Transcript Highlights:

• and culturally competent programs.
• These services for pass programs and culturally competent programs built by this initiative.
• This results in several... subsidies are having on price long term.
• A SERP is an enforceable air quality program.
• We can work on incentive programs.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:31:15.039> so for the third party reviewer program so for the third party reviewer program
• um and without Subs without subsidies um and without Subs without subsidies these<00:38:12.720><
• program, created in 2000.
• program is that we have to this program program is that we have and<01:52:54.800> we<01:52:55.280
• <02:26:43.600> it the counties to run this program it the counties to run this program it

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• and residential programs, adds language to grants providing training. in dilexia to teachers and staff
• while also limiting the number of programs or Cooperatives who may receive funding up to 20% a year
• Now, in addition to that, we're adding funds as part of the foundation school program entitlement in
• Relaying to the Texas Music Incubator Program to finance. Senate Bill 2812 by Alvarado.
• Establishment of the Sporting Life Pilot Program as part of the Thriving Texas Families Program to Health

Bills: SJR 12, SJR 81, SCR 39, SB 22, SB 32, SB 241, SB 393, SB 414, SB 458, SB 464, SB 568, SB 583, SB 609, SB 660, SB 693, SB 731, SB 732, SB 746, SB 783, SB 785, SB 897, SB 993, SB 996, SB 1008, SB 1029, SB 1035, SB 1036, SB 1120, SB 1122, SB 1147, SB 1163, SB 1188, SB 1197, SB 1209, SB 1227, SB 1245, SB 1267, SB 1307, SB 1321, SB 1332, SB 1386, SB 1394, SB 1396, SB 1470, SB 1494, SB 1537, SB 1596, SB 1598, SB 1610, SB 1664, SB 1814, SB 1822, SB 1841, SB 1948, SB 2065, SB 2155, SB 2406, SB 2407, SJR 12, SJR 36, SJR 81, SJR 50, SJR 4, SCR 22, SCR 12, SCR 39, SB 765, SB 62, SB 666, SB 888, SB 687, SB 847, SB 1248, SB 504, SB 305, SB 296, SB 284, SB 241, SB 304, SB 1023, SB 204, SB 609, SB 670, SB 850, SB 854, SB 413, SB 1346, SB 1033, SB 1220, SB 1073, SB 810, SB 1539, SB 447, SB 1119, SB 1505, SB 1215, SB 1302, SB 583, SB 673, SB 681, SB 1172, SB 955, SB 957, SB 1120, SB 541, SB 266, SB 1415, SB 53, SB 1352, SB 785, SB 1450, SB 1502, SB 1566, SB 414, SB 1062, SB 711, SB 746, SB 1404, SB 1448, SB 507, SB 1026, SB 1349, SB 1355, SB 1433, SB 1434, SB 1596, SB 1403, SB 667, SB 1059, SB 1567, SB 310, SB 311, SB 505, SB 1209, SB 1210, SB 1470, SB 264, SB 1029, SB 1358, SB 1364, SB 1569, SB 1376, SB 1228, SB 519, SB 1350, SB 462, SB 827, SB 1585, SB 1396, SB 1484, SB 1273, SB 927, SB 1227, SB 1229, SB 1353, SB 1464, SB 1709, SB 1729, SB 1733, SB 1744, SB 1772, SB 1841, SB 1147, SB 1008, SB 2016, SB 1173, SB 1163, SB 996, SB 568, SB 1370, SB 1321, SB 1101, SB 860, SB 993, SB 693, SB 1610, SB 1537, SB 1332, SB 1307, SB 963, SB 493, SB 984, SB 619, SB 1122, SB 455, SB 522, SB 1057, SB 1239, SB 1254, SB 1255, SB 1259, SB 1341, SB 1664, SB 1877, SB 464, SB 1277, SB 32, SB 732, SB 660, SB 731, SB 921, SB 268, SB 1822, SB 1188, SB 1589, SB 397, SB 1058, SB 1036, SB 1267, SB 2112, SB 1930, SB 532, SB 1035, SB 2155, SB 508, SB 292, SB 291, SB 901, SB 1333, SB 1436, SB 1494, SB 964, SB 779, SB 1378, SB 2312, SB 1719, SB 1386, SB 287, SB 2143, SB 1245, SB 261, SB 1247, SB 1948, SB 2406, SB 2407, SB 1882, SB 1197, SB 1814, SB 618, SB 38, SB 393, SB 2065, SB 1371, SB 1394, SB 1365, SB 2243, SB 2226, SB 2039, SB 1919, SB 1895, SB 1598, SB 1493, SB 1810, SB 1791, SB 1706, SB 1644, SB 1238, SB 783, SB 458, SB 22, SB 651, SB 897, SB 1809, SB 1080, SB 745, SB 826, SB 989, SB 1320, SB 1437, SB 2320, SB 2289, SB 1171, SB 664, SB 1637, SB 2064, SB 868, SJR 40, SJR 27, SCR 38, SCR 37, SB 1079, SB 1243, SB 1504, SB 1851, SB 1879, SB 2237, SB 1257, SB 2034, SB 1522, SB 883, SB 249, SB 1318, SB 1151, SB 596, SB 1191, SB 226, SB 570, SB 870, SB 991, SB 60, SB 365, SB 1067, SB 1786, SB 326, SB 1401, SB 1592, SB 1728, SB 1265, SB 586, SB 529, SB 217, SB 209, SB 1923, SB 1559, SB 1839, SB 387, SB 1874, SB 1872, SB 1873, SB 1921, SB 1883, SB 1677, SB 95, SB 1620, SB 1838, SB 2024, SB 2429, SB 1999, SB 511, SB 2309, SB 2166, SB 871, SB 510, SB 33, SB 2420, SB 1860, SB 1541, SB 1316, SB 1314, SB 1313, SB 1426, SB 1398, SB 1869, SB 1750, SB 1871, SB 36, SB 855, SB 1233, SB 760, SB 2425, SB 2037, SB 1758, SB 1759, SB 2365, SB 1924, SB 762, SB 1271, SB 1818, SB 605, SB 1405, SB 1762, SB 1968, SB 1977, SB 2077, SB 2148, SB 2321, SB 1967, SB 1662, SB 1663, SB 2124, SB 2204

Keywords: parental rights, education, constitutional amendment, school choice, child education, tax exemption, ad valorem, tangible personal property, income production, border security, southern border, federal immigration policy, illegal immigration, cartels, transnational cartels, fentanyl, drug trafficking, human trafficking, Operation Lone Star, Texas border

Summary: The meeting primarily focused on educational reforms, particularly in special education funding. Notably, Senator Bettencourt laid out the transformative impacts of Senate Bill 568, which aims to lift a historical cap on special education funding that affected approximately 775,000 students. The discussions included plans for an intensity-based funding model that could ensure fair distribution of resources depending on individual needs, thereby enhancing educational support for diverse learning requirements. Senators acknowledged past failures in the special education framework, emphasizing the necessity of moving towards a system that is transparent and focused on delivering adequate services.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:17:13.280> that housing status or their programs that housing status or their programs
• <00:19:07.600> like cognitive behavioral programming like cognitive behavioral programming
• <00:19:15.679> Uh and academic programming as well. Uh and academic programming as well.
• those pro that programming if the those pro that programming if the funding<00:19:22.720> was
• requirements, programming and service requirements, programming and service requirements, the

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum, approved the October 21 minutes, and then heard a KO presentation focused on county jail funding pressures. KO leaders and county judges said jail costs have become a statewide crisis, noting that county general fund contributions to jail budgets have risen sharply since 2019. They said the organization’s sole legislative priority this session is to “reshape the shared responsibility” for county jails through three main proposals: incentivizing regional jails, clarifying responsibility for pre-trial felony detainees, and changing the model for housing state inmates. On regional jails, KO proposed one-time state construction help for new or expanded regional facilities, allowing former county jails to become 96-hour holdover facilities, changing regional jail authority boards so each participating county jailer can serve, increasing the closed-jail supplement, and offering a one-time payment to counties that close a jail and join a regional plan. On pre-trial felony detainees, Judge Mosley argued counties bear the full cost for people held before trial, sometimes for years, and said counties should be reimbursed for time served credit when those inmates are later sentenced. On state inmates, KO said the current per diem of $35.34 is below the average daily county jail cost of $63.44, and proposed a new contract model requiring the Department of Corrections to pay actual housing costs while counties provide agreed programming such as substance use treatment, cognitive behavioral programming, re-entry services, workforce training, and academic programming. Members asked about the fiscal impact of the package, the feasibility of regional jail population thresholds, and whether the proposal could affect counties’ ability to house federal inmates. KO said regionalization should remain a local decision, that a bill draft and fiscal note were being developed, and that only certain jails are eligible to house federal inmates under existing agreements. Representative Maddox also asked about social media comments by Judge Mosley regarding homeschooling; Mosley said the remarks were unrelated to KO and apologized for any offense. Senator Mills asked what counties would do with savings from jail costs, and judges said the money would likely go to local services such as roads, ambulance service, senior programs, parks, economic development, infrastructure, broadband, and water projects.

Transcript Highlights:

• program fee.
• program fee.
• <01:36:50.480> And program, program certification fee.
• And program, program certification fee.
• And so, um, this is a scholarship program, program, program, um,<04:48:10.360> that, And if everybody

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee reviewed a handout comparing House Bill 2 to current retirement law and walked through the bill section by section with staff from the retirement system. The discussion focused on vesting, earnable compensation, average final compensation, compensation-over-base limits, special duty pay, normal retirement age, re-retirement, and maximum benefit rules for Group 2/Tier B members. Staff explained that some provisions would restore pre-2011 rules, including counting certain end-of-career payments such as unused sick and vacation time in earnable compensation and reducing the AFC averaging period from five years back to three. They also described how the bill would eliminate the current cap on compensation over base, which mainly affects overtime, and noted that the actuarial cost of the AFC-related changes is interrelated rather than easily broken out by feature. A separate discussion covered the special duty pay limitation, which currently applies to Tier A and would be removed under the governor’s bill for both Tier A and Tier B members after their vested buy date. Staff said the actuary estimated that removing the special duty limitation would increase costs by about $13.9 million. Members also asked about the practical difference between overtime and special duty, with staff explaining that special duty generally involves work for a private third party, often police detail work, while overtime depends more on staffing and scheduling. The committee also reviewed the normal retirement age changes for Tier B and the possibility that some members would need to work longer to reach the new vested buy date. Members raised concerns about an ambiguity in the bill that could allow already-retired Tier B members to return to work, then re-retire and claim the higher benefits, or allow vested deferred members to stop working and wait for the new vested buy date. Staff said the governor’s office did not intend to allow that result and requested clarifying language, noting that the bill as drafted does not expressly prohibit it. The committee also discussed part-time and seasonal work after retirement, with staff explaining that such work generally does not restore membership unless the person takes a full-time position requiring enrollment. Finally, the committee reviewed the maximum benefit provisions and noted that HB 2 in the current year does not change the maximum benefit date or include the 1.5% annual escalator that had been part of the 2023 proposal, making the current bill more costly than the earlier version.

Transcript Highlights:

• assistance program that we call SNAP. assistance program that we call SNAP.
• Everyone... programs for our families. Many of them programs for our families.
• very programs. This is unacceptable. very programs. This is unacceptable.
• programs, funding for treatment programs, funding for recovery services, and the efficacy of these programs
• the programs.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Wednesday, June 4, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• that may operate in a new program that may operate in parallel<00:42:55.599> with<00:42:55.839
• Students in the Wuski school district who were really in favor of a peer-to-peer program and they had
• This will not alter specific funding requirements in any program, funding, or grant source.
• requirements in any program, funding, or grant<01:19:27.360> source.
• Concerns were raised sessation program.

Keywords: 927, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And today, 15 states have required vehicle safety inspection programs.
• I'm going to address why we should consider revisiting this program.
• And the RLD would be looking at possibly a certification program.
• How much RLD would need, you know, to implement this program.
• The state should certainly consider A subsidy program.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But it is it was a great program trees. But it is it was a great program trees.
• We need our money for our programs. We need our money for our programs.
• The state federal funded programs. The state federal funded programs.
• We want those programs cuz we're back." We want those programs cuz we're back."
• and other programs which they programs and other programs which they programs and other programs which

Bills: HB 135, HCR 64, SCR 3, SCR 30, SB 500, SB 739, SB 816, SB 898, SB 1283, SB 1351, SB 1423, SB 1531, SB 1540, SB 1666, SB 1721, SB 1886, SB 1931, SB 2001, SB 2075, SB 2154, SB 2173, SB 2217, SB 2284, SB 2375, SB 2383, SB 2386, SB 2398, SB 2448, SB 2476, SB 2540, SB 2580, SB 2589, SB 2693, SB 2707, SB 2776, SB 2786, SB 2801, SB 2864, SB 2927, SJR 84, SCR 30, SB 243, SB 324, SB 393, SB 457, SB 511, SB 529, SB 547, SB 636, SB 646, SB 659, SB 715, SB 731, SB 735, SB 800, SB 801, SB 904, SB 1065, SB 1141, SB 1181, SB 1224, SB 1241, SB 1242, SB 1250, SB 1266, SB 1285, SB 1359, SB 1434, SB 1442, SB 1467, SB 1502, SB 1524, SB 1528, SB 1551, SB 1585, SB 1640, SB 1754, SB 1757, SB 1777, SB 1844, SB 1863, SB 1972, SB 2007, SB 2035, SB 2046, SB 2055, SB 2069, SB 2082, SB 2119, SB 2139, SB 2154, SB 2200, SB 2201, SB 2269, SB 2310, SB 2330, SB 2357, SB 2366, SB 2401, SB 2422, SB 2514, SB 2530, SB 2533, SB 2543, SB 2544, SB 2550, SB 2568, SB 2589, SB 2660, SB 2693, SB 2695, SB 2707, SB 2717, SB 2721, SB 2742, SB 2753, SB 2807, SB 2846, SB 2891, SB 2925, SB 2938, SJR 3, SJR 18, SB 5, SB 326, SB 767, SB 769, SB 783, SB 914, SB 963, SB 1035, SB 1197, SB 1271, SB 1415, SB 1437, SB 1619, SB 1637, SB 1786, SB 1806, SB 494, SB 530, SB 2312, SB 1, SB 260, HB 135, HB 1109, HB 1392, HB 22, HCR 64, SJR 36, SJR 50, SJR 63, SJR 84, SJR 59, SCR 12, SCR 39, SCR 48, SCR 19, SCR 30, SCR 3, SB 2023, SB 62, SB 666, SB 847, SB 284, SB 854, SB 1073, SB 810, SB 1505, SB 583, SB 1502, SB 507, SB 1434, SB 1376, SB 1585, SB 1772, SB 2016, SB 1163, SB 1122, SB 731, SB 397, SB 508, SB 1436, SB 287, SB 261, SB 1882, SB 393, SB 1791, SB 209, SB 2429, SB 1999, SB 511, SB 2309, SB 510, SB 1085, SB 1975, SB 2717, SB 1262, SB 1524, SB 636, SB 2056, SB 884, SB 517, SB 1200, SB 1845, SB 1863, SB 2681, SB 2200, SB 2199, SB 1757, SB 2458, SB 2201, SB 801, SB 2533, SB 3014, SB 3013, SB 758, SB 1721, SB 1013, SB 2797, SB 2383, SB 2119, SB 2448, SB 1777, SB 1283, SB 2076, SB 2786, SB 2876, SB 2284, SB 1540, SB 2929, SB 2540, SB 2595, SB 2217, SB 715, SB 500, SB 1640, SB 2001, SB 2514, SB 2753, SB 2398, SB 1241, SB 2927, SB 2173, SB 2538, SB 898, SB 1449, SB 2529, SB 2846, SB 2476, SB 986, SB 1181, SB 2075, SB 2154, SB 2864, SB 1359, SB 2386, SB 2550, SB 1351, SB 1423, SB 1931, SB 2245, SB 2589, SB 2707, SB 410, SB 2776, SB 2580, SB 1886, SB 1234, SB 739, SB 456, SB 1666, SB 2801, SB 2055, SB 1012, SB 2926, SB 2138, SB 1242, SB 2615, SB 2310, SB 1224, SB 2972, SB 2841, SB 3016, SB 2139, SB 1856, SB 2035, SB 1528, SB 1141, SB 2401, SB 2530, SB 2375, SB 547, SB 1266, SB 1373, SB 1467, SB 2069, SB 2269, SB 2480, 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, 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 1551, SB 3039, SB 2819, SB 66, SB 629, SB 1015, SB 2342, SB 2903, SB 2933, SB 1965, SB 2477, SB 3029, SB 2605, SB 2419, SB 1957, SB 375, SB 250, SB 777, SB 628, SB 2523, SB 2367, SB 2703, SB 2608, SB 2778, SB 3044, SB 2965, SB 2521, SB 865, HB 2525, HB 3093, SB 1032, SB 2165, SB 2501, SB 2675, SB 2452, SB 2835, SJR 84, SB 457, SB 547, SB 904, SB 1467, SB 1757, SB 1777, SB 2055, SB 2069, SB 2139, SB 2401, SB 2530, SB 2543, SB 2695, SR 349, SR 367, SR 468, SB 3064, SB 3065, HJR 7, HB 119, HB 130, HB 163, HB 166, HB 201, HB 272, HB 331, HB 380, HB 654, HB 694, HB 718, HB 865, HB 1266, HB 1397, HB 1500, HB 1552, HB 1576, HB 1583, HB 1584, HB 1760, HB 1894, HB 1965, HB 2018, HB 2029, HB 2286, HB 2340, HB 2427, HB 2455, HB 2467, HB 2508, HB 2523, HB 2730, HB 2756, HB 2791, HB 2970, HB 3016, HB 3096, HB 3248, HB 3255, HB 3336, HB 3623, HB 3698, HB 3699, HB 3803, HB 3804, HB 3805, HB 3806, HB 4129, HB 4187, HB 4236, HB 4238, HB 4643, HB 4738, HB 4739, HB 5333, SCR 3, SCR 30, SB 500, SB 739, SB 898, SB 1283, SB 1351, SB 1423, SB 1540, SB 1666, SB 1721, SB 1886, SB 1931, SB 2001, SB 2075, SB 2154, SB 2173, SB 2217, SB 2375, SB 2383, SB 2386, SB 2398, SB 2448, SB 2476, SB 2540, SB 2580, SB 2589, SB 2707, SB 2776, SB 2786, SB 2801, SB 2864, SB 2927, HB 135, HCR 64, SB 2284, SB 3064, SB 3065, HJR 7, HB 119, HB 130, HB 163, HB 166, HB 201, HB 272, HB 331, HB 380, HB 654, HB 694, HB 718, HB 865, HB 1266, HB 1397, HB 1500, HB 1552, HB 1576, HB 1583, HB 1584, HB 1760, HB 1894, HB 1965, HB 2018, HB 2029, HB 2286, HB 2340, HB 2427, HB 2455, HB 2467, HB 2508, HB 2523, HB 2730, HB 2756, HB 2791, HB 2970, HB 3016, HB 3096, HB 3248, HB 3255, HB 3336, HB 3623, HB 3698, HB 3699, HB 3803, HB 3804, HB 3805, HB 3806, HB 4129, HB 4187, HB 4236, HB 4238, HB 4643, HB 4738, HB 4739, HB 5333

Keywords: sales tax exemption, exotic animals, game animals, agriculture, livestock, gifted education, education support, student achievement, academic excellence, Texas education, cowboy culture, Bandera, cultural heritage, historical significance, Texas identity, Birding Capital, Matagorda County, wildlife, conservation, Texas Legislature

Transcript Highlights:

• from many community members that we can do provide very excellent transit with a bus rapid transit program
• Because if we get higher tax subsidies on the low ridership for, it'd be per rider on the light rail,
• If we get higher tax subsidies on the low ridership for, it'd be per rider on the light rail, so, you
• And just the fact that they have the program acknowledges that there is displacement.
• acknowledges that there is program acknowledges that there is displacement.<00:27:02.360> We<

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The meeting focused on opposition to the proposed Blue Line light rail extension in the West Broadway/North Minneapolis corridor and support for alternatives, especially arterial bus rapid transit. Committee members and invited speakers argued that the rail project would cost about $3.2 billion to $3.5 billion to build, require roughly $57 million a year to operate and maintain, and could burden Hennepin County taxpayers if federal funding does not materialize. They promoted House File 3507, which would direct $30 million toward bus transit in the corridor, and House File 3441, which was described as highlighting the operating costs of light rail. Testimony from community leaders and residents emphasized concerns about displacement, business disruption, safety, and neighborhood impacts. Speakers said the project could require demolition of homes and businesses, reduce parking and traffic access on West Broadway, and harm a predominantly Black business district in North Minneapolis. Several compared the project to past rail impacts such as Rondo, and said bus rapid transit would be more flexible, less expensive, and better aligned with community needs. One speaker also raised concerns about the placement of stations and the effect on residents who rely on transit for work, shopping, and access to services. Representative Kristin Robbins and others framed the issue as a budget priority, saying Hennepin County should focus on transit options that cost less and on funding for HCMC, which they said faces a serious deficit. In response to questions, the bill supporters said the effort was bipartisan, that federal funding for the rail project was uncertain, and that the legislature should move money toward bus service now rather than wait for a future federal agreement. No vote or formal committee action was taken in the excerpt, but the members indicated they would continue making the case for the bills and follow up with the community.

Transcript Highlights:

• An example of a program that falls within this area would be our weatherization program.
• I'm going to just be talking about three of those programs that we're calling flexible programs that
• I'm going to just be talking about three of those programs that we're calling flexible programs that
• I'm going to just be talking about three of those programs that we're calling flexible programs that
• I'm going to just be talking about three of those programs that we're calling flexible programs that

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• The program, and I have seen firsthand what happens when children lose access to care.
• recent press articles by The Wall Street Journal and the federal audit into these therapies and programs
• And given the fact that the federal government has suspended, at this point, those enhanced subsidies

Summary: The Assembly Appropriations Committee met on April 8, 2026, with a quorum established and 59 bills listed for consideration. The committee first approved two consent calendars: several bills were sent to the Assembly floor on a due-pass basis, and a smaller set was approved due-pass but not eligible for the floor consent calendar. The proposed suspense calendar was then deemed approved without individual debate on those measures. The committee heard several bills in regular order. AB 1977, sponsored by the Secretary of State, would clean up and clarify the Online Notarization Act to support implementation by 2030; it drew no opposition and was approved. AB 2011 would codify existing federal mental health parity standards into state law; supporters said it would preserve enforcement authority, while health plans opposed it as premature given federal uncertainty and possible premium impacts; the bill was placed on the B roll call. AB 1673 would give county fish and game commissions more flexibility to use certain revenues for wildlife conflict prevention, and it advanced on an A roll call. AB 2233 would allow unused authorized ABA therapy hours for children with autism to be made up within the authorization period; supporters emphasized access and continuity of care, while insurers warned of higher costs and reduced utilization safeguards; it advanced on an A roll call. AB 1660, as amended, would give courts more flexibility in cases involving financial institutions and public guardians/conservators, with supporters saying it could save counties time and money; it was approved due-pass as amended. During general public comment, speakers voiced support for AB 2081 and AB 1667, and opposition to AB 1777. After public comment and final vote recording for absent members, the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• As Chair Addis had mentioned in our opening comments, the C-BAS program is certainly a vital program
• Why would we cut this program?
• are providing the cost savings that Programs are providing the cost savings that these programs are
• The IHSS program is the largest home and community-based services program in the United States.
• with additional program data.

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:

• be a backstop, that carrier needs to be able to provide service to anyone We have no more direct subsidies
• Line program, and I think that is very helpful in terms of looking at affordability. Thank you.
• . program in the state that provides a discount for your phone service.
• I am the program manager for the Communications and Broadband Policy Branch for the Public Advocates
• to co-invest in things like the BEAD program, the $42 billion program, to get next generation technology

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Consideration, or is this just a separate new program?
• The hunger is there, and this program would help.
• The schools have had some summer programs.
• But those programs, they don't have to check for whether that child is SNAP or not.
• This would be a stable program.

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• programs for veterans, programs for students living with disabilities, programs for students experiencing
• It’s simply changing the caps on the loan program right now.” “You’re increasing the subsidy.
• The Cal Grant program is a...
• But this program is similar to what we have down in San Diego. We have a safe parking program.
• enter into the program.

Summary: The committee first adopted its 2025-26 rules on a 7-0 roll call, then approved three consent items—AB 88, AB 240, and AB 313—on a due-pass motion to Appropriations. The hearing then moved to AB 648, which would give community college districts the same zoning authority as the UC and CSU systems to build student and staff housing on property they own or lease. The author and supporters argued the bill would help address severe housing insecurity and homelessness among community college students, while opponents and some members raised concerns about local control, zoning exemptions, and the impact on nearby communities. AB 648 passed the committee on a 5-2 vote and was sent to the Local Government Committee. The committee next heard AB 466, which would require California Community Colleges and CSU campuses to provide organ and tissue donor registry information during student orientation, and request UC campuses to do the same. Supporters shared personal stories about transplants and donation, saying college orientation is a good opportunity to increase registrations. Some members worried about information overload during orientation and suggested campuses have flexibility in how they present the material, but the bill advanced on a unanimous 7-0 vote to Appropriations. AB 326 followed, proposing campus-by-campus external audits of the CSU every three years and public release of the audits. The author, faculty supporters, and a student argued that systemwide audits do not provide enough transparency about how money is spent at individual campuses, citing examples of financial mismanagement and fee increases. CSU opposed the bill, saying it already conducts annual consolidated external audits and that campus-level audits would add cost without added benefit. After extensive discussion about transparency, audit scope, and implementation, the bill passed 6-1 to Appropriations. The committee then took up AB 335, which would create a California Black-Serving Institution Grant Program to support Black student success and broader underserved student services; supporters emphasized persistent equity gaps and low completion rates, while an opponent argued the bill needed to be carefully amended to comply with Proposition 209 and equal protection requirements. The transcript ends during that item’s discussion, before a final vote is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• And despite all in the CCAP program.
• programs are so generous. programs are so generous.
• with the Feeding Our Future program. with the Feeding Our Future program.
• wonderful program." wonderful program."
• proven fraud in the child care program. proven fraud in the child care program.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The House took up an urgency motion to recall House File 3819 from committee and advance it to final passage. Supporters said the bill was needed to address fraud in the child care assistance program (CCAP), citing recent FBI raids on child care centers, prior audit findings, and long-standing concerns about weak oversight. They described the bill as restoring a penalty of perjury for attendance records, requiring electronic attendance tracking, mandating unannounced inspections, and requiring camera monitoring for higher-funded providers so the state can verify attendance and reduce improper payments. Opponents argued the bill was not ready, raised concerns about cost, implementation, and the inclusion of camera surveillance, and said the language could create problems related to retention and possible misuse of video. One member said the state had already taken bipartisan action on child care fraud in prior sessions and that the larger fraud estimates being cited were overstated compared with convictions. Another member emphasized that electronic attendance monitoring was the one part they supported, but said the bill lacked clarity and a Senate companion. Members also discussed the history of CCAP fraud investigations, including earlier OLA reports, criminal investigations within DHS, and allegations that fraud vulnerabilities had been known for years. Supporters argued the bill would help recover taxpayer dollars and improve affordability by reducing fraud, while critics warned that added camera requirements could increase costs for providers and potentially threaten child care center viability. The debate included questions and answers about video retention, with the bill author stating the intended retention period was 90 days, though a member noted that language was not clearly visible in the version before the House.

Transcript Highlights:

• for the Promise Program.
• of the Promise Program.
• would be the Arizona LEAP Program, the Community College Promise Program, the Arizona Promise Program
• It's a government-funded program.
• Ending the program. We're not changing the program. We're not telling them what to do.

Summary: The joint appropriations committee met on April 28 to review the FY 2027 budget package, including the general appropriations feed bills (HB 4138 and SB 1831) and related budget reconciliation measures. Staff described the budget as including about $17.96 billion in general fund appropriations, a one-time transfer of state monies to increase revenues, a 5% lump-sum reduction to most agencies’ discretionary general fund budgets, and several one-time restorations or continuations for items such as school facilities, child care, child safety, corrections stipends, and public safety operating costs. Members spent much of the meeting debating how the across-the-board cuts would be implemented, which programs might be affected, and how fund sweeps from prior-year appropriations and special funds would work, including questions about universities, public safety, rural hospitals, transportation grants, the Corporation Commission, and health insurance costs for state employees and troopers. A major point of discussion was the impact on universities and higher education. Arizona Board of Regents representatives said the proposed reductions and fund sweeps would affect already obligated dollars, research, staffing, and student aid programs, and could force difficult decisions about programs such as the Promise Program, Teachers Academy, and other pass-through funds. Committee members also raised concerns about whether the cuts could lead to tuition increases or reductions in services, while majority members emphasized that agencies and the executive branch should decide how to absorb the reductions. Another major topic was health care and the state employee health plan: staff explained that the budget includes a $228 million general fund infusion to stabilize the plan, while a separate reconciliation bill would raise employee premiums over three years. Members also discussed whether the budget’s changes to AHCCCS/Access and hospital eligibility rules could increase costs for hospitals and reduce coverage. Public testimony largely opposed the budget. Speakers from Opportunity Arizona, the Arizona Board of Regents, and local governments argued that the proposal would shift costs onto working families, reduce support for education, housing, SNAP, health care, and rural infrastructure, and protect tax benefits for data centers and higher-income taxpayers. A mayor from Globe asked for state help after severe flooding damaged roads, water lines, and homes, while a motorcycle safety advocate asked the committee to review a DPS motorcycle safety fund appropriation. Committee members and staff repeatedly clarified that some items discussed were one-time appropriations not continued into FY 2027, that some fund sweeps were from unspent or unencumbered balances, and that the committee planned to take a mass roll-call vote on the budget bills at the end of the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Act subsidies. Act subsidies.
• So it doesn't seem like a very good program, but even if you like the school building aid program, this
• /c> the school building aid program, this the school building aid program, this particular<03:16:28.520
• , Education Freedom Accounts program, Education Freedom Accounts program, would<04:26:31.280>
• <04:37:58.439> However, breakfast programs. However, breakfast programs.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• program that can let people produce their own power and contribute to the broader grid.
• That program, as I understand, is still not up and running. And correct me if I'm wrong on that.
• That program, as I understand, is still not up and running. And correct me if I'm wrong on that.
• Yet these programs have, I think, failed to materialize in meaningful ways or been dropped by the PUC
• Yet these programs have, I think, failed to materialize in meaningful ways or been dropped by the PUC

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Commerce and Consumer Protection Committee heard and considered a long list of Governor’s messages for appointments to state boards and commissions, including the Board of Dentistry, Barbering and Cosmetology, Speech Pathology and Audiology, Motor Vehicle Industry Licensing Board, Elevator Mechanics Licensing Board, Real Estate Commission, Board of Naturopathic Medicine, State Boxing Commission, Board of Professional Engineers, Architects, Surveyors and Landscape Architects, Hawaii Medical Board, Board of Physical Therapy, Board of Pharmacy, and the Public Utilities Commission. Most nominees and supporting agencies testified in support, and many nominees simply stood on their written testimony. Several nominees also answered questions about their experience and the issues facing their boards, including dental insurance and Medicaid concerns, condo and real estate disputes, pharmacy regulation and telepharmacy, boxing and MMA rule updates, and medical board service in rural areas. The committee discussed some contested or notable nominations in more detail. Richard Emery’s nomination to the Real Estate Commission drew opposition testimony tied to a condo management dispute, and he responded by emphasizing the need for factual evidence, mediation and complaint data, and better consumer education. Trinette Kahui and Andrea Ushijima were also nominated to the Real Estate Commission, with broad support. For the Boxing Commission, Robin Jumawan described ongoing statutory updates, MMA-related work, and delegation of amateur boxing rules. For the Hawaii Medical Board, Elizabeth Ignacio was strongly endorsed by state and industry witnesses as highly qualified and familiar with rural health issues, while Rebecca Sawai also received support from the board and Kaiser Permanente. In the decision-making portion, the committee moved to advise and consent to nearly all nominees on the agenda. Senator McKelvey stated reservations about Richard Emery due to opposition and possible conflicts, and also about nominees who were not present at the hearing, specifically Corrine Muldrow Soto and Stacie Kealoha Inouye; Senator Lamasao also noted reservations on those absent nominees. The chair disclosed personal acquaintance with Dr. Sawai and Andrea Ushijima. The committee then voted to adopt the recommendations, with the noted reservations and one no vote on GM 697 reflected in the record, and later reconvened to take up Governor’s Message 514/515 for John Etemura as chairperson of the Public Utilities Commission, where additional support testimony was heard from the Governor’s office, DCCA, and former consumer advocacy staff.