Transcript Highlights:

• So the 2022 Budget Act authorized one-time funding of $1.4 billion General Fund over five years for mobile
• So the 2022 Budget Act authorized one-time funding of $1.4 billion General Fund over five years for mobile
• Mobile crisis through March 30, 2027, and that's just all on the General Fund.
• We now have 44 mobile crisis teams, which are primarily funded through Medi-Cal and state General Fund
• At the same time, proposals shift mobile crisis toward county funding.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the 2022 Budget Act authorized one-time funding of $1.4 billion General Fund over five years for mobile
• And that's just all on the General Fund. Thank you. Okay. Mobile crisis through March 30, 2027.
• We now have 44 mobile crisis teams, which are primarily funded through Medi-Cal and State General Fund
• So what happens if the mobile crisis team becomes optional and counties lose state funding?
• At the same time, proposals shift mobile crisis toward county funding.

Summary: The subcommittee heard budget and policy updates from the Department of State Hospitals, the Commission for Behavioral Health, and the Department of Health Care Services. DSH described its proposed 2026-27 budget of $3.2 billion, including savings tied to IST solutions, higher patient-driven operating costs, and a small increase in caseload projections. Officials said the department has met court-ordered IST treatment benchmarks, with wait times reduced from a pandemic peak of 1,953 pending placements to about 250, and average treatment initiation now around five days. Members asked about the effects of Proposition 36 and SB 1323, rising outside hospitalization costs, Medicare enrollment, and whether IST solution funding was being overbudgeted; DSH said referrals are slightly down overall, aging and medically complex patients are driving outside care costs, and the IST solution savings reflect slower-than-expected program activation rather than a service gap. The department also outlined proposed funding for CONREP cost increases, a new county-by-county LPS bed allocation model, electrical infrastructure upgrades at Napa and Patton, SB 380 transitional housing feasibility work, and additional dental staffing and space at Metropolitan and Patton. The Commission for Behavioral Health reviewed its role in the Behavioral Health Services Act transition and its new Innovation Partnership Fund. Staff said the commission is shifting from county-level innovation oversight to a statewide grant strategy, with the first $20 million RFA drawing strong interest and awards expected in mid-June. Members asked how “innovation” would be defined, whether grants could be renewed after the initial three-year contracts, and how the state would ensure the money supports real service delivery rather than general outreach or training. The commission also sought a liquidation deadline extension for the Alcove youth drop-in center grants so remaining funds can be spent before they revert, allowing sites to finish implementation and support the final evaluation. DHCS provided an overview of CalAIM and BH Connect implementation, including updated specialty mental health access criteria, new ASAM-based substance use treatment standards, contingency management, traditional health care practices for tribal members, workforce investments, evidence-based practice expansion, IMD participation, and transitional rent services. The department also addressed BHSA implementation, saying it does not track specific local program cuts but will monitor county three-year plans, performance measures, and outcomes as counties shift to the new funding structure. On H.R. 1, DHCS said it is preparing outreach, eligibility simplification, and exemption strategies to reduce Medi-Cal coverage losses, including clinic navigators, a statewide outreach campaign, and possible employment supports through a future waiver. The department also reported that BH-CHIP bond funds have supported 437 infrastructure projects, creating 546 facilities and more than 9,500 residential beds, with additional outpatient capacity and tribal investments. Finally, DHCS outlined a proposed 988 trailer bill to create a statewide designation process for 988 centers and mobile crisis teams, with implementation no earlier than October 1, 2027.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the 2022 Budget Act authorized one-time funding of $1.4 billion General Fund over five years for mobile
• What do you anticipate would happen if the mobile crisis units aren't funded?
• We now have 44 mobile crisis teams, which are primarily funded through Medi-Cal and state General Fund
• So what happens if the mobile crisis team becomes optional and counties lose state funding?
• At the same time, proposals shift mobile crisis toward county funding.

Summary: The subcommittee heard presentations from the Department of State Hospitals (DSH), the Commission for Behavioral Health, and the Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) on budget proposals and implementation updates. DSH outlined its proposed 2026-27 budget, including funding for patient operating expenses, IST solutions savings, conditional release program costs, LPS bed allocation changes, electrical infrastructure projects at Napa and Patton, SB 380 transitional housing feasibility work, and expanded dental services at Metropolitan and Patton. DSH also reported that it has met court-ordered IST treatment benchmarks in the Stiavedi v. Clinton case, with average time to initiate treatment down to about five days and pending placements reduced to roughly 250, while noting that Proposition 36 could increase referrals and SB 1323 may divert some individuals earlier into community-based treatment. Members asked about rising outside hospitalization costs, Medicare enrollment, the timing and structure of capital projects, and whether IST solution funds are being fully used; DSH said the savings reflect slower-than-expected ramp-up of community programs and that the Central California FACT replacement program is still on track for January 2027 activation. The Commission for Behavioral Health described its role under the Behavioral Health Services Act (BHSA), including data, evaluation, grantmaking, technical assistance, and transparency work. It highlighted the new statewide Innovation Partnership Fund, a five-year, $20 million-per-year program with small and large grant categories; the first RFA drew strong interest, with more than 400 questions and over 1,000 bidders’ conference participants. The Commission also discussed a proposed extension to spend down about $4.1 million remaining for the Alcove Youth Drop-in Center grants so sites can finish implementation and Stanford can complete the final evaluation. Members asked about grant duration, whether projects can be renewed, what qualifies as innovation, and whether the fund could support service delivery rather than awareness campaigns or training; the Commission said awards are expected to be three-year contracts and that proposals must be new or meaningfully expanded approaches that support BHSA priority populations. DHCS reviewed major behavioral health changes under CalAIM and BH Connect, including peer support, mobile crisis, contingency management, traditional health care practices for tribal members, updated specialty mental health access criteria, and new substance use treatment standards based on ASAM’s fourth edition. DHCS reported strong contingency management results, with more than 13,000 members served and 95% testing negative for stimulant use during treatment, and said 21 Indian health care providers have been approved to offer traditional health care practices. It also described BH Connect initiatives such as the $1.9 billion access reform and outcomes incentive program, workforce investments, evidence-based practice expansion, IMD participation by four counties, and transitional rent services. On BHSA implementation, DHCS said it is not tracking individual county contract cuts but is monitoring county plans and statewide outcomes, while stakeholders raised concerns about local prevention and service gaps. DHCS also outlined its H.R. 1 implementation strategy, including outreach, streamlined renewals, exemptions for disabled, substance use, and medically frail individuals, and proposed clinic navigator and outreach funding; it said it has not yet produced a focused estimate of H.R. 1 impacts on behavioral health populations. The discussion ended with DHCS noting that B-CHIP bond funding has supported 437 infrastructure projects, creating 546 new or expanded facilities and more than 9,500 residential beds across the state.

Transcript Highlights:

• Although Medi-Cal pays for each mobile crisis response, funding is still inadequate.
• The key source of earmarked funding associated with 988 does not consistently reach county-run mobile
• Ultimately, mobile crisis is really expensive, and counties just don't have any funding coming up for
• Finally, we are concerned about the decreased funding for mobile crisis that California is likely to
• Funding for mobile crisis centers should not decline while demand is rising, and we would appreciate

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on California’s Mental Health Crisis held an informational hearing focused on the 988 suicide and crisis lifeline and the broader crisis response system around it. Chair Pellerin and Assembly Member Schiavo opened with personal remarks about the importance of the issue and the need to strengthen California’s crisis infrastructure, especially as federal actions and funding uncertainty threaten services for youth and LGBTQ+ callers. The hearing was organized into panels covering state implementation, county coordination, and community crisis services, with public comment to follow. State officials from CalHHS, DHCS, Cal OES, and the 988 California Consortium described progress since AB 988 and the five-year implementation plan, including governance structures, statewide network buildout, call-routing technology, public awareness campaigns, and integration with Medi-Cal mobile crisis services. They said California has created or enhanced more than 485 mobile crisis teams, built crisis stabilization and residential facilities, and expanded youth behavioral health supports such as BrightLife Kids and Soluna. They also noted ongoing work to replace lost Trevor Project support with enhanced LGBTQ+ youth training, and to develop a 988 resource directory and future public awareness campaign. Cal OES explained that the 988 surcharge is recalculated annually based on budgeted needs and fund balance, and that text-to-911 and next-gen 911 interoperability are being expanded. County and community witnesses emphasized that the system is still strained by rising demand and uneven local integration. Lake County described a peer-led rural mobile crisis model that has reduced law-enforcement holds and helped place residents into housing, but said 988 calls still do not reliably route to the county’s mobile crisis team and that rural counties need more flexible funding, vehicles, technology, and reimbursement support. Santa Clara County reported strong performance metrics and major growth in 988 call and text volume, but said sustained funding is needed to support staffing, text/chat expansion, and commercial payer reimbursement. The Mental Health Association of San Francisco said the California Peer Run Warm Line is a key part of the continuum of care, but recent budget changes forced cuts to Spanish-language services, federation support, and hours, despite high demand. Across the hearing, members and witnesses agreed that 988 is saving lives but still misses thousands of calls each month and needs more stable, multi-year funding, better coordination, and clearer roles among state agencies, counties, and crisis centers. Witnesses repeatedly called for stronger feedback loops, better integration between 988 and mobile crisis dispatch, and more investment in staffing, technology, and outreach so Californians can be connected to the right help without unnecessary law enforcement or emergency room involvement.

Transcript Highlights:

• transporting passengers and delivering goods commercially in places like California, Arizona, Nevada, Texas
• Texas just updated this law in a certain respect for operations to have a process by which, if there
• It is not Texas. Our roads are more complex. Our traffic is denser.
• AVs are a part of a broader mobility ecosystem that augments and expands good jobs across our economy

Committee: Senate Transportation

Summary: The Senate Transportation Committee held an informational hearing on autonomous vehicle technology in California, focusing on safety, regulation, first responder impacts, and the state’s evolving oversight framework. The chair said the committee would hear all panels before public comment, with witnesses limited to five minutes and public commenters to one minute. The first panel featured an industry representative, a safety academic, and victims/advocates who described sharply different views of AV safety and accountability. Ariel Wolf of the Autonomous Vehicle Industry Association argued that fully autonomous vehicles are distinct from driver-assist systems, said AVs are already reducing crashes and fatalities, and urged clear, uniform standards. Dr. Missy Cummings countered that remote operations and computer-vision failures show the technology still depends on human intervention and can be unsafe, especially when remote assistance is done from abroad. Robert O’Dowd and Dylan Angulo, both tied to Tesla crash cases, described fatal and serious injuries involving Autopilot/Full Self-Driving, criticized limited transparency and data access, and called for stronger disclosure, preservation of crash data, and mandatory fixes or disabling of defective software. Committee members questioned witnesses about data comparing AVs to human drivers, the role of remote operators, liability, and whether California should create clearer standards for the human element behind AV systems. Several members and witnesses discussed the need for “guardrails,” black-box-style data access, and accountability for the remaining crash risk. The hearing then shifted to first responders and road users: a San Francisco Fire Department representative described AVs blocking fire scenes, ambulances, and apparatus access during emergencies and urged a public safety manual override; a San Jose police representative said officers need clear enforcement authority, training, and reliable ways to stop or redirect AVs; a rideshare driver described near-collisions and congestion caused by robo-taxis; and a Teamsters representative opposed proposed heavy-duty AV truck rules as too reliant on manufacturer self-certification and lacking independent validation. In the final panel, DMV and CPUC officials defended California’s regulatory structure. DMV said it has regulated AVs since 2014, has issued multiple rulemakings and permit types, and is developing a fourth package that would add reporting, enforcement tools, emergency-response requirements, and rules for heavy-duty AVs. DMV said it has revoked or suspended permits when needed, including Cruise and Pony.ai actions. CPUC said its authority covers passenger service only, requires safety plans and ongoing reporting, and continues oversight after permits are issued. No votes or formal actions were taken, as the hearing was informational only.

Transcript Highlights:

• Although Medi-Cal pays for each mobile crisis response, funding is still inadequate.
• Although Medi-Cal pays for each mobile crisis response, funding is still in the state.
• Although Medi-Cal pays for each mobile crisis response, funding is still inadequate.
• The key source of earmarked funding associated with 988 does not consistently reach county-run mobile
• Ultimately, mobile crisis is really expensive, and counties just don't have any funding coming up for

Summary: The hearing focused on California’s 988 suicide and crisis lifeline and the broader crisis response system, with members and witnesses emphasizing both the system’s life-saving role and the risks posed by funding gaps, rising demand, and uneven local implementation. Opening remarks highlighted the personal impact of suicide and the need to strengthen crisis response so calls are answered quickly and linked to appropriate care rather than defaulting to 911, emergency rooms, or law enforcement. State officials described the AB 988 five-year implementation plan, which sets goals around public awareness, equitable access, high-quality call/chat/text response, and better integration with ongoing behavioral health services. State agencies reported progress on infrastructure, coordination, and related behavioral health investments. CalHHS said California has expanded mobile crisis teams, crisis stabilization units, and youth behavioral health supports, and is preparing additional public awareness and grant programs tied to Proposition 1. DHCS explained that 988 is funded through a federal SAMHSA grant and the AB 988 surcharge, while Medi-Cal separately funds mobile crisis services; officials said the mobile crisis benefit is active in 53 counties and that statewide expansion remains a work in progress. Cal OES described the statewide technical buildout, including network infrastructure in all 11 crisis centers, interoperability with 911, and a pilot of next-generation routing and call-handling tools. The 988 California Consortium said call volume continues to rise sharply, missed calls remain a major concern, text/chat capacity is limited, and centers need more stable funding, better reimbursement, and stronger feedback loops with the state. County and community witnesses stressed that local systems need more flexible, sustained support to match the demand. Lake County described a peer-led rural mobile crisis model that has reduced law enforcement holds and increased housing placements, but said county-run mobile crisis teams still cannot reliably access 988 surcharge dollars and face reimbursement problems from Medi-Cal and commercial plans. Santa Clara County reported strong performance metrics, rapid call answer times, and a broad continuum of mobile crisis services, but said staffing and funding are strained and commercial reimbursement remains slow. The Mental Health Association of San Francisco said the peer-run warm line complements 988 by offering non-emergency support and warm handoffs, but recent budget changes forced cuts to Spanish-language service, federation support, and hours. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken during the hearing; members mainly asked questions about surcharge levels, budget timing, coordination among agencies, data collection, and how to improve collaboration with frontline crisis centers.

Transcript Highlights:

• There were difficulties implementing that fund. Okay, there’s that fund.
• </c><01:15:47.040><c> But</c> that fund. Okay, there's that fund. But that fund.
• . fund. fund.
• </c><04:59:58.080><c> for</c> road funding and it locks in funding for road funding and it locks in funding
• </c> fund transportation, it won't fund fund transportation, it won't fund roads.<05:03:48.560><c> In

Transcript Highlights:

• We are entirely self-funded. We do not use any General Fund. We are a generator of General Fund.
• There's the Texas Permanent Fund and the Alaska Permanent Fund.
• But they tend to manage one fund or two funds.
• Fund, these are the two largest funds.
• funds.

Committee: House House Appropriations & Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• I do not have any enterprise fund.
• Fund, that will reach 94.
• The Sentencing Commission is primarily funded through general fund appropriations.
• Primarily funded through a mix of state general fund and federal dollars.
• Why are we not funding these?

Committee: House House Appropriations & Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• It has to do with the separate fund that is not used to pay down debt, so the separate fund that funds
• fund.
• Rights for creation of permanent fund provide relative to the use of monies in the fund.
• The funding will be under the consolidated judicial expense fund for the courts, and they, along with
• , emergency sub-fund grant awards, and rate-study requirements.

Bills: HR265 , HR266 , HR267 , HR268 , HR269 , HR270 , HR271 , HR272 , HR273 , HCR107 , HCR108 , HCR109 , HCR110 , HCR111 , HR257 , HR258 , HR259 , HR260 , HR261 , HR262 , HR263 , HCR105 , HCR106 , SCR30 , SB57 , SB157 , SB202 , SB237 , SB276 , SB450 , SB465 , SB501 , SB525 , HR3 , HR80 , HR197 , HR243 , SCR5 , SCR35 , HB4 , HB623 , HB944 , HB986 , HB1098 , HB1222 , SB34 , SB164 , SB172 , SB198 , SB208 , SB232 , SB281 , SB286 , SB317 , SB322 , SB334 , SB380 , SB385 , SB409 , SB417 , SB421 , SB430 , SB439 , SB447 , SB458 , SB510 , SB398 , HB646 , HR84 , HR188 , HR205 , SCR19 , SCR3 , SCR6 , SCR18 , SCR11 , SCR22 , SCR2 , SCR20 , SCR24 , HCR6 , HB301 , HB359 , HB657 , HB675 , HB680 , HB727 , HB302 , HB819 , HB1257 , HB1258 , SB8 , SB10 , SB11 , SB12 , SB13 , SB14 , SB16 , SB17 , SB18 , SB20 , SB21 , SB22 , SB40 , SB48 , SB55 , SB69 , SB75 , SB77 , SB78 , SB85 , SB102 , SB115 , SB133 , SB140 , SB148 , SB151 , SB165 , SB169 , SB170 , SB185 , SB197 , SB200 , SB217 , SB235 , SB278 , SB280 , SB291 , SB300 , SB303 , SB315 , SB324 , SB330 , SB411 , SB416 , SB420 , SB436 , SB438 , SB449 , SB455 , SB456 , SB477 , SB489 , SB521 , SB45 , SB58 , SB71 , SB81 , SB92 , SB100 , SB109 , SB141 , SB156 , SB181 , SB203 , SB204 , SB205 , SB207 , SB213 , SB214 , SB216 , SB229 , SB257 , SB274 , SB290 , SB304 , SB374 , SB379 , SB396 , SB410 , SB425 , SB427 , SB429 , SB479 , SB522 , HCR72 , HB633 , HB603 , HB940 , HB251 , HB775 , HB998 , HB1191 , HB625 , HB1255 , HB901 , HR20 , HR74 , HCR65 , HCR71 , HB284 , HB306 , HB341 , HB366 , HB393 , HB458 , HB577 , HB582 , HB605 , HB614 , HB733 , HB752 , HB773 , HB798 , HB911 , HB955 , HB996 , HB1035 , HB1069 , HB1113 , HB1140 , HB1180 , HB1240 , SB82 , SB89 , HB258 , HB842 , SB149 , SB382 , SB441

Keywords: Pineville High School, Lady Rebels, softball, LHSAA, Louisiana High School Athletic Association, Class 5A, state championship, high school sports, student athletes, commendation, resolution, athletics, girls softball, championship team, Pineville, school recognition, sportsmanship, coach Allison Frye, Louisiana legislature, House Resolution

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill protects taxpayer dollars and builds public trust and prohibits public funds from being used
• Unfortunately, because many transportation funding formulas are based on a city's residential population
• , industrial cities in California lack the funds to keep their roads aligned with state safety standards
• SB 1375 allows qualifying projects to avoid duplication and deliver public projects that improve mobility
• He graduated from the University of North Texas, where he earned a bachelor's degree in political science

Transcript Highlights:

• , living donor, medical orders for National Guard, grants from the Missouri Military Family Relief Fund
• It supports the MoGives program and other funding streams that directly... Times of hardship.
• It supports the MoGives program and other funding streams that directly benefit veterans and family members
• He lives in a mobile home back in the woods, drives a pickup that's 20 years old.
• VA Claims Insider, they just settled with the Texas Attorney General for $6.8 million in debt relief

Committee: House Veterans and Armed Forces

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 2535 in executive session. Members adopted a House committee substitute and two cleanup amendments, including clarifications related to Gold Star spouses and a correction to a property tax exemption amount for veterans. The substitute was then approved, and the committee voted the House Committee Substitute for HB 2535 do pass by a recorded vote of 15 ayes and 1 no. The committee then held a public hearing on Senate Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 974, which Senator Black described as a consumer-protection measure aimed at preventing exploitation of veterans by unaccredited claims assistance companies. The bill would restrict compensation for referrals and certain claims work, require written agreements, cap fees tied to benefit increases, and prohibit upfront fees and misleading practices. Supporters, including a former VA official and several veterans, argued the bill would provide needed guardrails and choice for veterans navigating a difficult claims process. Opponents, including the VFW and Missouri veterans groups, argued the bill conflicts with federal law and could legitimize paid claims assistance outside the VA accreditation system; they urged striking the contested section and relying on existing federal rules and Missouri consumer-protection law instead. Testimony also covered several other provisions folded into SB 974, including military leave for public employees, National Guard-related items, survivor benefit tax deductions, and the MoGives living organ donor language. Witnesses on the organ donor provision said it would help service members avoid financial hardship while donating organs. The hearing ended without a vote on SB 974, and the chair announced the committee was out of time and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• 29.120><c> State</c> Administration from Kennesaw State University and is now an assistant professor at Texas
• The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mobile, Pro Tem Pringle, for the purpose of making announcements

Transcript Highlights:

• Transparency and accountability and use of public funds require a clear understanding of how such funds
• are going and what type of impact the funds are making.
• The funding that is administered at the state level, whether it be state funding or federal funding,
• That should be remaining stable as that's recurring funding.
• And I think that's a good overview. of their funding.

Committee: Senate Senate Health & Public Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• Agenda Item 1 pertains to ongoing funding for the California Education Learning Lab.
• So I just think that's not, I mean, that's not the answer, the funding systems.
• centers for teaching and learning, those funds are being restricted.
• Is that the best use of our funding to... ...of potential overhaul, is that the best use of our funding
• In terms of funding, most of the appropriated funds, approximately $3.8 billion, have been encumbered

Summary: The subcommittee heard presentations on several GovOps-related budget proposals, beginning with ongoing funding for the California Education Learning Lab. The Learning Lab described its intersegmental grants to UC, CSU, and community college faculty, including AI-related work and a math alignment project, and said the Governor’s proposal would move the program’s home agency to GovOps and restore $4 million annually. The Department of Finance supported the proposal as a way to improve coordination, while the LAO recommended rejecting it, arguing the projects are hard to scale, similar professional development already exists in the segments, and the state should consider saving General Fund dollars. Senators split on the value of the program, with some emphasizing innovation and intersegmental collaboration and others questioning its measurable long-term impact; the item was held open. The committee then reviewed the Office of Civil Rights proposal to implement AB 715 and SB 48 with $3.5 million in 2026-27 and $2.8 million ongoing. GovOps said the office had been set up administratively, positions were being recruited, and it would provide training, technical assistance, and complaint review related to anti-Semitism and other discrimination in TK-12 schools. The LAO had no concerns, but senators raised substantial questions about the office’s placement in GovOps, the lack of guidance while the laws are being implemented, the use of gubernatorial appointees, and whether the staffing structure matches the likely workload across different discrimination categories. GovOps said it would develop guidance, coordinate with CDE, and shift resources as needed once staff are hired, but several members said they were not prepared to support the item as presented; it was also held open. After public comment supporting the California Education Interagency Council, the subcommittee approved vote-only items 11 through 17 and 6 through 10. It then heard from the Office of Data and Innovation on a request for five positions and $1.25 million in reimbursement authority to expand digital service delivery work. ODI described projects such as reducing unauthorized EBT theft and forecasting community water system outages, and said it uses guardrails and contracts to protect sensitive data when working with vendor AI services. The LAO had no concerns, and members generally praised ODI’s small, high-impact role; the item was held open. Finally, the Department of Technology presented on the Middle-Mile Broadband Initiative, reporting that 423 miles are complete, more than 70% of the network has been permitted, and about 5,300 miles are expected to be completed by December 2026, with some work potentially slipping into 2027. CDT said Skyline Technology Solutions had been selected to operate the network and that the third-party administrator, Golden State Net, would continue to support development and later help oversee operations and sales. The LAO noted the project’s progress but raised concerns about the novel three-party structure, accountability, and long-term financial sustainability. Senators questioned the legal basis for the operator arrangement, the revenue outlook, reporting to the Legislature, and whether the network will be self-sustaining; CDT said it expects revenues to cover operations over time and will continue annual and quarterly reporting. The item was left open.

Transcript Highlights:

• Agenda Item 1 pertains to ongoing funding for the California Education Learning Lab.
• centers for teaching and learning, those funds are being restricted.
• So maintaining Learning Lab funding, particularly focused on AI and innovative...
• In terms of funding, most of the appropriated funds, approximately $3.8 billion, have been encumbered
• Yeah, so CDT currently has not come forward with any budget request for funding.

Summary: The subcommittee first heard a presentation on ongoing funding for the California Education Learning Lab. The Learning Lab described its intersegmental grant-making work with UC, CSU, and community college faculty, including projects on AI, math alignment, and open educational resources. The administration proposed moving the program’s administrative home from the Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation to GovOps and restoring $4 million annually. The Department of Finance supported the proposal as a way to improve coordination, while the LAO recommended rejecting it, arguing the program is difficult to scale, overlaps with existing campus and segment-wide professional development, and could be wound down to save General Fund dollars. Senators split on the issue: some emphasized the program’s role in fostering innovation and cross-segment collaboration, while others questioned its measurable outcomes and whether it addresses problems rooted in K-12 preparation. The item was held open without a vote. The committee then considered funding for the new Office of Civil Rights within GovOps, created to implement AB 715 and SB 48. The proposal sought $3.5 million in 2026-27 and $2.8 million ongoing to staff the office, provide training and technical assistance to local educational agencies, and help track discrimination complaints through the Department of Education’s uniform complaint process. Finance said the office was being stood up administratively, but many positions were still unfilled; the LAO had no concerns and said the proposal simply implements recent legislation. Senators raised concerns about the office’s placement in GovOps, the lack of guidance while the office is not yet operational, the potential duplication with CDE processes, and whether staffing levels and coordinator roles match the volume and type of complaints. The department said it would adjust resources as workload becomes clearer and that first-year goals would include hiring staff, developing materials, and beginning outreach. The item was held open. After public comment and votes on several vote-only items, the committee heard from the Office of Data and Innovation on a request for five positions and $1.25 million in reimbursement authority. ODI said it uses data science, design, and engineering to improve state services, citing work on EBT theft detection and forecasting community water system outages. Finance had no comment, and the LAO supported the reimbursement model. Senators generally praised ODI’s small but high-impact role and asked about privacy safeguards for vendor AI tools; ODI said it uses state guardrails, enterprise contracts, and coordination with CDT to protect data. The item was held open. The Department of Technology then presented on the Middle-Mile Broadband Initiative, reporting progress on the 8,100-mile network, including 423 miles already complete and more than 70% permitted. CDT said it had selected Skyline Technology Solutions as operator and expected about 5,300 miles completed by December 2026, with some miles possibly slipping into 2027. The LAO noted most of the $3.8 billion appropriated has been encumbered, but raised concerns about the new three-party operating structure and long-term sustainability. Senators asked about accountability, the need for a two-year extension of liquidation authority, and whether revenues will cover operating costs. CDT said the extension is a precaution to allow for final reallocations if needed, that CDT retains ultimate responsibility, and that it expects the network to be self-sustaining over time through service revenues and lease arrangements. The department committed to continued reporting through annual reports, advisory committees, and briefings.

Transcript Highlights:

• We just need more funding. We need more funding.
• State credits are funded through the general fund. They're incredibly efficient.
• pre-development, acquisition, gap funding, the gap funding that we've been talking about.
• pre-development, acquisition, gap funding, the gap funding that we've been talking about.
• Funding is subsidy.

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Housing Finance and Affordability held its first hearing of 2025 to examine California’s housing finance system, with opening remarks emphasizing the state’s severe housing shortage, high costs, and the need for practical recommendations to the Legislature and Governor. Co-chairs described the committee as an educational and problem-solving forum focused on financing housing production, first-time homeownership, mixed-income developments, and affordability across the income spectrum. Witnesses from state agencies and the development sector were invited to explain how housing is financed and where the system is breaking down. Panelists from the California Housing Partnership, the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency, the Tax Credit Allocation Committee/State Treasurer’s Office, CalHFA, and Related outlined the “capital stack” used to finance affordable housing, stressing that projects typically rely on multiple public and private sources, including federal and state low-income housing tax credits, tax-exempt bonds, state subsidies, local funds, and rental income. Speakers noted that affordable housing rents generally cannot support full project costs without public subsidy, and that recent federal changes—especially the expansion of the 4% and 9% tax credit programs and the reduction of the bond financing threshold for 4% credits—should allow California to finance substantially more units. CalHFA also described its homeownership programs, including My Home, Dream For All, and disaster-related mortgage assistance, as well as its multifamily lending and bond issuance programs. Several witnesses and committee members emphasized that the system remains too complex, too slow, and underfunded. They pointed to the need for more state funding, a housing bond, a permanent funding source, and better coordination among agencies, while also citing recent streamlining efforts such as AB 434’s SuperNOFA, AB 519’s one-stop-shop working group, and the planned California Housing and Homeless Agency reorganization. Members raised concerns about equity, access, missing-middle housing, gender and racial disparities, and whether current programs adequately serve extremely low-income households and those at risk of homelessness. No formal votes or actions were taken during the hearing; the discussion ended with committee members and witnesses agreeing that both funding and administrative reform are needed to increase production and improve affordability.

Transcript Highlights:

• or the Housing Assistance Fund.
• We just need more funding. We need more funding.
• State credits are funded through the general fund. They're incredibly efficient.
• pre-development, acquisition, gap funding, the gap funding that we've been talking about.
• Funding is subsidy.

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Housing Finance and Affordability held its first hearing of 2025 to examine how California finances affordable housing and homeownership. Co-chairs opened by describing the state’s severe housing shortage, high costs, and the need for the committee to identify practical recommendations. Panelists from the California Housing Partnership, the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency, the Treasurer’s housing finance committees, CalHFA, and Related discussed the layered financing structure used for affordable housing, including federal low-income housing tax credits, tax-exempt bonds, state subsidies, local funds, and rental assistance. Witnesses emphasized that affordable housing projects typically require multiple funding sources and that the system is often slowed by complex applications, overlapping rules, and too many layers of financing. Several speakers noted recent federal changes that expanded the 9% and 4% tax credit programs, including a lower bond-financing threshold for 4% credits, which should allow more projects to move forward. State officials also highlighted ongoing efforts to streamline the system, including the SuperNOFA, AB 519’s one-stop-shop working group, and the planned California Housing and Homeless Agency, which is intended to align housing, homelessness, and civil rights functions. CalHFA described its homeownership and multifamily programs, including My Home, Dream For All, Cal Assist Mortgage Fund, and the Mixed Income Program, and said its financing tools help first-time buyers and developers. Related and other housing providers said the state has made real progress through land-use reform, accountability enforcement, and faster tax credit allocation, but argued that funding remains far below need. They called for more state and permanent funding sources, more efficient administration, more support for ADU and modular financing, and better attention to deeper affordability, the “missing middle,” and equity impacts on renters, women, and communities of color. The hearing was informational only; no votes or formal actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• Agenda item one pertains to ongoing funding for the California Education Learning Lab.
• So I just think that's not the answer—the funding systems.
• centers for teaching and learning, those funds are being restricted.
• So maintaining Learning Lab funding, particularly focused on AI and innovative...
• And in terms of funding, most of the appropriated funds, approximately $3.8 billion, have been encumbered

Transcript Highlights:

• And of the three counties that I serve in central Florida, the amount of funding that I have for a mobile
• So all the mobile response, for my managing entity, the mobile response team, So all the mobile response
• mobile response.
• And of the three counties that I serve in central Florida, the amount of funding that I have for a mobile
• time that that fund source is available, and that funding balance.

Summary: The Health Care Budget Subcommittee held a panel discussion on Florida’s mental health and substance abuse system, with representatives from DCF, AHCA, two managing entities, and two providers describing how the state’s behavioral health network is funded and operated. Members focused on the implementation of prior legislative investments, especially the $50 million in recurring funding from Representative Maney’s bill and the earlier $126 million community behavioral health appropriation. Witnesses said the newer funds were used mainly for crisis beds, discharge planning, outpatient services, regional collaboratives, and a USF Marchman Act report, while the larger behavioral health appropriation supported CAT, FACT, FIT, forensic teams, residential and outpatient services, and crisis care, with most dollars going directly to services and only a small share to administration. A major theme was access to crisis care and the role of mobile response teams, 988, and central receiving facilities in diverting people from Baker Act admissions and reducing readmissions. DCF and providers said mobile response teams have expanded, are being used to de-escalate crises and connect people to care, and have shown strong diversion results and reductions in Baker Acts in some regions. Members also asked about waitlists, children in crisis, and how to handle people without housing or support; providers said discharge planning is individualized but often constrained by homelessness, transportation, and a lack of safe placements, and several witnesses identified housing as one of the biggest barriers to recovery and stability. The committee also examined provider sustainability, reimbursement, and funding gaps. Witnesses described delays caused by contract timing, cost allocation rules, and Medicaid reimbursement rates that do not always keep pace with labor and operating costs, especially for smaller providers and rural networks. DCF and AHCA said managing entities can provide advances, retroactive rate adjustments, and technical assistance, and that Medicaid managed care plans have network standards and complaint/dispute processes. Members raised concerns about a reported $7 million loss in federal non-sustainable funds, provider closures, and whether there is a formal ombudsman process for disputes; DCF said the federal reductions were known and tied to one-time funds, and that the department generally handles provider issues informally while working with managing entities to preserve continuity of care.