Transcript Highlights:

• It is a basic need.
• time that that fund source is available, and that funding balance.
• time that that fund source is available, and that funding balance.
• We need to not be hemmed in by whatever OKA money is in or whatever fund source comes down, whether it's
• what those needs are and the best approach to address those needs.

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.

Transcript Highlights:

• that do not fund the actual needs of students, combined with significantly rising costs to meet their
• We ask that you fully fund DSHS's request for the increase in staffing and system enhancements needed
• We ask for funding for Eastern Washington for this critical need. Thank you. Thank you.
• Housing is a basic need.
• Housing is a basic need.

Bills: HB2289

Committee: House Appropriations

Keywords: appropriations, budget, fiscal matters, state spending, general fund, supplemental budget, biennial budget, substitute bill, public defense, civil legal aid, courts, judicial branch, homelessness, supportive housing, affordable housing, behavioral health, juvenile rehabilitation, youth services, child welfare, foster care

Transcript Highlights:

• He said these funds not only need to be continued, but they also need some way to pay these caregivers
• </c><00:11:46.160><c> to</c> 247 so these funds uh not only need to 247 so these funds uh not only need
• It seems like we've heard a lot about school funding, more than we really need to know.
• fund the Bureau of Developmental Services priority needs list.
• <c> to</c><02:57:38.040><c> higher</c> do we need to increase funding to higher do we need to increase

Summary: The House Finance Committee opened a public hearing on House Bills 1 and 2, which concern the governor’s proposed FY 2026-2027 budget. The chair explained that the committee must fit the budget to House Ways and Means revenue, which is about $800 million below the governor’s estimate in an almost $16 billion budget. He also noted a projected current-budget overspend, the impact of recently passed legislation, possible fee updates, no new tax proposals at that time, and the importance of federal funding and Medicaid stability. Testimony was limited to three minutes, with the chair asking speakers to avoid duplication. Much of the testimony focused on Medicaid, disability services, and home- and community-based care. Speakers urged the committee to restore or protect funding for transportation, Medicaid, day programs, in-home supports, and behavioral health services. Several individuals and providers described how cuts would affect people with disabilities, medically fragile children, and families who rely on services to remain employed and avoid institutional care. A home care provider argued that a proposed 3% Medicaid cut would increase hospitalizations and costs, while a behavioral health representative asked for sustainable Medicaid rates, uncompensated care support, housing resources, and continued funding for community behavioral health clinics. Another major topic was the Group II retirement provisions in HB 2 for public safety workers. Representatives from police, fire, corrections, probation/parole, and related associations testified in support, saying prior pension changes hurt recruitment and retention, pushed experienced workers to neighboring states, and should be reversed to restore promised benefits. They argued the provisions would help keep public safety careers viable and honor commitments made to first responders. An executive counselor also warned that when the state shifts costs away from itself, local property taxpayers bear the burden, and she opposed cost shifts such as Medicaid premiums and universal vouchers. A separate speaker urged funding public schools rather than universal vouchers, arguing vouchers can leave other students behind as resources are diverted.

Transcript Highlights:

• We also have needs that outpace funding in our maintenance work, and again, this is a direct result of
• Both maintenance and operations and preservation need to be fully funded.
• Both maintenance and operations and preservation need to be fully funded to keep the system running in
• I will say like the rest of our infrastructure, they also need preservation funding to go forward.
• And we need to fund it in the next biennium.

Summary: The Transportation Committee heard a presentation from WSDOT Secretary Julie Meredith on the agency’s mission, 2025 accomplishments, and 2026 priorities. Meredith emphasized preservation, safety, emergency response, ferry reliability, culvert replacement, and major projects such as the I-5 Ship Canal Bridge work, North Spokane Corridor, Confluence Parkway, and the Interstate Bridge Replacement Program. She highlighted the state’s aging transportation assets, recent storm and flood damage, bridge strikes, and the need for additional preservation funding, including the governor’s proposed $1 billion investment in Washington State Ferries and continued work on the World Cup and future regional growth planning. Members asked about ferry service disruptions, rising IBR costs, staffing needs, aviation assets, and bridge-strike certainty tied to the Coast Guard’s upcoming decision on bridge clearance requirements. The committee then received a briefing on HB 2306, the governor’s supplemental transportation budget, which totals $16.7 billion and increases the enacted budget by about $1.2 billion, with most of the increase directed to WSDOT capital spending. OFM staff said the proposal is driven by preservation, maintenance, and ferry needs, and relies on about $3.1 billion in bonding against transportation revenues, while staying below the Treasurer’s coverage ratio. The proposal includes $2 billion for preservation, $164 million for paving this summer, $756 million for paving over 10 years, $250 million for maintenance, $150 million for preserving existing ferries, $15 million for Lower Columbia River dredging, and smaller investments for WSP communications, DOL access, and local road grants. Committee members asked about debt service, remaining bonding capacity, and the impact of office closures and ferry service reductions. Public testimony was largely supportive of the governor’s budget, especially its preservation and ferry investments. Local officials and associations backed ferry funding, local road grants, pavement and bridge preservation, and the Columbia River dredging match. Several speakers urged more support for cities and counties, while rail and transit advocates asked for more rail capital funding and less highway expansion. One ferry advocate criticized the cost of hybrid-electric vessel maintenance compared with diesel, and another witness warned against a pay-per-mile tax. The hearing ended without a vote, and the chair announced a short caucus before adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• "So that's the funding mechanism that provides what we need to build out this system and operate it.
• is funded by the General Fund.
• Is funded by the General Fund, so we really do need a framework addressing that issue.
• And there are also, we need to ensure that there's fair play and that the funds are distributed appropriately
• by two funds: the Gambling Control Fund and the Indian Gaming Special Distribution Fund, which is often

Transcript Highlights:

• The primary funding source for our operational needs is the state highway fund.
• The primary funding source for our operational needs is the state highway fund.
• The primary funding source for our operational needs is the state highway fund.
• Why need a dedicated fund?
• need a dedicated fund state backs it why need a dedicated fund I<03:24:09.760><c> mean</c><03:24:10.000

Summary: The committee met with New Hampshire DOT Commissioner Bill Cass and Finance Director Danielle Shandra to review the agency’s FY 2026 budget. Cass gave a high-level overview of DOT’s mission, organization, funding structure, and staffing trends, noting the agency has about 650 employees across five divisions. He said the Governor’s recommended FY 2026 budget totals $95.99 million, essentially flat from FY 2025, with funding primarily from Turnpike funds, Highway funds, federal sources, and a small General Fund share for non-highway units. Members asked about how Turnpike and Highway funds are treated in state accounting, and DOT explained that while they are enterprise funds restricted to their purposes, they are considered unrestricted from the statewide perspective and are appropriated through the budget process. A major topic was staffing and budget targets. DOT said its full-time staffing level has remained relatively flat since 2014 even as vehicle miles traveled increased and vacancies rose. To meet budget targets, the department unfunded seven permanent positions and nine temporary full-time positions, and later noted additional reductions in Finance, including the elimination of two full-time positions, reduced print shop equipment purchases, and deeper cuts to overtime, temporary help, equipment, and supplies in FY 2027. DOT also explained that it shifted funding for one unmanned aerial system position from General Funds to Highway Funds, saying the change was workable because the position supports highway-related work and federal-aid-eligible activities. Members asked for clarification on the state transit operating match, and DOT explained that the Legislature had previously provided about $1.8 million annually in General Funds to help local transit agencies meet federal match requirements, but that funding was not included in this budget. DOT said that could reduce the ability to draw down some federal transit funds, though the impact may not be immediate because those funds can be used over several years. The department also described its unmanned aerial system program, saying it has been used for about five years for mapping, survey work, construction oversight, and storm damage assessment, and that it now has about five drones and two full-time positions supporting the program. DOT said it is expanding cross-training so more employees can operate drones without adding positions. No votes or formal actions were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• to the specific needs of our students rather than diverting general fund resources away from the classroom
• to the specific needs of our students rather than diverting general fund resources away from the classroom
• to the specific needs of our students rather than diverting general fund resources away from the classroom
• To the specific needs of our students rather than diverting general fund resources away from the classroom
• We know we need to provide more funding for our schools. of school walk around and quit and leave of

Bills: HF957 , HF877

Committee: House Education Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• , municipal need, or, as I said, some connection to a state facility... ...need, municipal need, or,
• the long-term needs... ...you know, if there's future funding they know, then they could start to think
• pavement needs today, drainage needs, upgrades.
• We would have funded it, but then we would have had $472 million less than other critical needs because
• This is desperately needed funding through the state's most successful road and bridge program.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Transportation

Summary: The Transportation Committee heard testimony on House Bill 4987, the Healey-Driscoll administration’s transportation bond bill financing long-term improvements to municipal roads and bridges. Administration officials said the bill would authorize more than $5 billion overall, including $1.2 billion for Chapter 90 over four years, $500 million for accelerated road and bridge repairs, $200 million for MBTA rail modernization and reliability, $200 million for transportation projects supporting housing development, $200 million for a new DCR parkway resilience and safety program, and reauthorizations for federal-aid highway projects, non-federal highway projects, municipal pavement, and Shared Streets and Spaces. They emphasized that the proposal is backed by Commonwealth Transportation Fund revenues, including registry fees, gas tax, and Fair Share surtax revenue, and said it would improve safety, reliability, housing production, and regional equity. Committee members asked about the four-year Chapter 90 authorization, the housing-related transportation funding, federal funding uncertainty, and how the MBTA money would support commuter rail electrification and regional rail. Administration witnesses said the multi-year structure would help municipalities plan and avoid more expensive deferred maintenance, that the housing funds would be flexible for infrastructure needs tied to development, and that the state is pursuing federal grants while relying on state-backed capital financing. They also described process improvements at MassDOT that have reduced project bid-to-notice timelines by 60% and said the rail modernization funds would support locomotive procurement, including battery-electric and Tier 4 diesel locomotives. The Massachusetts Municipal Association and local officials from Sherborn, Conway, and Yarmouth strongly supported the bill, saying the increased Chapter 90 funding and road-mile formula have made a major difference for small and rural communities and that four-year funding would improve predictability, project bundling, and cost savings. They cited local road, bridge, culvert, and gravel-road needs and urged favorable action. A Better City and MAPC also supported the bill but urged the committee to use it for broader transportation policy changes and new revenue tools, including possible reforms to TNC fees, regional pricing, and other funding mechanisms. The committee took no vote during the hearing and adjourned after testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• First, we don't see an immediate need for this funding as the existing special fund loan that it took
• not need to rely on General Fund appropriations moving forward.
• The remaining funds support counseling, academic services, and basic needs supports.
• We've also worked through our basic needs centers to leverage funding through that program to support
• This amount will also fund the scholarship at the 17.5% level of unmet need.

Transcript Highlights:

• need could receive priority in the benefit of the fund, if that makes sense.
• So when we're looking at buildings and building needs and deferred maintenance, funds are being distributed
• So when we're looking at buildings and building needs and deferred maintenance, funds are being distributed
• those needs.
• You asked another question, follow up: How is that fund continuously funded beyond what's in the fund

Committee: House Education

Transcript Highlights:

• There's no need for an enrollment stabilization fund.
• We really need to look at this. You have the AP and dual enrollment funding.
• to be fully funded and that there needed to be parity.
• we need more funding for their salaries.
• There's more funds per student, and that means the districts have the funds that they need to fund these

Summary: The House convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and a quorum present, then adopted the special order report and moved into a series of budget-related bills. The chamber first took up HB 5011/SB 2506 on environmental resource management and natural resources funding, where Democrats argued the bill would reduce recurring support for the Resilient Florida program, the Florida Wildlife Corridor, invasive species removal, and other conservation efforts. Supporters said the change would shift money from recurring to nonrecurring funding so the Legislature could reassess priorities each year and rely more on private-sector stewardship. After a strike-all amendment and conference posture change, SB 2506 passed 97-12. HB 5013, reducing state-funded property reinsurance reserves, passed 108-0, and HB 5501, redirecting documentary stamp tax distributions from housing and transportation trust funds into general revenue, passed 82-26 after extended debate over its impact on affordable housing and transportation funding. The House also passed HB 5015 on state group insurance, which requires DMS to develop a formulary management system and was described as producing significant savings; members raised concerns about prescription access and implementation, but the bill passed 109-0. HB 5201 on state financial accounting and HB 5203 on the Capitol Center both passed unanimously, as did HB 5009, which creates a Florida Accountability Office and reorganizes audit functions. The chamber then passed HB 7031, a major sales tax reduction bill lowering the state sales tax rate and several related rates; supporters framed it as permanent relief for all Floridians, while opponents said property tax relief would be more meaningful and that the sales tax cut would also benefit tourists and out-of-state visitors. HB 7031 passed 112-0. The House then began consideration of HB 501, the proposed fiscal year 2025-26 budget, totaling $112.9 billion and emphasizing reduced recurring spending and large reserves. Subcommittee chairs outlined their budget silos: K-12 education at $20.6 billion with teacher raises, school hardening, literacy, transportation stipends, and security funding for Jewish day schools; health care at $47 billion with full Medicaid and KidCare funding, opioid settlement spending, mental health beds, and senior services; transportation/economic development at $18.5 billion; agriculture and natural resources at $5.8 billion with reduced Everglades spending but continued water, resiliency, and land management funding; higher education at $8.7 billion; state administration at $2.9 billion; justice at $7.3 billion; and IT at $529 million for Florida PALM, FX, and other systems. Members then began questioning the K-12 budget, focusing on FEFP funding, proration, voucher growth, stabilization dollars, mental health and school safety funding, and whether districts would be held harmless under the proposed allocations.

Transcript Highlights:

• In terms of this strategy that is due to the Legislature, we would need funding to bring on consultants
• Funding available.
• to fund private energy...
• So why do we need to have ongoing staffing and funding? Thank you.
• The current DSGS funding level is not sufficient to fund the program in 2026.

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Resources, Environmental Protection and Energy heard six budget-related items and took no votes, holding all items open for a future hearing. The first item concerned a climate bond expenditure plan for the California Transmission Accelerator Revolving Fund under SB 254. GoBiz, IBank, and the Department of Finance described a request for nearly $26 million and 10 limited-term positions to develop financing strategies and evaluate transmission projects, while the LAO said the proposal was broadly consistent with Prop. 4 but noted that the Legislature may want to provide more direction on program design. Senators questioned how the proposal would lower ratepayer costs, protect state funds, and ensure accountability for billion-dollar transmission projects. The second item covered trailer bill language to redirect funding among demand-side reliability programs. Finance proposed moving $22 million from the DEPA program to DSGS for summer 2026 and using CalSHAPE interest funds for ELRP or an equivalent CPUC program in 2027-28, with CEC and CPUC coordinating the transition. Senators and LAO questioned why CalSHAPE funds should not continue supporting schools, and several members argued DSGS has been more successful and should continue rather than be shifted to ELRP. CEC and CPUC explained that DSGS and ELRP serve different reliability functions and do not address public safety power shutoffs. Public commenters, including school groups and clean energy advocates, split between extending CalSHAPE for school HVAC/plumbing projects and preserving or expanding DSGS. The committee also heard on petroleum market oversight implementation under SBX1-2 and ABX2-1, with the CEC and its Division of Petroleum Market Oversight requesting additional staffing to support inventory monitoring, refinery resupply analysis, and market oversight. Senators pressed for details on investigations, refinery margins, gasoline price spikes, and the transportation fuels transition plan, while staff said the draft plan would be released soon and that DPMO’s work on branded versus unbranded gasoline remains ongoing. Finally, the CPUC presented three additional proposals: implementing AB 1207’s climate credit reforms, studying large-load/data center cost impacts under SB 57, and preparing for regional market participation under AB 825. The LAO repeatedly cautioned that some of these requests may go beyond statutory minimums and urged the Legislature to decide how much policy direction and staffing it wants to provide. Public commenters supported DPMO funding, opposed ending CalSHAPE, and strongly favored continued DSGS funding over a new ELRP structure.

Transcript Highlights:

• These are foundational funds.
• It needs to be scalable.
• direct funding from the CDC.
• We need testing capacity. We need these data systems to get out of faxing and spreadsheets.
• of funds and having it go towards these critical programs and services that are in need.

Summary: The subcommittee held an oversight hearing on federal actions affecting California’s public health and family planning systems, focusing first on the freeze to Title X family planning funds and then on broader CDC/public health grant terminations. Chair and members described the cuts as abrupt, harmful, and likely to create major gaps in disease surveillance, vaccination, contraception, STI testing, and other preventive services, while also criticizing the federal administration’s explanation that the actions were tied to DEI or civil-rights compliance. The chair thanked Attorney General Bonta for legal action and said the hearing was intended to document the real-world impacts and inform state budget responses. Witnesses from Essential Access Health, Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, a Central Coast clinic, and other providers said California’s Title X network serves more than half a million low-income patients annually and relies on the funds for staffing, outreach, training, mobile and school-based clinics, and confidential care. They warned that the freeze has already forced reserve spending, delayed services, and could lead to layoffs, reduced hours, longer waits, and fewer appointments, especially for sexual and reproductive health care. Public comment included support for a proposed state backfill of Title X losses, with advocates emphasizing impacts on low-income, LGBTQ+, and communities of color. On the public health side, CDPH, county health officials, and local health officers testified that the CDC’s rescission of $11.4 billion in grants would affect California by an estimated $840 million and threaten lab capacity, immunization programs, health disparities work, and data systems such as CalConnect and vaccine registries. Sacramento County and others described how the grants supported outbreak response, sequencing, community vaccination clinics, and equity-focused partnerships, and said terminations had already led to canceled appointments, stopped contracts, and layoffs. Several speakers urged the Legislature to preserve and expand state “future of public health” funding and to backfill federal losses, while public commenters from HIV, immunization, labor, and county organizations echoed concerns about workforce losses and worsening health outcomes.

Transcript Highlights:

• We know there will be budgets that need further general fund adjustments, and we will be working with
• fund.
• So the requested adjustment consists of funds needed to cover shortfalls, including $11,700 in personnel
• We'd like to be fully funded. ...funded.
• We're fully funded from the Dental Fund.

Committee: House House Appropriations & Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• So 2012 needs $171 million to match federal funds. So that's in 2012 now. Okay.
• Fifty million of that is going to the highway fund out of that flexible transportation fund.
• The thing is, is that it's exactly right, is that some of these don't need, you know, they need funding
• We have the sinking fund, you know, or bond payment fund, whatever you want to call it.
• But, Adam, I think you do need to get us a flow chart for the flex funding in the distribution on that

Committee: House Appropriations - Government Operations Division

Summary: The House Appropriations Government Operations section reconvened and first took up an amendment for the Industrial Commission related to a proposed west-to-east natural gas pipeline. Members discussed increasing the state’s capacity commitment from $60 million to $120 million so the project could move forward and support a future FERC permit, with supporters citing growing demand from data centers, agricultural users, and oilfield gas capture needs. The committee also discussed a separate motion to exempt the mill and elevator from the vacant FTE pool; that motion failed on a roll call vote. The committee then reviewed other Industrial Commission items, including housing authority funding, the abandoned well fund, Bank of North Dakota-related changes, and a decision not to add more to litigation funding. The discussion then shifted to the Department of Transportation budget and a major transportation funding framework. Speaker Weiss explained a proposal to consolidate and rework transportation funding into fewer buckets, including moving Prairie Dog-style funding into the flexible transportation fund, adding $370 million to that fund, and providing $171.3 million for federal match needs. The plan also included $50 million for statewide discretionary projects, $50 million for bridges, and grant flexibility for cities, counties, and townships, with some debate over eligibility thresholds and how much discretion DOT should have in awarding grants. Members also discussed whether small communities could realistically apply for grants and how the new structure would coordinate statewide transportation investments. Additional DOT topics included a proposed gas tax increase, changes to distribution percentages among DOT, cities/counties, townships, and transit, and the treatment of electric vehicle registration fees. The committee noted that transit funding would rise under the formula and that EV registration fees would continue to flow into the highway distribution fund. No final action was taken on the broader DOT package during this portion of the meeting, but members agreed to continue work on the amendment and revisit the issue the next day, with a suggestion to brief the caucus before floor action.

Transcript Highlights:

• I would certainly focus more on the special exceptions and why you need the special exception item funding
• fund.
• fund.
• million in other funds.
• Finally, as I noted, the legislature last session funded some much-needed additional employees to the

Bills: SB1 , SB 1

Committee: Senate Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• other funds total the above funds fund other funds total the above funds fund other funds total the
• other funds total source of funds 1 fund other funds total source of funds 1 fund other funds total
• are in excess of the amount needed to fund the excess of the amount needed to fund the excess of the
• amount needed to fund the food stamp program shall be retained by food stamp program shall be retained
• other funds total source of funds 1 fund other funds total source of funds 1 fund other funds total

Bills: SJR 59 , SCR 30 , SCR 46 , SB 31 , SB 127 , SB 324 , SB 401 , SB 407 , SB 467 , SB 482 , SB 506 , SB 529 , SB 584 , SB 619 , SB 636 , SB 646 , SB 647 , SB 659 , SB 715 , SB 732 , SB 735 , SB 771 , SB 784 , SB 800 , SB 801 , SB 816 , SB 1013 , SB 1026 , SB 1049 , SB 1055 , SB 1065 , SB 1137 , SB 1169 , SB 1181 , SB 1383 , SB 1395 , SB 1410 , SB 1433 , SB 1524 , SB 1531 , SB 1568 , SB 1640 , SB 1666 , SB 1681 , SB 1718 , SB 1754 , SB 1757 , SB 1972 , SB 1980 , SB 2004 , SB 2007 , SB 2041 , SB 2046 , SB 2050 , SB 2075 , SB 2076 , SB 2154 , SB 2173 , SB 2206 , SB 2225 , SB 2253 , SB 2268 , SB 2306 , SB 2308 , SB 2314 , SB 2322 , SB 2330 , SB 2351 , SB 2366 , SB 2371 , SB 2392 , SB 2398 , SB 2476 , SB 2533 , SB 2540 , SB 2544 , SB 2589 , SB 2610 , SB 2623 , SB 2660 , SB 2662 , SB 2693 , SB 2707 , SB 2717 , SB 2722 , SB 2742 , SB 2753 , SB 2779 , SB 2807 , SB 2843 , SB 2844 , SB 2858 , SB 2877 , SB 2880 , SB 2885 , SB 2920 , SB 2938 , SB 2986 , HJR 4 , HCR 35 , SJR 3 , SJR 18 , SB 5 , SB 260 , SB 1786 , SB 914 , SB 963 , SB 1197 , SB 1415 , SB 1437 , SJR 36 , SJR 50 , SJR 63 , SJR 84 , SJR 59 , SCR 12 , SCR 39 , SCR 46 , SCR 48 , SCR 19 , SCR 30 , SCR 3 , SB 2023 , SB 1433 , SB 2322 , SB 2877 , SB 407 , SB 1718 , SB 1395 , SB 62 , SB 666 , SB 847 , SB 284 , SB 854 , SB 1073 , SB 810 , SB 1505 , SB 583 , SB 1502 , SB 507 , SB 1026 , SB 1434 , SB 1376 , SB 1585 , SB 1772 , SB 2016 , SB 1163 , SB 619 , SB 1122 , SB 732 , SB 731 , SB 397 , SB 508 , SB 1436 , SB 287 , SB 261 , SB 1882 , SB 393 , SB 1791 , SB 529 , SB 209 , SB 2429 , SB 1999 , SB 511 , SB 2309 , SB 510 , SB 2253 , SB 584 , SB 1085 , SB 2314 , SB 2046 , SB 1975 , SB 2717 , SB 1262 , SB 1524 , SB 1137 , SB 636 , SB 2056 , SB 884 , SB 517 , SB 1200 , SB 1410 , SB 1845 , SB 1863 , SB 2681 , SB 2200 , SB 2199 , SB 1757 , SB 2050 , SB 2458 , SB 2201 , SB 1055 , SB 2660 , SB 2662 , SB 1065 , SB 801 , SB 2533 , SB 3014 , SB 3013 , SB 758 , SB 647 , SB 1721 , SB 2268 , SB 2366 , SB 1013 , SB 2797 , SB 2371 , SB 2383 , SB 646 , SB 1169 , SB 1754 , SB 2779 , SB 2004 , SB 2119 , SB 2448 , SB 1777 , SB 1283 , SB 2392 , SB 2076 , SB 2786 , SB 2876 , SB 2284 , SB 2225 , SB 1540 , SB 2920 , SB 2929 , SB 1972 , SB 2540 , SB 2742 , SB 2595 , SB 2217 , SB 715 , SB 2330 , SB 1383 , SB 500 , SB 1640 , SB 2001 , SB 2080 , SB 2722 , SB 506 , SB 2514 , SB 2623 , SB 2753 , SB 2398 , SB 1241 , SB 2927 , SB 2173 , SB 2538 , SB 898 , SB 467 , SB 1449 , SB 2529 , SB 1531 , SB 2846 , SB 2476 , SB 986 , SB 1181 , SB 2075 , SB 2154 , SB 2864 , SB 31 , SB 2880 , SB 1359 , SB 2386 , SB 771 , SB 2844 , SB 2550 , SB 1351 , SB 1423 , SB 1931 , SB 2245 , SB 2589 , SB 2707 , SB 2807 , SB 2351 , SB 410 , SB 659 , SB 816 , SB 2776 , SB 2693 , SB 2580 , SB 1980 , SB 1886 , SB 1234 , SB 739 , SB 482 , SB 456 , SB 127 , SB 1666 , SB 2843 , SB 2801 , SB 800 , SB 2055 , SB 784 , SB 2986 , SB 735 , SB 1012 , SB 324 , SB 2926 , SB 2938 , SB 2007 , SB 2138 , SB 1242 , SB 2615 , SB 1049 , SB 2310 , SB 1224 , SB 2972 , SB 1568 , SB 2841 , SB 2885 , SB 3016 , SB 2858 , SB 2610 , SB 2139 , SB 1856 , SB 2035 , SB 2308 , SB 2306 , SB 2041 , SB 1528 , SB 1681 , SB 1141 , SB 2401 , SB 2530 , SB 2375 , SB 547 , SB 1266 , SB 1373 , SB 1467 , SB 2069 , SB 2269 , SB 2480 , SB 2544 , SB 672 , SB 904 , SB 2695 , SB 2891 , SB 2422 , SB 2543 , SB 1854 , SB 317 , SB 2539 , SB 2532 , SB 2925 , SB 1250 , SB 2082 , SB 2203 , SB 457 , SB 2357 , HJR 4 , HB 135 , HB 1109 , HCR 35 , HCR 64 , SB 2721 , SB 243 , SB 1285 , SB 2568 , SB 1959 , SB 1442 , SB 1454 , SB 2520 , SB 2541 , SB 1708 , SB 1237 , SB 1844 , SB 1586 , SB 1 , SB 260 , SB 31 , SB 467 , SB 482 , SB 647 , SB 732 , SB 816 , SB 1055 , SB 1137 , SB 1169 , SB 2004 , SB 2253 , SB 2268 , SB 2314 , SB 2351 , SB 2371 , SB 2623 , SB 2722 , SB 2779 , SB 2920 , HJR 4 , SB 407 , SB 1395 , SB 1433 , SB 1718 , SB 2322 , SB 2877 , SB 619 , SB 646 , SB 1026 , SB 2742 , SB 2880 , SR 443 , SR 449 , SR 456 , SR 460 , SR 465 , SCR 46 , SB 260 , SB 3062 , HJR 8 , HJR 31 , HJR 72 , HJR 99 , HJR 133 , HB 29 , HB 33 , HB 50 , HB 107 , HB 116 , HB 125 , HB 140 , HB 141 , HB 155 , HB 171 , HB 227 , HB 255 , HB 363 , HB 368 , HB 491 , HB 609 , HB 630 , HB 745 , HB 767 , HB 913 , HB 917 , HB 1135 , HB 1188 , HB 1238 , HB 1242 , HB 1261 , HB 1318 , HB 1404 , HB 1495 , HB 1507 , HB 1606 , HB 1708 , HB 1748 , HB 1851 , HB 1922 , HB 2002 , HB 2003 , HB 2198 , HB 2355 , HB 2358 , HB 2415 , HB 2457 , HB 2495 , HB 2546 , HB 2637 , HB 2763 , HB 2765 , HB 2798 , HB 2818 , HB 3228 , HB 3307 , HB 4116 , HCR 29 , SB 1410 , SB 3062 , HJR 8 , HJR 31 , HJR 72 , HJR 99 , HJR 133 , HB 29 , HB 33 , HB 50 , HB 107 , HB 116 , HB 125 , HB 140 , HB 141 , HB 155 , HB 171 , HB 227 , HB 255 , HB 363 , HB 368 , HB 491 , HB 609 , HB 630 , HB 745 , HB 767 , HB 913 , HB 917 , HB 1135 , HB 1188 , HB 1238 , HB 1242 , HB 1261 , HB 1318 , HB 1404 , HB 1495 , HB 1507 , HB 1606 , HB 1708 , HB 1748 , HB 1851 , HB 1922 , HB 2002 , HB 2003 , HB 2198 , HB 2355 , HB 2358 , HB 2415 , HB 2457 , HB 2495 , HB 2546 , HB 2637 , HB 2763 , HB 2765 , HB 2798 , HB 2818 , HB 3228 , HB 3307 , HB 4116 , HCR 29 , SB 1410

Transcript Highlights:

• other funds total the above funds fund other funds total the above funds fund other funds total the
• other funds total source of funds 1 fund other funds total source of funds 1 fund other funds total
• are in excess of the amount needed to fund the excess of the amount needed to fund the excess of the
• amount needed to fund the food stamp program shall be retained by food stamp program shall be retained
• other funds total source of funds 1 fund other funds total source of funds 1 fund other funds total

Bills: SJR 59 , SCR 30 , SCR 46 , SB 31 , SB 127 , SB 324 , SB 401 , SB 407 , SB 467 , SB 482 , SB 506 , SB 529 , SB 584 , SB 619 , SB 636 , SB 646 , SB 647 , SB 659 , SB 715 , SB 732 , SB 735 , SB 771 , SB 784 , SB 800 , SB 801 , SB 816 , SB 1013 , SB 1026 , SB 1049 , SB 1055 , SB 1065 , SB 1137 , SB 1169 , SB 1181 , SB 1383 , SB 1395 , SB 1410 , SB 1433 , SB 1524 , SB 1531 , SB 1568 , SB 1640 , SB 1666 , SB 1681 , SB 1718 , SB 1754 , SB 1757 , SB 1972 , SB 1980 , SB 2004 , SB 2007 , SB 2041 , SB 2046 , SB 2050 , SB 2075 , SB 2076 , SB 2154 , SB 2173 , SB 2206 , SB 2225 , SB 2253 , SB 2268 , SB 2306 , SB 2308 , SB 2314 , SB 2322 , SB 2330 , SB 2351 , SB 2366 , SB 2371 , SB 2392 , SB 2398 , SB 2476 , SB 2533 , SB 2540 , SB 2544 , SB 2589 , SB 2610 , SB 2623 , SB 2660 , SB 2662 , SB 2693 , SB 2707 , SB 2717 , SB 2722 , SB 2742 , SB 2753 , SB 2779 , SB 2807 , SB 2843 , SB 2844 , SB 2858 , SB 2877 , SB 2880 , SB 2885 , SB 2920 , SB 2938 , SB 2986 , HJR 4 , HCR 35 , SJR 3 , SJR 18 , SB 5 , SB 260 , SB 1786 , SB 914 , SB 963 , SB 1197 , SB 1415 , SB 1437 , SJR 36 , SJR 50 , SJR 63 , SJR 84 , SJR 59 , SCR 12 , SCR 39 , SCR 46 , SCR 48 , SCR 19 , SCR 30 , SCR 3 , SB 2023 , SB 1433 , SB 2322 , SB 2877 , SB 407 , SB 1718 , SB 1395 , SB 62 , SB 666 , SB 847 , SB 284 , SB 854 , SB 1073 , SB 810 , SB 1505 , SB 583 , SB 1502 , SB 507 , SB 1026 , SB 1434 , SB 1376 , SB 1585 , SB 1772 , SB 2016 , SB 1163 , SB 619 , SB 1122 , SB 732 , SB 731 , SB 397 , SB 508 , SB 1436 , SB 287 , SB 261 , SB 1882 , SB 393 , SB 1791 , SB 529 , SB 209 , SB 2429 , SB 1999 , SB 511 , SB 2309 , SB 510 , SB 2253 , SB 584 , SB 1085 , SB 2314 , SB 2046 , SB 1975 , SB 2717 , SB 1262 , SB 1524 , SB 1137 , SB 636 , SB 2056 , SB 884 , SB 517 , SB 1200 , SB 1410 , SB 1845 , SB 1863 , SB 2681 , SB 2200 , SB 2199 , SB 1757 , SB 2050 , SB 2458 , SB 2201 , SB 1055 , SB 2660 , SB 2662 , SB 1065 , SB 801 , SB 2533 , SB 3014 , SB 3013 , SB 758 , SB 647 , SB 1721 , SB 2268 , SB 2366 , SB 1013 , SB 2797 , SB 2371 , SB 2383 , SB 646 , SB 1169 , SB 1754 , SB 2779 , SB 2004 , SB 2119 , SB 2448 , SB 1777 , SB 1283 , SB 2392 , SB 2076 , SB 2786 , SB 2876 , SB 2284 , SB 2225 , SB 1540 , SB 2920 , SB 2929 , SB 1972 , SB 2540 , SB 2742 , SB 2595 , SB 2217 , SB 715 , SB 2330 , SB 1383 , SB 500 , SB 1640 , SB 2001 , SB 2080 , SB 2722 , SB 506 , SB 2514 , SB 2623 , SB 2753 , SB 2398 , SB 1241 , SB 2927 , SB 2173 , SB 2538 , SB 898 , SB 467 , SB 1449 , SB 2529 , SB 1531 , SB 2846 , SB 2476 , SB 986 , SB 1181 , SB 2075 , SB 2154 , SB 2864 , SB 31 , SB 2880 , SB 1359 , SB 2386 , SB 771 , SB 2844 , SB 2550 , SB 1351 , SB 1423 , SB 1931 , SB 2245 , SB 2589 , SB 2707 , SB 2807 , SB 2351 , SB 410 , SB 659 , SB 816 , SB 2776 , SB 2693 , SB 2580 , SB 1980 , SB 1886 , SB 1234 , SB 739 , SB 482 , SB 456 , SB 127 , SB 1666 , SB 2843 , SB 2801 , SB 800 , SB 2055 , SB 784 , SB 2986 , SB 735 , SB 1012 , SB 324 , SB 2926 , SB 2938 , SB 2007 , SB 2138 , SB 1242 , SB 2615 , SB 1049 , SB 2310 , SB 1224 , SB 2972 , SB 1568 , SB 2841 , SB 2885 , SB 3016 , SB 2858 , SB 2610 , SB 2139 , SB 1856 , SB 2035 , SB 2308 , SB 2306 , SB 2041 , SB 1528 , SB 1681 , SB 1141 , SB 2401 , SB 2530 , SB 2375 , SB 547 , SB 1266 , SB 1373 , SB 1467 , SB 2069 , SB 2269 , SB 2480 , SB 2544 , SB 672 , SB 904 , SB 2695 , SB 2891 , SB 2422 , SB 2543 , SB 1854 , SB 317 , SB 2539 , SB 2532 , SB 2925 , SB 1250 , SB 2082 , SB 2203 , SB 457 , SB 2357 , HJR 4 , HB 135 , HB 1109 , HCR 35 , HCR 64 , SB 2721 , SB 243 , SB 1285 , SB 2568 , SB 1959 , SB 1442 , SB 1454 , SB 2520 , SB 2541 , SB 1708 , SB 1237 , SB 1844 , SB 1586 , SB 1 , SB 260 , SB 31 , SB 467 , SB 482 , SB 647 , SB 732 , SB 816 , SB 1055 , SB 1137 , SB 1169 , SB 2004 , SB 2253 , SB 2268 , SB 2314 , SB 2351 , SB 2371 , SB 2623 , SB 2722 , SB 2779 , SB 2920 , HJR 4 , SB 407 , SB 1395 , SB 1433 , SB 1718 , SB 2322 , SB 2877 , SB 619 , SB 646 , SB 1026 , SB 2742 , SB 2880 , SR 443 , SR 449 , SR 456 , SR 460 , SR 465 , SCR 46 , SB 260 , SB 3062 , HJR 8 , HJR 31 , HJR 72 , HJR 99 , HJR 133 , HB 29 , HB 33 , HB 50 , HB 107 , HB 116 , HB 125 , HB 140 , HB 141 , HB 155 , HB 171 , HB 227 , HB 255 , HB 363 , HB 368 , HB 491 , HB 609 , HB 630 , HB 745 , HB 767 , HB 913 , HB 917 , HB 1135 , HB 1188 , HB 1238 , HB 1242 , HB 1261 , HB 1318 , HB 1404 , HB 1495 , HB 1507 , HB 1606 , HB 1708 , HB 1748 , HB 1851 , HB 1922 , HB 2002 , HB 2003 , HB 2198 , HB 2355 , HB 2358 , HB 2415 , HB 2457 , HB 2495 , HB 2546 , HB 2637 , HB 2763 , HB 2765 , HB 2798 , HB 2818 , HB 3228 , HB 3307 , HB 4116 , HCR 29 , SB 1410 , SB 3062 , HJR 8 , HJR 31 , HJR 72 , HJR 99 , HJR 133 , HB 29 , HB 33 , HB 50 , HB 107 , HB 116 , HB 125 , HB 140 , HB 141 , HB 155 , HB 171 , HB 227 , HB 255 , HB 363 , HB 368 , HB 491 , HB 609 , HB 630 , HB 745 , HB 767 , HB 913 , HB 917 , HB 1135 , HB 1188 , HB 1238 , HB 1242 , HB 1261 , HB 1318 , HB 1404 , HB 1495 , HB 1507 , HB 1606 , HB 1708 , HB 1748 , HB 1851 , HB 1922 , HB 2002 , HB 2003 , HB 2198 , HB 2355 , HB 2358 , HB 2415 , HB 2457 , HB 2495 , HB 2546 , HB 2637 , HB 2763 , HB 2765 , HB 2798 , HB 2818 , HB 3228 , HB 3307 , HB 4116 , HCR 29 , SB 1410

Transcript Highlights:

• We've not yet funded anything in that newer program, but we are putting in place all the pieces needed
• The PSCOC certifies funding for the SSTBs through a formal resolution process for demonstrated need on
• other items needed to complete the project on their end, we can have that funding available.
• Or do they need to depend on the community benefit fund?
• Or they need some capital funding for improvements, but we don't do that currently.

Committee: House Public School Capital Outlay Oversight Task Force

Transcript Highlights:

• But then we shifted solely to CIFCO cases to avoid losing the funding needed for social workers, and
• we cleared the CIFCO backlogs. ...the funding needed for social workers.
• That would be the level of annual funding needed for county-run Home Safe programs to maintain their
• Unfortunately, the need is far greater than we have the funds to serve and to continue to grow.
• It’s just funding. Correct. What about the need for MOUs between departments in California?