Transcript Highlights:

• I'm Ona Minge, State Budget Director with Minnesota Management and Budget.
• </c> State Budget Director Ona Minge. State Budget Director Ona Minge.
• </c> with Minnesota Management and Budget. with Minnesota Management and Budget.
• budget reserve policy.
• </c> budget reserve policy. budget reserve policy.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Can you tell us where we start, on an overall budget agreement or budget bills for this year to consider
• ON AN OVERALL BUDGET AGREEMENT OR BUDGET BILLS FOR THIS YEAR TO CONSIDER.
• of this budget.
• budget bills. >> Through you, Mr.
• We've now, in this budget extender, $23.1 billion toward this year's budget.

Keywords: 993, senate, all

Summary: The Senate opened with routine business, including approval of the prior journal and several messages from the Assembly to discharge and substitute identical Senate bills. The chamber then took up a budget extender, Senate Print 10262/Assembly Bill 11295, which would appropriate $2.9 billion to keep state government operating through May 14 while budget negotiations continued. Senator O’Mara questioned the delay in reaching a full budget and criticized the lack of clarity on major policy issues, conference committees, school aid timing, and a proposed $1 billion utility ratepayer relief plan, arguing the state’s spending and affordability problems were worsening. Senator Serrano responded that negotiations were in the final stretch and that the extender was necessary to maintain government operations. The extender passed 59-1 after being restored to the non-controversial calendar. The Senate also considered a major election-law bill, Senate Print 88A, providing for automatic voter registration and pre-registration through DMV, Medicaid, and NYCHA-related transactions. Senator Walczyk’s proposed amendment to require voter ID was ruled nongermane, and his appeal was rejected. The bill prompted extended debate over whether the process would protect against non-citizen registration or instead remove barriers for eligible voters. Supporters, including Senator Gianaris, said it would streamline registration and help eligible but unregistered New Yorkers participate; Senator Zellner said it would strengthen the process. Opponents, including Senators Walczyk, Borrello, Helming, Rhoads, and Martins, warned it would shift responsibility away from bipartisan boards of elections, create administrative errors, and risk improper registration. The bill ultimately passed after being restored to the non-controversial calendar, with senators explaining votes along party lines. The chamber also adopted or advanced several resolutions and recognized guests. Senator Gallivan’s Police Week resolution drew remarks honoring fallen officers and law enforcement families, with Senators Chan, Rolison, Weik, Ryan, and Myrie speaking in support. Senator Sepúlveda’s resolution commemorating Dominicans in Albany was also discussed, with praise for the Dominican community’s contributions to New York and supportive remarks from Senator Chan. In addition, the Senate heard introductions for guests from Allen A.M.E. Church and the creators of the documentary “Teenage Wasteland.”

Transcript Highlights:

• Did you look at changing their budget to say, we want to Did you look at changing their budget to say
• If it's within the budget, then I would urge us to try to use the budget for the Department of Corrections
• I have tried since 2022 to increase their budget.
• I know that there's two budgets.
• There's this budget here, and then there is the local county budget.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• He added that while the budget trend has overall increased, 54 percent of the budget goes to labor.
• While the budget trend has overall increased, it's important to note 54% of our budget goes to labor.
• 54% of our budget goes to labor.
• The operating budget... Yes.
• have a budget.

Summary: The committee received a detailed staff presentation on Washington State Ferries’ capital needs, current fleet status, and long-range funding outlook. Staff described the current service pattern, ridership recovery since the pandemic, the aging fleet, and the state’s plan to add three new hybrid-electric Olympic-class vessels under the 2025 budget, with delivery expected around 2030-2032. Members also heard that the fleet is operating with no reserve vessel, that preservation time is below the desired level, and that terminal electrification and vessel conversion plans face timing, cost, and procurement risks. Questions focused on ridership trends, biofuel supply, design-risk allocation in vessel contracts, sequencing of terminal electrification with new vessel delivery, and the cost and feasibility of restoring international Sidney service, which would require a SOLAS-certified vessel. Staff then outlined ferry capital funding, saying recent spending and programmed needs are far above regular ferry-specific revenues and that the system relies on a mix of dedicated accounts, transportation package money, federal grants, and transfers. They said the near-term budget is balanced through 2027-29, but the longer-term capital outlook shows a shortfall of roughly $250 million to $300 million per biennium, with broader unmet needs much higher. The presentation estimated costs for future vessels, life extensions, terminal electrification, and additional Jumbo Mark II conversions, and noted that the current enacted plan does not fully fund fleet replacement, full electrification, or life extension of older vessels. Members asked for follow-up information on terminal seismic/environmental issues, contract options for additional vessels, and the timing and cost of alternative vessel designs. The committee then shifted to WSDOT maintenance and preservation. Pascoe Focktich described maintenance operations, including winter response, guardrail repair, facilities, equipment, and the effects of underfunding and inflation. He said most of the maintenance budget is fixed cost and labor, that material prices have risen sharply, and that many facilities are in poor condition with asbestos issues and deferred upkeep. He also noted growing guardrail damage, increasing pavement claims, and the burden of maintaining aging bridges and facilities. Members asked about prior planning for these needs, the role of asbestos, and whether more proactive sequencing could help budget decisions. Troy Suing then presented the highway preservation program, saying WSDOT is in the early stages of critical failure and has stretched preservation dollars as far as possible. He explained the distinction between pavement, bridge, and other highway asset preservation, said the department is largely reactive, and estimated that delaying work can make it three to five times more expensive later. He said about 40% of roadways are currently due or overdue for preservation, bridge conditions are nearing the federal poor-bridge threshold, and the department’s 10-year preservation need is about $8 billion. Members asked about the cost of deferring work, whether the department could do more if funded, how priorities are set, and whether other states face similar problems. Finally, Evan Grimm and Mike Fay briefed the committee on bridge strikes by overheight vehicles. They described recent incidents on I-90 near Cle Elum and SR 410 near White River, the damage and closures caused, and possible countermeasures such as public outreach, improved trip-planning tools, and a pilot warning system with sensors and flashing beacons. Fay explained the state’s financial recovery process for third-party damage, saying WSDOT recovers roughly $20 million per biennium and about 78% to 80% of billed damages, with money going to the motor vehicle fund. Members asked about prevention, insurance recovery, and whether the state uses claim data to inform future design or safety changes.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Senate Budget Committee will come to order.
• AB 107 is a budget bill junior, which includes a variety of changes to the Budget Acts of 2023, 2024,
• The first bill, AB 107, includes amendments to budget bill items in the 2023, 2024, and 2025 Budget Acts
• the budget of our citizens and the budget of the utilities to make sure they are held accountable for
• We're also considering the budget of our citizens and the budget of the utilities to make sure they are

Summary: The Senate Budget Committee heard two bills: AB 107, a budget bill junior making largely technical changes to the 2023, 2024, and 2025 Budget Acts, and AB 117, a trailer bill authorizing a regional transit loan package for Bay Area agencies. Department of Finance staff said AB 107 contains no new state money or new policy items, but makes adjustments such as extending encumbrance periods, updating federal authority, moving $20 million in tourism promotion funding from Visit California to GoBiz, and adding an APA exemption for certain climate bond program guidelines. AB 117 would allow CalSTA to loan up to $590 million from unallocated Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program funds to MTC, which would then lend to BART, Muni, Caltrain, and AC Transit; the loans would run 12 years with two years interest-only, and the state said the structure is intended to be cost-neutral and protected by repayment safeguards. Committee discussion focused heavily on transparency, oversight, and whether the transit loan could jeopardize future projects or become a de facto bailout if a Bay Area sales tax measure fails. Several senators questioned the need for the APA exemption in AB 107, arguing that emergency or existing public processes might provide better oversight, while supporters said the exemption was needed to get voter-approved climate bond funds out the door and that the language had already been agreed to in the budget process. On AB 117, senators raised concerns about declining ridership, fare evasion, safety, post-pandemic travel patterns, repayment sources, and the impact on other TIRCP projects such as BART Phase 2. Finance staff and transit representatives responded that ridership changes were driven by COVID-era shifts, labor and safety issues, and changing commute patterns, and that the loan would be secured against existing state transit assistance streams rather than general fund dollars. Public comment was largely supportive of both bills. Water, natural resources, and environmental groups backed the APA exemption in AB 107, saying it would speed implementation of Proposition 4 funding for water recycling, wildfire, coastal resilience, and related projects. Transit agencies and labor groups supported AB 117, saying the loan is needed to stabilize operations and preserve service while local revenue measures and efficiency efforts are pursued; San Francisco, Caltrain, BART, and AC Transit all testified in favor, though San Jose asked for stronger protections for previously approved TIRCP-funded projects. The committee first passed AB 107 and AB 117 on 8-4 and 9-4 votes, placed them on call, then later lifted the calls and both bills ultimately passed with 11 votes each and were sent out of committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have budget language like that, I'm told.
• But there is language in our budget currently that requires certain issues to be examined in the budget
• But its desire is to keep this issue before our budget writers every time they sit down to write a budget
• This is a complicated issue in bad budget times.
• Of the budget writers.

Summary: The executive committee approved the May minutes by roll call vote, then received an actuarial update from Sarah Baker of the State Actuary’s Office. Baker explained the office’s annual work, including the DRS pension actuarial evaluation, support for state financial reporting, cash flow analysis, a six-year pension contribution outlook, interim support for GIT and WAL CARES, and an upcoming actuarial evaluation of the volunteer firefighters pension plan. She also responded to questions about bills allowing members to transfer into PERS, noting that such transfers have historically increased PERS costs and that any added cost would be borne by PERS members and employers depending on bill structure and affected demographics. Kate Adams of the Attorney General’s office reported no new developments in the cases the committee is monitoring. She said the Dawson case is still in its early stages, with a judge assigned and a discovery plan due at the end of July. The committee asked for continued updates on that litigation. The committee then discussed interim work planning, focusing first on animal control officers’ eligibility for PERS and asking staff to continue researching definitions, comparable treatment in nearby states, and the cost and service-credit implications for affected employees. Members also discussed Plan 3 issues, including comparisons of Plan 2 and Plan 3 membership and data, and possible future briefing topics. The largest discussion centered on Plan 1 COLAs: members and retiree representatives debated whether to pursue a permanent COLA or an ad hoc COLA, and whether budget language should require future budget writers to consider a COLA. Retiree groups said they preferred a permanent COLA but were open to further discussion; staff was asked to continue work on possible language and policy options. The committee reviewed correspondence on four topics: Plan 1 COLA requests, a request to study LEOFF 2-style medical reimbursements for Washington State Patrol survivors, and a request to allow certain members to change survivor option elections after the federal Social Security Fairness Act. The committee agreed to bring the State Patrol medical reimbursement issue and the Social Security Fairness Act issue back for July, with staff to gather more information and provide an informational briefing. The July agenda was approved and includes the OSA annual update, the LEOFF 2 Board annual update, a PERS/TRS Plan 1 ad hoc COLA item, and the two survivor-related topics.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're going to start with budget and tax, and we are going to ask the chair of the capital budget subcommittee
• The Senate Budget and Taxation Committee has completed its review of the fiscal 2027 capital budget of
• Budget Subcommittee, as well as the subcommittee members and the full Senate Budget and Taxation Committee
• Taxation</c><00:01:51.800><c> Committee</c> The Senate Budget and Taxation Committee The Senate Budget
• I would as this budget reflects a statewide as this budget reflects a statewide approach<00:03:31.640

Keywords: Senate streaming session for Monday, March 23, 2026, 960, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• To bring the budget process full circle, today I want to introduce you to the final step: budget conference
• We expect budget conference meetings to begin in about a week.
• The first document in your packet is the budget.
• The Senate budget is higher than the House.
• Members, that concludes the major budget differences.

Summary: The Higher Education Budget Subcommittee met with a quorum present for what was described as its final committee meeting of the session. Chair Busatta opened the meeting by outlining the upcoming budget conference process, explaining that the House and Senate had both passed their budget bills and that conference negotiations would begin soon, with the Senate serving as the hosting chamber this year. She reviewed how the conference process works, including side-by-side budget documents, chamber offers, subcommittee negotiations, escalation to the chairs and then to the Speaker and President, and the required 72-hour cooling-off period before final budget passage. The main discussion focused on the differences between the House and Senate higher education budgets for fiscal year 2025-2026. The chair noted a total $62.5 million difference, with the Senate budget higher overall. Key differences included House reductions for vacant FTE positions, differing approaches to recurring versus nonrecurring funding in financial aid and workforce programs, the Senate’s larger funding level for workforce development capitalization incentive grants, and differing allocations for colleges and universities. In the university budget, the Senate centralized nurse education funding at the University of South Florida’s Center for Nursing and funded several specific initiatives, while the House proposed additional funding for performance-based metrics, faculty recruitment and retention, and tuition waivers. The chair also highlighted a major proviso difference involving the EASE grant, where the House proposed minimum benchmark metrics for institutional eligibility. No testimony was taken and no votes were held on the budget differences. After the overview and brief explanation of the budget and proviso side-by-side documents, the committee concluded its agenda and adjourned on a motion by Representative Blanco, without objection.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senate Bill 282, the President's budget bill, fiscal year 2027, Budget and Taxation. >> Leader moves
• Desk is clear, budgets in. We are officially in the budgets in the 449th session.
• </c><00:01:23.920><c> and</c> Commission, Recommendations, Budget and Commission, Recommendations, Budget
• </c> Budget, and Taxation. Budget, and Taxation.
• </c> ordered to the capital budget ordered to the capital budget subcommittee. subcommittee. subcommittee

Keywords: Senate streaming session for Wednesday, January 21, 2026, 960, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> budget proposals. budget proposals.
• </c> governor's um supplemental budget. governor's um supplemental budget.
• </c> Friday is the budget, no integrity. Friday is the budget, no integrity.
• Um, Liam and Kyle are going to take us through the DE budget and the DE budget spreadsheet for the budget
• </c> spreadsheet for the budget. spreadsheet for the budget.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• budget is approximately $15.5 million.
• The budget shows four positions.
• The budget shows four positions.
• budget.
• We reduced our budget a bit.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony from Insurance Commissioner DJ Bettencourt on the New Hampshire Insurance Department budget. He said the department is self-funded through assessments on insurers based on New Hampshire premium volume, with about $8 billion in premiums written in the state and a department budget of roughly $15.5 million. He explained that the department has 88 authorized positions, eight vacancies, and that three full-time positions were unfunded after the governor’s requested 4% reduction exercise. He also said the department is trying to balance staffing needs with not overburdening carriers during a hard insurance market. A major topic was the department’s $2.6 million rebate to industry from the prior fiscal year, which Bettencourt described as a credit against the next assessment rather than a direct cash payment. Members questioned why that credit was not reflected as a reduction in the upcoming budget, and Bettencourt and staff explained that the budget assumes full staffing and full spending, with any year-end surplus returned to insurers. The commissioner said the department had added staff in recent years for succession planning and to preserve institutional expertise, and that the rebate reflects careful budgeting rather than excess spending. Members also asked about staffing changes by division, including positions unfunded in fraud, property and casualty examinations, life and health examinations, and tax. Bettencourt said fraud investigations remain strong and that the department can use outside contractors for examinations, with those costs billed to the company being examined. He also described the department’s examination process, including periodic financial exams and targeted market conduct reviews triggered by consumer complaints or trends. Additional questions covered OIT transfers, the department’s oversight of fully insured health coverage, the insurance premium tax and fines going to the general fund, and the department’s limited role in auto repair reimbursement disputes, where he said complaints have recently declined.

Transcript Highlights:

• In the Governor's budget, while the Governor's budget does not include any additional funding to the
• courts for Prop. 36, the Governor's budget maintains the $130 million included in the 2025 Budget Act
• I can't speak to the budget.
• It has to be reauthorized in this year's budget.
• It has to be reauthorized in this year's budget.

Summary: The subcommittee met to hear budget-related updates from the Judicial Branch and the Office of Emergency Services, with no votes taken. The Judicial Council supported the Governor’s proposed budget, highlighting $70 million for increased trial court operating costs, additional funding for court-appointed counsel, Court of Appeal case processing, and courthouse construction and facilities. Trial court representatives emphasized staffing retention problems, especially in counties like San Bernardino, and said stable funding is needed to avoid delays and maintain access to justice. Members also discussed the branch’s remote proceedings program, which has been used in more than 6 million hearings statewide since 2022 and was described as especially important in rural areas and for vulnerable litigants; several members urged making the authority permanent rather than extending it temporarily. A major portion of the hearing focused on Proposition 36 implementation. Finance said the Governor’s budget maintains the $130 million provided in the 2025 Budget Act for court workload and pretrial services, but adds no new Prop. 36 court funding. Judicial Council staff reported nearly 35,000 felony Prop. 36 filings in 2025, with most cases still pending and only a small share of treatment-mandated cases already dismissed after treatment. Witnesses said courts are using the funds for staffing, coordinators, clerks, and treatment-court operations, but that workload varies widely by county and that data collection is limited because courts report aggregate information rather than case-level outcomes. The LAO raised a technical concern about the Department of Finance’s Prop. 47 savings estimate and recommended revising the methodology at May Revision. The committee also reviewed the Orange Central Justice Center facility modification project, where the Judicial Council explained that hidden construction deficiencies and fire-life-safety issues caused costs to rise substantially after demolition began. The LAO said the project itself was supportable but recommended that the Legislature set an ongoing funding level for court facilities, require a long-term facilities plan, and consider more oversight of facility modification projects. Finance said it continues to fund courthouse projects individually and through the State Public Works Board, while acknowledging project delays and cost increases. Finally, Cal OES and advocates discussed victim services funding. Cal OES said it administers about $315 million annually for victim service programs, including VOCA-funded services, but federal VOCA allocations have fluctuated sharply and the state has used one-time General Fund backfills to maintain services. Trauma recovery center advocates warned that an 85% reduction in funding would sharply reduce services for survivors of violent crime, while human trafficking advocates urged reauthorization of the Human Trafficking Victim Assistance Program before funding reverts to pre-pandemic levels in July 2026. Members asked about federal and state funding stability, referral pathways, and the long-term value of these programs in preventing worse outcomes and reducing public costs.

Transcript Highlights:

• In fact, it establishes its operating budget through a budget adjustment.
• percent, relative to the 26 operating budget.
• And signed and assigned the State Fair Commission to make a budget request through its budget or support
• In their budget request, they felt the flat budget was sufficient for them to carry out their outreach
• That we needed to fund our operating budget.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Budget Center recommends the following actionable next steps.
• And our budget allows us to accomplish those goals.
• There's no proposal in the Governor's budget related to this.
• , which may need to be considered this budget cycle.
• So budget year plus two shows 75%, and then budget year... The 100% would be that.

Summary: The committee heard an extensive Department of Social Services presentation on child care budget issues, including the Governor’s proposed 2026-27 budget, federal CCDF changes, Prop. 64 revenue adjustments, and a one-time $11.5 million disaster-related infrastructure grant for licensed child care facilities affected by 2025 declared disasters. DSS said federal formula updates and lower Prop. 64 revenues would reduce funding and could result in about 4,176 CCTR slots being reduced, but the department said it was working to avoid impacts to currently enrolled children. The LAO supported aligning general child care funding with lower revenues and asked for more detail on the disaster grant. Members pressed DSS and Finance on why reductions were not being backfilled and why so many awarded slots remain uncontracted or unused; DSS said delays are largely due to providers building new infrastructure, licensing, staffing, and enrollment challenges, and that some unspent funds revert to the General Fund. The committee also discussed whether some contract dollars should be shifted to vouchers and whether more flexibility should be allowed for infrastructure and expansion costs. A second panel focused on the state’s commitment to expand child care and on rate reform. DSS reported that nearly 125,000 new slots have been awarded since 2021-22, but speakers from Stanislaus County Office of Education, Parent Voices California, and the California Budget and Policy Center argued that unmet need remains large and that the system still leaves many families without access. Stanislaus County described a large local shortage of infant and toddler care and said reimbursement disparities between child care programs and state preschool create disincentives for providers. Parent Voices gave testimony about the burdens and instability families face when trying to access care, especially for survivors and low-income parents, and called for a universal, publicly funded system. The Budget Center said only about 16% of eligible children were enrolled in 2024, urged expansion across the mixed delivery system rather than concentrating investment in TK, and called for faster rate reform and new revenue. LAO estimated that bringing certain CCTR adjustment factors up to CSPP levels would cost $88 million to $131 million ongoing. Members and witnesses discussed the single rate structure, automation needs, and the need for deadlines and a ramp-up plan; DSS said the goal is to eliminate disparities, but that policy decisions are still needed before automation can proceed. The committee then reviewed several trailer bill proposals. DSS outlined a 2026-27 COLA proposal that would apply a 2.41% increase through cost-of-care-plus payments, though the department said it had inadvertently excluded CalWORKs Child Care and the Emergency Child Care Bridge Program and would revise the proposal; LAO recommended making the COLA methodology uniform across programs. DSS also proposed replacing the market rate survey with the federally approved alternative methodology on a triennial schedule, limiting temporary absences in family child care homes to 20% of monthly hours, defining excessive unexplained absences as more than 30 days in a year, and aligning family fee deductions with new federal requirements so providers receive the full voucher value. Members generally supported the temporary absence change and asked about implementation timing for the family fee deduction, with DSS saying it was in contact with Riverside County. The committee also heard a brief update on the Early Childhood Policy Council reappropriation, which would extend unused funds through June 30, 2028 because prior costs came in higher than expected.

Transcript Highlights:

• The internal budget process, the sheets that will have the LFC budget seat sheets are very much sort
• our operating budget.
• You're doing budget cuts now, right? You're doing budget cuts in who's of? Us? Us? You may ask.
• In front of you, you have our FY 20 budget request. Budget request.
• budget.

Transcript Highlights:

• It is part of their basic budget.
• Budget, and I would turn to my colleagues for anything specific, but that is the base budget that the
• So that budget started in 2016, with the 2017 Budget Act.
• They have base budgets.
• I'm not sure what budget that would come out of.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And I know that's their budget, not your budget, but I mean, I thought they were doing some remodeling
• And then I know you don't know the PRC budget or budget request.
• Normally, we would budget around 30 million for PCF in the OSI budget.
• And then they would have the budget adjustment authority to increase their budgets for PCF.
• That budget is $863.8 million.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• budget year.
• We do consider them budget proposals, although, of course, policy is made in the budget as well.
• We did submit that budget letter, the budget ask.
• We've also submitted a budget change proposal to make permanent the resources granted in the prior budget
• in the budget year.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Human Services heard testimony on Department of Developmental Services (DDS) and related budget and trailer bill proposals, with a major focus on the impacts of H.R. 1 on people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD). DDS and the Department of Social Services (DSS) said H.R. 1 could affect Medi-Cal and CalFresh access, but that people with disabilities and caregivers are exempt from the work requirements; the administration is working on data matching and automation through the statewide eligibility system to identify exemptions, with June 1, 2026 as the implementation date for CalFresh changes. Witnesses and advocates warned that any loss of Medi-Cal could create fiscal pressure on regional centers and households, while public commenters described the real-life consequences of losing services. Committee members repeatedly expressed concern about cost shifts to counties and asked for harm-mitigation strategies before the May Revision. The committee also reviewed the governor’s IHSS-related proposals. DSS said the budget would set a baseline for authorized hours, align IHSS disenrollment/reinstatement with Medi-Cal eligibility processes, and eliminate the IHSS backup provider system, while emphasizing that individual service hours would still be based on assessed need. DDS said if a person loses IHSS or Medi-Cal, regional centers may have to step in as payer of last resort for some services, potentially at higher state cost. Members and the Legislative Analyst’s Office questioned whether counties could absorb the proposed shifts without reducing services, and asked for more detail on implementation, data quality controls, and how regional centers could help families navigate disruptions. A separate trailer bill on DDS rate reform and the Quality Incentive Program drew mixed reactions. DDS proposed extending a contract exemption and delaying final rate reform regulations to 2030, saying the changes are budget-neutral and needed for implementation. DDS reported that about 81% of providers had completed the current Quality Incentive Program requirements, but providers and advocates argued the 90-10 structure can function like a penalty and may destabilize services if providers lose 10% of funding. Committee members asked for clearer assistance to providers, possible flexibility for good-faith efforts, and a redlined version of the language before the May Revision. The committee also heard DDS’s proposed trailer bill on regional center governance and provider capacity. DDS said the language would consolidate regional center contracts and performance measures, strengthen board training and oversight, require consumer advisory committees, expand independent legal support, raise the threshold for board approval of contracts, and remove barriers such as physical-office requirements and duplicate vendorization. DDS said the goal is to improve accountability and efficiency while preserving person-centered services, and members indicated they wanted further refinement and stakeholder input before moving forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• This was adopted in last year's budget.
• the budget with outward-facing services.
• That's definitely better for members as well as for the budget.
• Bayer supports the Governor's budget proposal and the related budget trailer bill on prescription drug
• We are sponsoring the budget request for Dementia Care Aware.

Summary: The hearing began with a stakeholder presentation from Let California Kids Hear urging coverage of pediatric hearing aids for children in the large group market. Advocates described the issue as a long-running developmental emergency, argued that existing state efforts have been inefficient, and said the new proposal would cover about 70% to 80% of affected children without new spending by redirecting existing dollars. Public commenters, including parents, audiologists, and children’s advocates, strongly supported the proposal and emphasized the need for timely access to sound. The chair thanked the group and noted hope for a future fix, including continued work on the exchange market. The Department of Finance then gave a broad budget warning about the state’s more than $20 billion structural deficit and said new investments must be weighed against out-year shortfalls. HCAI followed with an overview of its programs, including CalRx insulin and naloxone, reproductive health grants, the Office of Health Care Affordability, seismic hospital compliance, workforce programs, and the Data Exchange Framework. Members asked about geographic targeting of workforce funds, behavioral health pipeline programs, the status of the 21st Century Nursing Initiative, and future CalRx products such as EpiPens and GLP-1s. HCAI also described its enforcement approach for health care spending targets, saying the board would not change the targets in response to H.R. 1, and outlined the diaper access initiative, which will distribute diapers through hospitals in higher-need areas. Several HCAI budget items were discussed and held open, including additional expenditure authority, the transfer of the Data Exchange Framework and Office of the Patient Advocate, long-term care payment transparency staffing, and reporting on health care worker waiting periods. The department also presented its Behavioral Health Services Act workforce initiative and a proposed $100 million General Fund offset, which both the LAO and the chair questioned as unclear and potentially one-time in nature. HCAI said the final workforce plan would be adjusted after stakeholder consultation if the offset proceeds. The department also described the Rural Health Transformation Program, saying California received $233.6 million in federal funds, had to revise its proposal to satisfy CMS, and must obligate the money by October 30; the program will fund rural care models, workforce development, and technology, with grants rolled out on a phased basis. The Department of Managed Health Care then presented its budget and three legislative implementation requests: SB 41 on PBM reform, SB 306 on prior authorization transparency, and AB 1041 on provider credentialing timelines. Finally, the administration outlined a menopause care proposal requiring coverage and education for menopause-related services, provider training, and an outreach campaign, with DMHC requesting staffing and funding to implement and enforce the new requirements. Throughout the hearing, most items were held open for later action, and no final votes were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, well as some budget negotiations.
• Um, not on that subject, but on the budget subject, how are we doing with the back-of-the-budget cuts
• </c> overall HHS budget. overall HHS budget.
• </c> portion of the teal box of our budget. portion of the teal box of our budget.
• </c> &gt;&gt; It's not in the budget this time. &gt;&gt; It's not in the budget this time.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first handled routine business, approving the prior meeting minutes with one abstention from a member who had been absent. It then received an update from DHHS Commissioner Lori Weaver on the department’s rural health transformation grant submission. Weaver said the grant was submitted ahead of the deadline, reflected input from communities and providers statewide, and would now enter a CMS review and negotiation phase. She explained that the governor’s office will oversee the grant with DHHS, that some proposals may be limited by federal parameters, and that the department may need to hire some staff to administer the grant, within the grant’s administrative cap. Members also discussed DHHS budget pressures and staffing. The department’s CFO, Nathan White, reviewed the agency’s budget mix, noting that DHHS accounts for a large share of the state’s operating and general fund budgets, and explained projected general fund lapse estimates, which he said are currently just under $20 million for the department. He also described why lapse projections are difficult to predict in DHHS because many costs are driven by utilization and because some funds are statutorily non-lapsing. White reported that vacancy rates have risen, citing about 400 unfunded positions in the current biennium and the department’s hiring freeze, while emphasizing that direct-care positions are being prioritized. Committee members raised concerns that back-of-the-budget cuts and weak revenue collections could affect the department’s ability to manage lapse projections. The committee then heard from Division of Public Health Director Ian Watt on vaccine policy and federal changes. Watt said New Hampshire continues to support access to safe and effective vaccines, including through the universal purchase program and seasonal respiratory virus guidance. He explained a recent CDC change regarding the MMRV vaccine, which now discourages the combined shot for the first dose in children under four because of febrile seizure risk, while still allowing it for the second dose. Watt said New Hampshire’s school and child care vaccine mandates remain stable, with nine vaccines required for schoolchildren and 10 for child care, and that the state continues to review federal recommendations cautiously. He also said there have been no supply or funding disruptions affecting vaccine access, and that childhood vaccine funding through commercial insurers remains intact. Finally, the Permanent Subcommittee on Alzheimer’s Disease and Other Related Dementias presented its annual report. The subcommittee said it met about six times, heard presentations on state services, silver alerts, brain health awareness, and palliative/hospice care, and began work on updating the state’s Alzheimer’s plan, which had last been updated in 2015-2016. To gather more direct input, the subcommittee formed a needs-assessment work group to develop a survey for people living with dementia, caregivers, and service providers. It recommended integrating Alzheimer’s and dementia materials into chronic disease, aging, and public health outreach; embedding cognitive health into systems of care and the state health improvement plan; adding cognitive health measures to BRFSS; and continuing partnerships with aging and advocacy organizations. Members praised the report and suggested it should clearly identify the subcommittee and include page numbers in future versions.