final report would be sent to the Legislature soon and that statewide bargaining appeared more viable than regional bargaining, though it would require clear statutory scope and major fiscal changes. The department estimated that each $1 per hour statewide wage increase would cost at least $1.3 billion to $1.5 billion annually. Labor advocates argued that IHSS wages, benefits, and training are too inconsistent across counties and called for statewide bargaining, consumer participation, and ongoing state funding. County representatives supported stronger wages but cautioned that counties need protection from new costs and administrative burdens, and consumer advocates warned that moving bargaining to the state could weaken local consumer control and the program’s consumer-driven structure.

Transcript Highlights:

• Today's hearing covers the Office of the State Public Defender and the Judicial Branch operations.
• We recently had a senior, 76 years old, who was facing an $80 rent increase.
• the types of services that they used to cover.
• So in addition to covering increased costs and contributions, we had to cover our portion of the debt-related
• The courts of appeal are also facing increasing complexity in their caseloads.

Summary: The committee heard budget and workload presentations from the Office of the State Public Defender, legal aid organizations, and the Judicial Branch. OSPD requested permanent funding for positions that had been temporarily funded to implement the Racial Justice Act, explaining that the work has become ongoing and now includes additional Supreme Court briefing, habeas proceedings, investigations, expert analysis, and data requests. The State Public Defender also presented the AB 625 public defense workload report, which found statewide staffing shortages, caseloads above recommended standards, and major gaps in investigators and support staff. Senators asked about racial bias claims, the volume of data requests, and the impact of Prop. 36, and OSPD said it would provide additional written information. The legal aid panel asked for a $50 million increase to the Equal Access Fund, $20 million to restart homelessness prevention services, and $10 million for health care access work, while also supporting Access to Justice Commission requests for loan repayment assistance, immigrant family preparedness services, and innovation grants. Witnesses described legal aid as homelessness prevention and cited examples involving eviction defense, domestic violence survivors, and immigration detention cases. Los Angeles Superior Court Presiding Judge Sergio Tapia discussed eviction data, low tenant representation, and court pilots in Compton and at Stanley Mosk that combine mediation, rental assistance, and legal help. Senators asked for service maps, outreach materials, and more detail on funding needs and federal funding losses. For the Judicial Branch overview, the Judicial Council and trial court representatives supported the Governor’s proposed budget, including $70 million for trial court operations, $21.7 million for employee health and retirement costs, and funding for appellate counsel, case processing, and courthouse construction. They said rising costs, staffing retention, and interpreter shortages continue to strain the courts, and described efforts to reallocate interpreter funds and recruit hard-to-find languages such as Mixteco. Senators pressed the branch and the Department of Finance on courthouse facilities, noting that the long-term need is far larger than the current budget proposal; Finance said the branch’s facility needs were estimated at about $22.5 billion over 10 years to start 68 projects and $29.4 billion to complete the remaining projects. The committee requested follow-up information on facilities, judgeships, and interpreter needs.