Transcript Highlights:

• ] This includes 3,897 homes in our Hurricane Irma program, 979 homes in our Hurricane Michael program
• So the Hurricane Michael Housing Program is the fastest CDBG-DR housing program in the nation.
• So the Hurricane Irma housing program has been our largest housing program, with 3,897 completed homes
• Programs up very quickly.
• This is a federal program. It is not a state program. It's 100% federal dollars.

Summary: The Committee on Community Affairs met with a quorum and heard two bills, a confirmation, and two agency presentations. SB 48 by Senator Gates would require local governments to allow voluntary accessory dwelling units, preserve homestead exemption for the owner-occupied portion, limit parking restrictions, require 30-day minimum leases, extend density bonuses for military-family housing, and allow reusable tenant screening reports. The bill drew strong support from the Florida Association of Mortgage Professionals and several others, and it was reported favorably on a unanimous roll call. SB 34 by Senator Sharief would expand the Historic Cemetery Program, particularly to help historic African-American cemeteries preserve and maintain themselves by allowing sale of excess vacant land only if proceeds are used for long-term upkeep; it also passed unanimously and was reported favorably. The committee also recommended confirmation of Fox Henderson to the Florida Housing Finance Corporation Board of Directors by unanimous vote. In addition, the Department of Commerce presented on the Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery program and Rebuild Florida, describing more than $4.3 billion in HUD disaster recovery funds since 2017, housing repair and replacement efforts that have completed more than 5,200 homes, and infrastructure and mitigation projects across the state. Members asked about average project costs, contractor oversight, corrective actions for deficient work, and clawbacks from a prior vendor; Commerce said it had ended the earlier vendor relationship, imposed about $3.6 million in financial consequences, and now uses stronger oversight and competitive procurement for contractors. The Division of Emergency Management then presented on Elevate Florida, a federal mitigation program that allows homeowners to apply directly for elevation, reconstruction, acquisition, or wind-mitigation projects, with a 75/25 federal-homeowner cost share and no state funds used. Director Kevin Guthrie said the program is intended to reduce repetitive flood losses, keep homeowners in their communities, and serve as a national model; he reported more than 12,000 applications, about 1,500 prioritized for review, 500 on a wait list, and 305 submitted to FEMA for final approval. Members asked about assistance for seniors who cannot meet the 25% match, the wait-list process, contractor selection, and the mix of project types, and Guthrie said contractors were selected through competitive procurement and that most projects are elevations, though some may become reconstructions or acquisitions depending on inspection results. The committee adjourned after the presentations.

Transcript Highlights:

• These are our climate-smart agriculture programs and the farm to school program.
• These programs, namely the Regional Farm Equipment Sharing Program and the Tribal Food Sovereignty Program
• programs.
• Is Market Match in this program, or is that in a different program, the farmers' market match?
• And this... oh, the CNIP program, the Certified Nutrition Incentives Program.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The statewide program is fairly new compared to the district programs.
• When you mentioned DCAP, the statewide program is one component of the DCAP program.
• , the ZAP program.
• So we have a pilot program, $3 million in the e-bike program.
• SAFER, FPIP, agricultural waste programs, and methane reduction programs.

Summary: The committee hearing focused heavily on CARB’s broad trailer bill request for regulatory fee authority. Finance and CARB argued the proposal would let CARB develop fees to recover reasonable costs for implementing and enforcing regulations, while the LAO recommended rejection because the authority was too broad, could apply to an entire division of code, and would delegate core legislative taxing/fee-setting power without enough guardrails. Members from both parties raised concerns about the breadth of the authority, accountability, affordability impacts, and whether the Legislature would be put in an up-or-down position after CARB had already developed regulations. CARB responded that fees would still go through a budget change proposal and legislative approval before collection, and cited existing examples such as transport refrigeration units and commercial harborcraft fees. The committee then reviewed CARB’s request for permanent resources to implement SB 905 on carbon capture, utilization, storage, and carbon dioxide removal. CARB said the Legislature had previously authorized limited-term positions and funding, but it had struggled to recruit and retain staff with specialized regulatory and technical expertise, and that the work had included pre-rulemaking contracts, technology review, and permit-related preparation. Members questioned the pace of work, the use of limited-term positions, and whether additional permitting authority would be needed. CARB said it hoped to begin rulemaking later in the year if permanent resources were approved. Members also discussed the cap-and-trade spending plan, noting lower-than-expected auction revenues but higher interest earnings, and the need to monitor the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and possible May Revision changes. The committee then heard overviews of the zero-emission vehicle package, the Community Air Protection Program, demand-side grid support, and e-bike incentives. CARB described ongoing investments in community-based transportation equity, drayage trucks, harbor craft, and other clean technology demonstrations, while members pressed on affordability, program duplication, and whether enough funding was being directed to incentive programs. No formal votes were taken during the portion provided, and the chair repeatedly indicated that the hearing was intended to surface concerns for later budget negotiations.

Transcript Highlights:

• the program.
• program.
• Program.
• The CCE program consists of two programs, in effect, the capital The CCE program consists of two programs
• program.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They also go to a program that's called the Trade Corridor Enhancement Program.
• programs.
• programs.
• the 617 program.
• These programs were...

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Very good program.
• That's where our program leaders of established programs and one other important critical program staff
• Programs that do not have students enrolled may be new programs.
• in those programs.
• describe and provide, and programs that the university, That programs describe and provide, and programs

Summary: The committee held its first meeting of the session and received an overview of the Higher Education Appropriations budget from staff director Tim Elwell. He explained the committee’s broad jurisdiction over universities, state colleges, district workforce programs, vocational rehabilitation, blind services, student financial aid, private colleges, and the Board of Governors, and reviewed key budget concepts such as local funds, funds per FTE, performance funding, and the distinction between the total appropriation and the recurring base budget. He noted that higher education is funded largely through state and local sources, with substantial flexibility compared with other state budgets, and that the base budget is heavily weighted toward lump-sum allocations to the public systems. The committee then heard a presentation from the University of South Florida’s Florida Center for Cybersecurity (Cyber Florida), led by retired Marine Gen. Frank McKenzie and USF representative Mark Walsh. They described Cyber Florida as a statewide cybersecurity platform created by the Legislature in 2014 to support education, research, workforce development, public policy, and community engagement. McKenzie emphasized the growing cyber threat environment, Florida’s leadership role, and several funded initiatives, including K-12 outreach, workforce training, a cyber range for county governments, critical infrastructure assessments, grant development, and public conferences and outreach. Members asked about public cyber awareness, the lack of a national cyber defense strategy, school district participation in Cyber Launch, and which counties are most at risk; McKenzie said smaller counties with limited cybersecurity staffing are generally more vulnerable and offered to provide follow-up information. Finally, the committee heard from the Florida Center for Students with Unique Abilities at the University of Central Florida, led by Dr. Drew Andrews, along with program and parent representatives from participating institutions. Andrews explained the center’s role in coordinating Florida’s postsecondary comprehensive transition programs for students with intellectual disabilities, supporting program development, distributing grants and scholarships, and monitoring outcomes. He reported that the state now has 33 approved programs at 35 institutions, including universities, state colleges, and technical colleges, and that scholarship and grant funding has grown significantly. He said student retention is about 88 percent, many graduates are employed, and median hourly earnings have increased over time. A representative from Southeastern University described how the center’s support helped build and sustain SEU Link, including a new third-year employment-focused option for students.

Transcript Highlights:

• Program, the Dairy Methane Reduction Program, and the Alternative Manure Management Program have delivered
• Habitat Program, our Organic Transition Program, and the Conservation Agriculture Planning Grant Program
• But, you know, the SWEEP Program, the farmer program, SALT program, those have all been beneficial.
• solid program.
• It's a great program.

Summary: The joint informational hearing examined how California agricultural programs have used cap-and-invest funding and what role agriculture should play in future climate investments. Committee chairs framed the issue as balancing climate goals, food production, rural economic vitality, and the fact that agriculture was not specifically funded in the recent cap-and-invest reauthorization. The first panel from CDFA and the Legislative Analyst’s Office described the state’s climate-smart agriculture portfolio, including Healthy Soils, SWEEP, the Dairy Methane Reduction Program, and Alternative Manure Management, and explained that GGRF revenues are now more constrained and may not fully support all tiered programs. LAO emphasized that agriculture is about 8% of California’s emissions, that most ag emissions are outside the cap, and that the Legislature should consider program effectiveness, the role of incentives, and GGRF priorities. CDFA testified that roughly $727 million has been invested in its flagship climate-smart ag programs, producing estimated reductions of 31 million metric tons of CO2e, 1.6 million acre-feet of water savings, and about 4,000 projects. The department said technical assistance is essential because farmers face risk when adopting new practices, and noted new Proposition 4 funding for Healthy Soils, SWEEP, and a regional farm equipment sharing program. University researchers then presented economic and methane-reduction analyses: UC Berkeley’s Dr. Hill described working landscapes as a major economic driver, while UC Davis’ Dr. Kibreab outlined dairy methane reduction pathways, including herd efficiency, digesters, alternative manure management, and emerging feed additives such as 3-NOP and seaweed, arguing that incentive-based programs have helped California move toward its methane goals. A later panel featured sharply different views on dairy digesters. Phoebe Seton argued that digesters worsen air and water quality, encourage manure liquefaction, and are an inefficient use of public funds, while CalCAN’s Brian Schobey and agricultural representatives said programs like AMP, SWEEP, Healthy Soils, FPIP, and the Farmer Program deliver measurable emissions reductions plus co-benefits such as water savings, lower energy costs, and improved air quality. Farm and industry witnesses stressed that stable, incentive-based funding helps family farms remain viable, supports co-investment, and should be treated as a partnership rather than a regulatory stick. No votes or formal actions were taken; the hearing ended with public comment and a continued call for future funding and policy discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• These are great programs.
• So we have them programming at Persevere. These are great programs.
• I didn't even go into the sort of justice programming or victim impact programming.
• So, medication programming, we've talked about our medication program.
• So, medication programming, we've talked about our medication program.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The commission met with a new member from Prisoners’ Legal Services and approved the July 11 minutes. The main presentation came from Department of Correction Commissioner Sean Jenkins and Deputy Commissioner Mitzie Peterson, who gave an overview of DOC facilities, population trends, and the department’s broad mission, including sentenced prisoners, pretrial detainees, civil commitments, Bridgewater State Hospital, and the Section 35 program. They noted the custody population has fallen from about 10,000 in 2016 to roughly 6,000–6,600, while the share serving first- or second-degree sentences has increased. They also reviewed the department’s facility footprint, including Souza-Baranowski, MCI Norfolk, MCI Framingham, Bridgewater, and the planned transfer of the Section 35 program to Health and Human Services by the end of 2026. A large portion of the discussion focused on programming, education, health care, and reentry. DOC described tablet access for all incarcerated people, free phone calls, email, and more than 330,000 hours of educational, vocational, and reentry use. They highlighted partnerships with colleges and universities such as Tufts, Boston College, Emerson, and others, along with HiSET completion, vocational training, and programs like The Last Mile and Persevere. Health care spending was discussed in detail, including a total annual health-related contract cost of about $300 million, with separate contracts for prison health care, Bridgewater State Hospital, MassAQC, and MAT services. DOC said it has nearly eradicated Hep C and MRSA and now offers all three FDA-approved MAT medications, including long-acting injectables when clinically indicated. Commissioners also asked about specialized programming, language and disability access on tablets, and how programming is distributed across facilities. DOC explained that nothing is mandatory, but program participation is encouraged and can affect parole consideration. Staff described assessments using COMPAS, criminal thinking interventions, trauma-related treatment, and specialized units for emerging adults, mental health, and substance use. The department said programming costs were about $101 million in fiscal year 2025, or roughly 12% of the operating budget, excluding health care. Members praised the elimination of restrictive housing and the rollout of body-worn cameras, while DOC said the cameras required new policy and union negotiations but are now used for training, accountability, and de-escalation. The meeting ended with a plan for DOC to return in September with more detailed information on SAUs, programming statistics, and facility structure, and the commission voted to adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our Strategic Shared Initiatives Program is now, like the Fiscal Health Monitoring Program, an ongoing
• The program serves as California's principal state financial aid program, providing need-based grants
• Scholarship Program, and all the other important state financial aid programs.
• We provided you... ...program and all the other important state financial aid programs.
• Parent PLUS Loan Program.

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Education heard updates on higher education issues, beginning with California State University’s turnaround plans for seven campuses with enrollment declines. CSU said overall enrollment is growing systemwide, but some campuses, especially in Northern California, face structural declines tied to demographics and community college pipelines. The plans focus on reengaging stopped-out and adult learners, expanding partnerships and guaranteed admissions, improving retention and student support, and reducing costs through program suspensions, hiring freezes, shared services, and procurement consolidation. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the strategies were reasonable but urged regular legislative updates, and the Department of Finance had no additional comments. Committee members emphasized the need for implementation oversight, written updates, and attention to student outreach, financial aid, and privacy concerns around AI tools used in recruitment. The committee then reviewed the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education’s request for a $10 million General Fund appropriation to repay litigation-related borrowing. Department of Consumer Affairs and bureau staff said the bureau has a long-standing structural deficit, has already cut positions and shifted some costs, and that the General Fund backfill would reduce future fee increases on institutions. The LAO opposed the request, arguing the bureau can cover near-term costs with its existing loan and that litigation costs should remain the responsibility of the regulated entities through fees. Finance supported the one-time backfill as a unique situation that would lower fee increases and avoid passing litigation costs on to schools and students. Members asked about preventing a repeat of the problem, and bureau staff said they are pursuing fee increases through the sunset review and have strengthened internal policies and disability accommodation practices. The subcommittee also heard a broad update on Cal Grant funding and student aid. The California Student Aid Commission, UC, CSU, and the community colleges described Cal Grant as essential to affordability, but the LAO noted spending has grown faster than historical averages and said the state likely lacks capacity for major expansion in the near term. The segments highlighted the importance of state aid in covering tuition and living costs, and raised concerns about federal changes to student loans and Pell Grants, especially the elimination of Grad PLUS for some graduate students and limits on part-time borrowing. Committee members pressed for data on students who are eligible but not served by current Cal Grant rules, including adult learners and students affected by age and merit restrictions, and asked for analysis of phased-in implementation of the Cal Grant Equity Framework. Finance said full implementation would cost hundreds of millions of dollars and that affordability remains part of the state’s multi-year compact with the segments. Finally, the committee began discussion of the Middle Class Scholarship Program. CSAC and the UC and CSU said the program is a key part of affordability and debt reduction, especially after the 2022 reforms that expanded awards to total cost of attendance and improved administration. They warned that cutting funding by more than half would reduce award coverage from 35% to 17.5% of cost of attendance and could affect enrollment and persistence, particularly for middle-income students who do not qualify for other need-based aid. The segments also noted that recent administrative changes have reduced award revisions and campus workload, but that data exchange and award volatility remain challenges.

Transcript Highlights:

• and the adult education program.
• This program expands upon the current Pell Grant program, but has some key differences.
• This program expands upon the current Pell Grant program, but has some key differences.
• auto repair programs, CNA programs.
• funding for the program.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So in my opinion, Programs and cutting funds for those programs.
• These programs The Housing and Disability Advocacy Program and the Community Care Expansion Program.
• program.
• The CCE program consists of two programs, in effect, the capital The CCE program consists of two programs
• program.

Summary: The joint informational hearing focused on the impact of H.R. 1 on older Californians and related county administration issues. Chair Jackson and Chair Addis opened by emphasizing California’s rapidly aging population and the need to protect seniors’ access to food, health care, housing, and in-home support services. Testimony from the Department of Social Services, Department of Health Care Services, and Department of Aging described how H.R. 1 would expand work and reporting requirements in CalFresh and Medi-Cal, increase redeterminations, and create new eligibility barriers. Witnesses and advocates warned that these changes could lead to large coverage losses, especially for adults ages 55 to 64, people experiencing homelessness, caregivers, and some immigrant groups, while also increasing administrative burden on counties. The LAO noted that many provisions do not directly apply to Californians 65 and older, but highlighted indirect effects and some direct impacts, including a new home equity limit for certain long-term care recipients and narrower immigration eligibility rules. Committee members pressed the administration and counties on how exemptions would be identified and implemented, whether data systems could automatically protect eligible people, and how outreach would reach older adults, women, LGBTQ seniors, and people with limited digital access. DHCS and CDSS said they are working to use existing data, cross-program information sharing, and human-centered communications to maximize exemptions and reduce churn, including text outreach, print and radio campaigns, and navigator support. Members also raised concerns about the need for legal aid and county eligibility workers to help people navigate complex rules, and requested updated analyses on the number of people likely to lose both Medi-Cal and CalFresh and the broader human and system impacts. No votes were taken. The second major topic was the administration’s proposal to shift some future IHSS costs to counties by establishing a statewide baseline for average authorized hours per case. CDSS said the proposal is intended to improve consistency in assessments and not reduce services, while counties and labor groups strongly opposed it, arguing that rising hours reflect real increases in need, an aging and higher-acuity caseload, and state-mandated assessment tools rather than county error. County representatives said the proposal would strain already limited local revenues, worsen the effects of H.R. 1, and could force cuts to other safety-net services. Committee members questioned the proposal’s timing and impact, but the hearing ended without action, with the chairs asking for continued updates, additional analysis, and more information before May Revision.

Transcript Highlights:

• From the program.
• not a criminal justice program, a health care program.
• And this is Program, a health care program, and this is not just one person.
• This is a program regarding environmental assessments. This is a program.
• with respect to the program.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit Committee held an oversight hearing on the state auditor’s October 2024 report on California’s Forensic Conditional Release Program (CONREP) for sexually violent predators. Members and witnesses discussed public safety, the long delays in finding community housing, the role of local housing committees, and the Department of State Hospitals’ oversight of Liberty Healthcare, which operates much of the program. Several legislators from rural and high-desert districts said their communities have been disproportionately affected by placements and questioned why many placements end up in remote areas. State Auditor Grant Parks said the audit found that CONREP participants were convicted of new offenses less often than sexually violent predators who were unconditionally released, but that 18 of 56 participants had been revoked and returned to state hospitals for noncompliance. He said it took an average of 17 months to place current participants in the community, with 20 additional people awaiting placement for an average of 20 months, and that the program incurred significant pre-placement costs. Parks also said local officials were often unclear about their role, DSH had not given clear guidance at the time of the audit, and California lacks a transitional housing option used in some other states. He reported that DSH had implemented four of the five audit recommendations, while declining the recommendation to explore state-owned transitional housing. DSH Director Stephanie Clendendon and Liberty representative Ken Carabello defended the program as a court-ordered, highly supervised treatment model intended to reduce reoffending and support reintegration. They said DSH is actively involved in placement review, that Liberty searches countywide under statutory restrictions, and that community feedback and court approval are part of the process. DSH said it has now implemented guidance for housing committee designees, formal program reviews, an outcome tracker, and an analysis of whether to separate some Liberty services into different contracts. DSH continued to oppose transitional housing, arguing it would not solve the core siting and statutory problems and would add cost. Several members remained critical, arguing the program is broken, costly, and unfairly concentrated in certain communities, and some called for major statutory changes or suspension of the program.

Transcript Highlights:

• Need to connect to our programs.
• another program.
• for Immigrants, Foster Care Kinship Guardianship Assistance Program, Adoption Assistance Program, Refugee
• The federal program CSD...
• The programs are not entitlement programs, and the funding California receives is limited compared to

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• program, right?
• program?
• Hazelwood Legacy Program.
• Program.
• Create their own programs.

Bills: SB1, SB 1

Keywords: appropriations, budget, state funding, education, healthcare, infrastructure, campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Over the years, programs such as the Healthy Soils Program, the Soil Program, the State Water Efficiency
• Program, the Dairy Methane Reduction Program, and the Alternative Manure Management Program have delivered
• Habitat Program, our Organic Transition Program, and the Conservation Agriculture Planning Grant Program
• But, you know, the SWEEP program, the FARMER program, SALT program, those have all been beneficial.
• solid program.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• TIMELINE AND PROGRAM TIMELINE AS IT HAS BEEN ROLLED OUT IN THE FLORIDA MEDICAID PROGRAM.
• PROGRAM.
• SEE HOW THE PACE PROGRAM COMPARES FOR LONG TERM CARE PROGRAMS.
• >> JUST PROGRAMS IN GENERAL.
• IF PEOPLE DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE PROGRAM THE PROGRAM WILL NOT BE HELPFUL TO THEM.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• programs.
• those programs.
• So many low-producing programs actually don't have dedicated faculty to those programs.
• So they're great programs.
• and said, we want a program.

Summary: The Higher Ed Funding Committee met to review a proposed process for identifying and addressing low-producing academic programs, then moved into discussion of draft funding formulas for the university system. Lisa Johnson of the ND University System described how other states and systems define low-producing programs, emphasizing multi-year enrollment and completion thresholds, cost and workforce review, and the role of governing boards. She reported that North Dakota institutions already review programs in varying cycles, often use shared resources and stackable credentials to keep low-enrollment programs viable, and cited recent system actions over five years: 100 programs placed on inactivation, 75 terminated, and 384 new programs created. Committee members raised concerns about workforce-critical programs, duplication, exemptions, and whether the legislature or the State Board of Higher Education should drive the process. The chair said he wanted the board to bring a detailed proposal to the June meeting and suggested the legislature may use funding leverage, including a possible holdback, to encourage the review process. The committee then heard a Legislative Council presentation on a draft funding formula for UND and NDSU. The proposal used fall census FTE enrollment, with a placeholder rate of $7,000 per undergraduate FTE and $10,500 per graduate/professional FTE, plus incentives for completions in high-demand fields and research productivity. Alex from Legislative Council explained that the formula also included separate treatment for research funding, external grants, and capital building tiers, and that the MD program at UND would remain fixed funding outside the formula. Members questioned the use of the placeholder rates, the in-demand program list, the treatment of external grants, and how the proposal compared with current appropriations. The chair noted that the formula numbers were illustrative and not final budget amounts. A second draft formula for the other nine institutions was also reviewed. It used fall census FTE with no weighted economic factor, a higher undergraduate rate of $8,750 per FTE, and completion incentives for in-demand credentials and all other credentials. Members noted that the proposal would benefit some institutions, such as Bismarck State College, while reducing funding for others, such as Mayville State, and questioned whether the same structure should apply across institutions with very different missions and sizes. Committee discussion focused on fairness, hold-harmless concerns, and whether the nine institutions should be grouped differently. The committee did not take formal action, but the chair indicated the formulas would continue to be discussed later in the meeting and in future work.

Transcript Highlights:

• program.
• And so we are, we have a new NOFA program through our MHP program. So we are not at zero.
• We have a lot of programs.
• program, the CERNA Farm Worker Program, and the homeless housing rescue fund.
• low-income housing tax credit program and the multifamily housing program.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Programs.
• auto repair programs, CNA programs.
• auto repair programs, CNA programs.
• Also, though this program is more targeted than the program.
• in that program.

Summary: The committee heard an overview of the May Revision’s Proposition 98 changes for K-12 and community colleges. The Department of Finance said the minimum guarantee rises by $6.4 billion over the Governor’s Budget across the three-year window, with higher guarantees in each year, full payment of the prior settle-up, and larger deposits into the school rainy-day fund. The LAO said the revenue and LCFF updates were reasonable, but urged caution about the settle-up approach and recommended using more of the available funding to protect ongoing programs and build budget resilience. Members focused heavily on the size of the proposed $3.9 billion settle-up, the $10.3 billion reserve deposit, declining K-12 enrollment, and how much of the new funding should be ongoing versus one-time. The committee then reviewed the community colleges portion of the budget. Finance described the May Revision’s higher SCFF COLA, additional funding for enrollment growth, a student support block grant, apprenticeship adjustments, and continued funding for deferred maintenance, Calbright, Common Cloud, and credit for prior learning. The Chancellor’s Office supported the core investments but asked for more funding for enrollment growth, changes to the growth formula, and a COLA for Student Equity and Achievement. The LAO recommended prioritizing the statutory COLA increase, noted that more than half of districts are already above current-year growth targets, and said the new adult learner demonstration project should be rejected because districts already have tools to support similar services. Members also discussed a $52 million current-year apportionment shortfall, which Finance said was discovered too late for the May Revision and would need to be addressed later. Finally, the committee took up the proposed implementation of the federal Workforce Pell program. Finance proposed one-time funding for the California Student Aid Commission and Cradle to Career to build eligibility and data systems, along with trailer bill changes to set up state approval processes. CSAC said the program is promising but highly complex, that California lacks the needed infrastructure, and that the state will need emergency regulations, data linkages, and ongoing funding beyond the one-time proposal. The LAO agreed that some initial funding is needed but warned that the amounts and ongoing costs remain uncertain and that the Legislature should carefully draft the trailer bill language. Members asked about timing, other states’ actions, and how the state would ensure the program is ready for students and institutions.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:55:47.599><c> to</c> programs under the NHP program to programs under the NHP program to sustain
• program.
• ><c> will</c> program, our groundbreaking program will program, our groundbreaking program will cease
• The knowledge studies program, a culturally based STEM program that provides educational programming
• The knowledge studies program, a culturally based STEM program that provides educational programming

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: This joint informational briefing on Act 310 grants and aid focused on organizations describing how federal funding cuts, Medicaid/SNAP changes, and related policy shifts are affecting their services and budgets. Committee members explained there would be no Q&A, testimony would be limited to one minute, and in-person participants would be heard before Zoom callers. Members repeatedly asked testifiers to identify the amount of federal funding lost or at risk. Testimony came from a wide range of nonprofits and community providers, including Aloha Care, Hawaii Bicycling League, Hawaii Literacy, Hawaii Youth Symphony, Healthy Mothers Healthy Babies Coalition of Hawaii, the Tsunami Museum, The Kohala Center, West Hawaii Community Health Center, West Hawaii Region Hospital Foundation, Sounding Joy Music Therapy, Big Brothers Big Sisters Hawaii, Dynamic Community Solutions, Feeding Hawaii Together, Girl Scouts of Hawaii, Hawaii Disability Rights Center, Hawaii Youth Services Network, Hawaiian Lending and Investments, Homana, Honolulu Theatre for the Youth, Kids Hurt Too Hawaii, and Kokua Kalihi Valley. Most described reduced or threatened federal support and requested state funding to maintain services such as health care access, food security, disaster preparedness, literacy and digital inclusion, youth mentoring, arts education, housing, and climate or agricultural resilience. Several speakers emphasized direct impacts on vulnerable populations, including kūpuna, low-income families, immigrants, homeless youth, and people with disabilities. Requests ranged from relatively small planning or program grants to multi-million-dollar stabilization asks, with some organizations citing specific losses such as reduced Medicaid or USDA funding, canceled EPA or FEMA support, or expiring federal grants. No votes or formal committee actions were taken during the briefing.