Transcript Highlights:

• In 2025, we are at about $2,800 for our average premium. So not a huge growth in average premium.
• In 2025, we are at about $2,800 for our average premium. So not a huge growth in average premium.
• But $682 was our premium.
• But we need to charge an appropriate premium.
• In 2021, our average premium was $1,139.

Summary: The Assembly Insurance Committee held an oversight hearing on the California Fair Plan, focused on the plan’s rapid growth, its financial stability after the January Southern California wildfires, and its role as the insurer of last resort. Fair Plan officials explained that the plan was created in 1968, is a not-for-profit involuntary association of licensed property insurers, and is intended to be a temporary safety net until policyholders can return to the admitted market. They emphasized that the plan is not a state agency or taxpayer-funded, but is regulated by the Department of Insurance and supported by member-company assessments if claims exceed available funds. Victoria Roach and Armand Feliciano said the Fair Plan has grown sharply since 2018 and especially after market pullbacks by major insurers, reaching about 575,000 policies and roughly $600 billion in exposure by spring 2025. They noted that growth is increasingly occurring in lower wildfire-risk areas, where the plan can sometimes be cheaper than the voluntary market, and said this undermines depopulation back into the private market. They also discussed recent policy expansions, including coverage for farms, higher residential and commercial limits, and pending or proposed changes such as AB 290, SB 525, and AB 226, which would add tools like a line of credit and bond access. A major portion of the hearing addressed the January wildfire losses and the plan’s financial response. Fair Plan officials said they assessed member insurers for $1 billion after determining claims and cash flow would exceed available resources, and that the process was approved quickly and paid smoothly, with more than 80% of the assessment collected within 10 days. They also described the reinsurance tower, the plan’s limited surplus, and the need for actuarially sound rates to reduce future reliance on assessments. On claims handling, they said the plan has received over 5,500 claims from the fires, has paid more than $2.9 billion so far, expects total payments near $4 billion, and has focused on advancing payments quickly for total losses and other urgent needs. Members questioned the plan’s solvency, the growth in non-wildfire areas, claim denials, smoke-loss coverage, and how depopulation works. Roach said most closed claims without payment were duplicates rather than denials, and that smoke claims require direct physical loss under the policy, with coverage determined case by case. Public commenters from the California Building Industry Association and the Independent Insurance Agents and Brokers of California said the Fair Plan’s growth reflects a weak voluntary market, inadequate rates, and insurer fear of future assessments, and urged support for rate increases and AB 226. The hearing concluded with no vote, but with a commitment from Fair Plan officials to follow up on unanswered questions and continue providing more transparency through public data and website disclosures.

Transcript Highlights:

• But we've stabilized the industry.
• Rates have stabilized. Also, the number of lawsuits that have gone down.
• They've stabilized. Before you can go down, you've got to stabilize.
• But at the moment, we have citizens who have paid their insurance premiums.
• We do, in our premiums.

Summary: The committee met to hear five banking and insurance-related bills. HB 1549, an Office of Financial Regulation agency bill to help more efficiently regulate financial institutions, was amended to match Senate companion language and then passed unanimously. HB 1231 would extend physician payment and prior-authorization protections similar to a prior dental law, including limits on virtual credit card payments as the sole payment method; physicians and medical groups supported it as a way to reduce fees and retroactive denials, while insurers were not heard in opposition, and the bill passed unanimously. The committee then heard HB 999, which would make gold and silver legal tender and allow transactions in bullion through electronic debit mechanisms. The sponsor and several proponents framed it as an inflation hedge and economic freedom measure, while questions focused on definitions, transaction costs, and vendor participation. The bill passed on a mostly party-line vote, with one member voting no. The committee also approved HM 4363, a memorial urging Congress to establish a sovereign wealth fund; the sponsor described it as a way to steward national wealth, and the memorial passed with one dissenting vote. Finally, the committee took up HB 1551, which would create a prevailing-party attorney fee framework in insurance contract disputes. The sponsor argued it would restore balance, deter meritless litigation, and help consumers with valid claims recover fees, while insurers, business groups, and defense attorneys warned it would revive one-way fee shifting, increase litigation, and raise premiums. Consumer advocates and some members supported it as necessary to give policyholders meaningful recourse. After debate, the bill passed favorably, with one member voting no.

Transcript Highlights:

• increase if upon renewal any premium increase if upon renewal premiums<00:10:33.120> are<00:10
• explanation for certain premium explanation for certain premium increases<00:10:53.360> during
• Second is that COMIC would have to pay premium taxes, which would increase the premiums otherwise charged
• <00:35:01.560> taxes comic would have to pay premium taxes comic would have to pay premium
• > inside<01:04:24.599> or premium stabilization fund is inside or premium stabilization fund

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee opened by outlining hearing procedures, including a two-minute limit for live testimony, a request not to repeat written testimony, and a reminder about decorum. The first bill heard was SB 697, which would create a nonrefundable individual income tax credit for expenses to retrofit residences with wind-resistive devices. The Insurance Division said it supported the concept but noted it may need an appropriation or outside expertise to develop certification standards, while the Department of Taxation said the bill should retain a third-party certification requirement if the Insurance Division cannot administer the credit. The Hawaii Insurers Council supported the bill, and the Tax Foundation suggested a subsidy-style program would be more efficient than a tax credit and criticized the bill’s 100% credit structure. A testifier in support argued the measure would help homeowners fortify houses against hurricanes and reduce shelter demand; written testimony from several others, including HIEMA, was noted as supportive. The committee then moved through SB 76, which would require the Hawaii Property Insurance Association to provide commercial property coverage after two private-market denials, and SB 83, which would require insurers to give advance written premium-change notices and explanations to common-interest community policyholders and the insurance commissioner, along with a report on premium increases. For SB 76, the State Insurance Division stood on its written comments, and testimony in support came from Michael Honda, the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies, and Jessica Herzog. SB 83 drew more extensive discussion: the Insurance Division supported the need for better transparency, while the Hawaii Insurers Council opposed the bill, arguing that agents—not insurers—typically communicate with AOAO boards and that the measure could worsen an already difficult market. Insurance Division staff acknowledged widespread complaints from condo associations about lack of transparency and said the division had received many calls about premium increases and nonrenewals. The discussion on SB 83 expanded into broader concerns about condo insurance, nonrenewals, surplus lines, and the difficulty of getting timely explanations for large premium increases. Committee members and testifiers described older buildings struggling to fund repairs and upgrades while facing steep insurance costs, and some urged the committee to craft baseline statutory protections for unit owners. The Insurance Division said surplus lines serve a critical gap-filling role and warned against regulating that market in a way that could slow access to coverage. No votes or final committee actions were taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• It allows TWA to borrow from the state's economic stabilization fund.
• As continued premium increases hurt residents and businesses alike along the coast.
• premiums for communities in Tier One counties.
• So your, your first, Is your CRT money that going in part of the premiums going into that.
• The only way to stabilize the property. Insurance market is to stop the losses.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, Senate Bill 1330 curbs artificial premium inflation that comes from excess charges on some of these
• Do you believe this bill will impact premium costs for enrollees at all?
• The goal of Senate Bill 1332 is simply to allow health insurers to waive employer premiums.
• Current law does require employees to be responsible for the health insurance premium until the end of
• Such notification causes businesses to be responsible for an additional monthly premium, resulting in

Bills: SB95, SB268, SB493, SB619, SB660, SB922, SB984, SB1098, SB1188, SB1307, SB1332, SB1822

Keywords: immunization, written informed consent, civil liability, health care provider, vaccine compensation, administrative penalty, health care, licensing, complaint procedure, disciplinary action, law enforcement, pharmacy benefit manager, PBM, gag clause, prescription drug pricing, out-of-pocket cost, cash price, pharmacist, pharmacy, prescription drug benefit

Transcript Highlights:

• We're looking at 60,000 Minnesotans losing health care coverage just because of the increased premium
• Healthcare coverage just because of the increased premium, the loss of those tax credits.
• <00:03:26.800> benefits guarantees that those premium benefits guarantees that those premium
• cannot afford insurance if these premium cannot afford insurance if these premium tax<00:04:43.040
• rent sta stability. um rent assistance. rent sta stability. um rent assistance.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I ask you to include it now because stability can wait.
• And then on issue 8, we also oppose the proposal to increase premiums to $50.
• Communities will not be able to afford these premiums.
• Additionally, we should not be taking this opportunity to increase the premium.
• Additionally, we should not be taking this opportunity to increase the premium.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The subcommittee first heard May Revision items for child support, child care, and related human services. The Department of Child Support Services described two technical adjustments, which the LAO said raised no concerns. The Department of Social Services then walked through child care proposals, including a shift in how federal and Proposition 64 funding reductions would be absorbed, a 2.01% COLA, disaster-related child care infrastructure grants, an increase in in-contract administrative support costs for alternative payment agencies, reversion of prospective-pay implementation funding after a federal rule change, a one-time allocation to cover the first quarter of Cost of Care Plus payments in the next fiscal year, reappropriation for existing infrastructure grant closeout work, and estimates of unspent child care funds. The department also outlined trailer bill language on a single rate structure, site safety and emergency procedures, CalWORKs child care data sharing, and child care oversight. The LAO recommended that the Legislature seek more justification for shifting reductions from General Child Care to the Alternative Payment Program, noting that CAP reductions affect more slots and that General Child Care has had significant unspent funds. It supported removing prospective-pay funding, but recommended rejecting the administrative cost shift to a percentage-based rate because it could create future General Fund pressure. It also suggested the Legislature review alignment between the disaster grants and the child care infrastructure program. Senators and members pressed the administration on why the budget would reduce child care slots and COLA percentages while the state still has waitlists and unspent funds, and questioned the need for early funding of Cost of Care Plus payments and the move from a flat administrative amount to a percentage. Public commenters, including providers, advocates, county offices, and infrastructure partners, urged full COLA funding, preservation of child care slots, support for prospective pay, and continued investment in child care access and facilities. After a short recess, the committee moved to Part B on health and heard the Department of State Hospitals. DSH presented a May Revision budget of $3.2 billion and described proposals for a central utility plant replacement at Metropolitan State Hospital, an electronic health record implementation, reduced county bed billing authority due to phased-in LPS bed capacity, limited contract exemption authority for online clinical subscriptions, reversion of prior-year unspent operating funds, and a workforce development proposal shifting some costs to Behavioral Health Services Act funds, including support for an additional psychiatric training cohort at Napa. The department also outlined IST-related savings and a trailer bill to remove the sunset on the independent placement panel program.

Transcript Highlights:

• For many families and individuals, car insurance premiums can be an insurmountable financial burden and
• Additionally, Lifeline insurance program could provide stability and fairness in the marketplace.
• <00:04:44.600> are companies companies whose premiums are companies companies whose premiums
• So if you have more money and better credit, you are going to have a better premium cost.
• <00:21:02.039> are we are being our insurance premiums are we are being our insurance premiums

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• farmers face both high premiums and high deductibles?
• /c><00:03:57.159> high farmers face both High premiums and high farmers face both High premiums
• successful program which has stabilized successful program which has stabilized the<01:11:51.800
• <01:11:56.480> thank premiums thank premiums thank you<01:11:59.000> thank you thank you
• <01:25:04.719> tax we have made enhanced premium tax we have made enhanced premium tax credits

Bills: HF10, HF27

Keywords: undocumented immigrants, state funding, MinnesotaCare, scholarship ineligibility, state assistance, permit to carry, concealed carry, handgun permit, firearm permit, pistol training, sheriff, application process, electronic filing, mail application, fax submission, certified mail, certified delivery, gun rights, Second Amendment, firearms regulation

Transcript Highlights:

• , ...a 22% decrease in their annual insurance premiums and a measurable reduction in uninsured losses
• Can you imagine if we were to ever get to a 22% decrease in your insurance premiums for hardened homes
• Lives and livelihoods have been saved, and our market has largely stabilized.
• This underscores the need to preserve operational tools that ensure financial stability.
• We can answer questions like: Are some types of places seeing larger premium increases than others?

Summary: The Assembly Insurance Committee met to consider several bills focused on California’s insurance market, wildfire resilience, and consumer protections. AB 888, the California Safe Homes Act, was heard first. Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara and Alabama Insurance Commissioner Mark Fowler testified in support, describing state grant programs that help homeowners harden roofs and create defensible space, with the goal of reducing losses and improving insurance affordability and availability. Supporters from the insurance industry, local government, and the Rebuild Paradise Foundation also backed the bill, and committee members emphasized the need for more incentives for mitigation. The bill passed the committee on a do pass motion and was sent to Appropriations. AB 290, by Assemblymember Bauer-Kahan, would require the FAIR Plan to offer automatic payments and address non-renewal grace-period issues. The author described her own experience being forced onto the FAIR Plan and facing a large premium increase, while Consumer Federation of California called the bill common-sense consumer protection. The FAIR Plan opposed unless amended, saying it was already handling major wildfire claims and other operational demands and requested more time and changes to the non-renewal grace-period language. Members across the committee supported the bill as a needed modernization measure, and it passed as amended to Appropriations. AB 1339, by Assemblymember Gonzalez, would direct the Department of Insurance to study insurance availability and pricing for affordable housing providers and report policy recommendations. Supporters from affordable housing organizations said rising premiums were forcing providers to cut services, defer maintenance, and use reserves, threatening housing stability for low-income residents. The bill passed as amended to Appropriations. AB 646, by Assemblymember Wallace, also passed to Appropriations; it concerns disclosure related to motor vehicle protection products and catalytic converter theft deterrence, with support from auto dealers and industry groups. The committee also approved AB 1531 on consent. Members later added on to the record in support of the bills, and the hearing concluded without recorded opposition votes on the measures that advanced.

Transcript Highlights:

• So figure 2 is a breakdown of $100 in qualified monthly premiums.
• About $3 is due to the premium tax, and $3.75 is the premium surtax.
• The report shows how the New Mexico premium assistance program works.
• HCAF revenue from the premium surtax has far exceeded the insurance subsidy needs.
• And for those that remain, they'll see a premium increase of about $1900 per person.

Transcript Highlights:

• Their premiums really didn't change much.
• It's Thomas for the premium based on the company's private prior your premium.
• So the tele matter reimbursement premium for premium is received by the fine can change each year.
• also be including the costs and to the premium.
• And then any premium that we expect to see through the end And then any premium that we expect to see

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:09:33.040> for one district doesn't spike premiums for one district doesn't spike premiums
• deductible while paying monthly premiums deductible while paying monthly premiums of<00:35:46.200
• in monthly health care premiums. in monthly health care premiums.
• So, 85% contribution of premiums for families, 95% for single premiums.
• It's stability for our school districts. It's stability for our school districts.

Bills: HF3119

Keywords: teacher compensation, educational staff, unlicensed staff, minimum wage, inflation adjustment, education finance, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• It's a lot of the insurance premium.
• <00:04:26.960> Our that our premium is increasing. Our that our premium is increasing.
• <00:04:33.120> of another indication of the stability of another indication of the stability
• nature of the business as premiums nature of the business as premiums collected<00:59:09.839>
• <01:08:22.880> when rate policies at a higher premium when rate policies at a higher premium

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Call to Order and Roll Call 00:00:15 Department of Insurance Update 00:01:39 Department of Financial Institutions Update 00:37:07 Insurance Industry Update 00:54:50 Credit Union Industry Update 01:10:53, 958, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum, approved the September 16 minutes, and then received an update from Insurance Commissioner Sharon Clark and staff on the Department of Insurance. Clark reviewed department activity, including growth in premium volume and licensing, consumer complaints and recoveries, and a rise in fraud referrals. She said the department has 66 open fraud cases and described common schemes such as staged auto accidents, inflated repair or cleanup charges, and roofing scams. She also said the department’s investigators often prepare strong cases but face reluctance from local prosecutors, especially in Fayette and Jefferson counties, to pursue them. Clark reported favorable workers’ compensation news, saying rates will decrease 9.7% next year for the 20th straight year. She contrasted that with a difficult property insurance market driven by storms, reinsurance costs, inflation, labor shortages, and litigation, but said Kentucky’s market remains relatively stable, citing the Kentucky Fair Plan’s small number of policies. She then warned of significant 2026 health insurance premium increases on the exchange: 16.1% for Molina, 23% for Anthem, and 37% for WCare, after CareSource withdrew. She said the rates were reviewed by actuaries and found fair, but that the biggest pressure point is the scheduled expiration of enhanced premium tax credits, which she said could leave about 90% of exchange enrollees facing a compounded increase. Members questioned Clark about fraud prosecution, the number of people in commercial versus public coverage, and the impact of expiring subsidies. Clark said the prosecution issue is mainly with Commonwealth attorneys and that rural counties are more cooperative than urban ones. She also said the health market is individually rated and that older enrollees would be hit harder, while the loss of tax credits could push some people out of the marketplace. One member asked about the attorney general’s recent opinion on SB 188, the PBM bill; staff said attorneys were still reviewing it. Clark closed by noting that Kentucky’s fraud and towing/storage legislation has become a model for other states.

Transcript Highlights:

• There's no stability of the plan.
• And that has premium uh increases.
• premiums just continue to rise for them. premiums just continue to rise for them.
• It's the the premium costs are going up.
• <01:03:17.039> since to me about driving the premiums since to me about driving the premiums

Bills: HF1546, HF2403, HF2389, HF2398

Keywords: fire safety, public safety, statewide fire code, code cleanup, repeal, obsolete statutes, matches, strike-anywhere matches, safety matches, match packaging, match storage, tent safety, flame resistant tents, public assembly tents, flammable materials, fire code modernization, Minnesota Statutes chapter 325F, commerce policy, financial institutions, insurance regulation

Transcript Highlights:

• That is the real health care crisis, not premiums.
• Governor DeSantis ...who pay health insurance premiums and taxes.
• If all of you had to start paying in, it would drive the premiums down.
• It will undoubtedly increase medical malpractice premiums for physicians in Florida.
• Rates have stabilized and are trending downwards. Your work is working.

Summary: The Judiciary Committee met to consider HB 6003, a bill to repeal Florida’s “free kill” law that limits certain survivors’ ability to recover non-economic damages in medical negligence wrongful death cases. The sponsor, Rep. Trabulsy, said the bill would restore access to the courts for a small class of families and noted the measure passed both chambers last year before being vetoed by the governor. She and supporters framed the bill as a fairness and constitutional issue, while opponents argued repeal would increase malpractice exposure, insurance costs, and pressure on physician access, especially in high-risk specialties and rural areas. Public testimony was sharply divided. Supporters included family members who described deaths they said were caused by medical negligence and who argued the current law denies accountability and equal treatment based on marital status or whether a decedent had minor children. Opponents included the Florida Hospital Association, Florida Medical Association, Florida Chamber, U.S. Chamber, Florida Insurance Council, and other health care and business groups, who warned that repeal could worsen already high malpractice premiums, contribute to physician shortages, and destabilize access to care. Several speakers on both sides discussed possible caps on non-economic damages as a compromise, though the bill itself was presented as a clean repealer with no amendments. During debate, several members spoke in support, emphasizing equal access to the courts and rejecting the idea that the law should treat some families differently from others. Opponents of the bill argued that the current system helps preserve market stability and that liability concerns, not the free kill law, are driving provider departures. After closing remarks from the sponsor, the committee voted 15 yeas and 1 nay to report HB 6003 favorably.

Transcript Highlights:

• Currently, we have a 2.4% premium tax in insurance.
• And that is going to feed back into reduced premiums.
• The cost that a customer pays is the premium plus the premium tax.
• And that is going to feed back into reduced premiums.
• The cost that a customer pays is the premium plus the premium tax.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Committee on Insurance held an informational hearing on how climate change, wildfire risk, and related catastrophes are affecting California’s insurance market, affordability, and availability. Chair and members framed the issue as a statewide challenge tied to resiliency, land use, utilities, legal liability, and the FAIR Plan. Senator Becker noted the hearing was connected to SB 254 and its recent report, while the Vice Chair emphasized that the state’s current regulatory framework limits flexibility and that industry testimony would also have been useful. Amy Bach of United Policyholders described worsening availability and affordability, driven by climate impacts, insurtech/risk scoring, inflation, and the growth of surplus lines coverage. She said the Sustainable Insurance Strategy is beginning to show progress, but the FAIR Plan remains too large and non-admitted carriers create concerns because they are less regulated and do not share FAIR Plan or guaranty fund obligations. She stressed that mitigation incentives, grants, and voluntary insurer rewards for wildfire-hardening are important, but that many households cannot afford the needed improvements. In response to questions, she said underinsurance remains a major problem, especially after recent fires, and suggested stronger insurer responsibility for replacement-cost estimates or broader replacement-cost endorsements. Actuary Nancy Watkins and Stanford’s Michael Wara argued that California must both reduce wildfire risk and allow actuarially sound pricing if it wants a healthier market. Watkins compared the market to a household with rising expenses and said the state needs a mitigation framework focused on the highest-risk communities, especially older neighborhoods and homes near the wildland-urban interface. Wara said premiums must roughly equal expected claims plus expenses, and that California is “burning down too many houses,” which drives both availability problems and higher rates. He highlighted the role of structure-to-structure spread, older housing stock, utility ignitions, and the need to focus on community hardening, not just vegetation management. Both speakers said mitigation should be targeted, science-based, and sustained rather than one-time or scattered. Frank Freebalt of Cal Poly and Michael Gullner of UC Berkeley continued the discussion on fire modeling and risk reduction. Freebalt said the problem is best understood as a structure ignition and urban conflagration problem, requiring integrated land-use, utility, and community mitigation, with evidence-based priorities and better analytics. He emphasized that the state should focus on the highest-risk intersections first and that targeted mitigation can multiply the effectiveness of suppression and evacuation resources. No votes or formal actions were taken; the hearing was informational and focused on testimony, questions, and policy discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:36:25.359> Premiums mortgage approval process. Premiums mortgage approval process.
• stability through home ownership. stability through home ownership.
• Chair. that uh drive the cost of premiums and that uh drive the cost of premiums and insurance<00:45:
• <00:48:32.240> any homeowner uh insurance premiums any homeowner uh insurance premiums any
• And it could it means stability.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The task force met on October 22, 2025, with a quorum present and several members participating remotely. Members approved the minutes from the previous meeting. Michelle Urick of the Legislative Coordinating Commission then gave an administrative update on proxy voting and the task force’s operating procedures. She said the enabling statute only authorizes the officially appointed member to act and vote, so proxy voting is not allowed, and votes must be cast in person at the meeting where the item is considered. She also said members may submit written positions, but not vote before or after a meeting. In response to concerns about attendance for future votes, the chair said the January meetings would be rescheduled if possible using a Doodle poll so more members could be present in person. The group also agreed to treat the revised document as operating procedures rather than a formal charter, with no separate adoption action needed at that time. The task force then moved into testimony on homeowners and commercial property insurance. Paul Edgar of Minnesota Realtors said rising insurance costs are adding to housing affordability pressures, citing an increase in the monthly principal, interest, taxes, and insurance payment on a median-priced Minnesota home from $1,622 in 2021 to $2,642 in September 2025. He said higher insurance costs and limited coverage can affect buyers’ financing, especially for condominiums and townhomes, and urged continued work on liability and insurance-related laws that may discourage condo development. He also referenced prior bipartisan reforms to Minnesota’s condominium construction defects law and said his organization supports further improvements to encourage more condo production. Keenan Ravery of the Minnesota Mortgage Association focused on how insurance requirements affect mortgage lending. He explained that lenders require insurance both at origination and throughout the life of the loan, with standards aimed at protecting collateral rather than providing full homeowners coverage. He said replacement-cost coverage has long been the norm, but recent issues with roofs, deductibles, HO-6 policies, and force-placed insurance have become pain points for consumers and lenders. He said his association is working with national trade groups on reforms that could allow more flexibility in coverage types and deductibles, and he expressed hope that Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Housing Finance Agency may announce policy changes in the coming months or by early 2026. No votes or substantive policy actions were taken beyond approving the minutes and agreeing to pursue scheduling adjustments for January.

Transcript Highlights:

• Each month for health insurance premiums, all of us are doing the same thing.
• , for whatever reason, they can't afford to pay the premium or they're not willing to pay it.
• Even charging a $1 premium likely would have some effect on enrollment.
• We oppose any premiums because we know payments of any amount cause people to lose coverage.
• LCHC opposes the proposed Medi-Cal freezes and the $30 premium.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We have the state premium subsidy program.
• We have the state premium subsidy program.
• The $1 premium subsidies.
• Premiums are about $600 a month.
• Some people have much higher premiums, and people have lower premiums.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Health held a May Revision hearing covering several health-related budget proposals and broader concerns about the state’s budget structure. The Chair opened by praising some May Revision changes, such as added health IT funding, county administration support tied to Medi-Cal changes, a delay in Medi-Cal cuts for some lawfully present immigrants, and additional support for Covered California subsidies, while criticizing proposed increases in Medi-Cal premiums, changes to senior eligibility, the lack of a Medi-Cal dental solution, and other reductions affecting counties, mobile crisis units, workforce incentives, and physician shortages. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the state’s budget condition remains weak despite progress on the structural deficit, and the Department of Finance said the May Revision uses a mix of reductions, reforms, revenue proposals, and fund shifts to cut out-year deficits. The committee first heard Department of State Hospitals proposals, including adjustments to county bed billing authority, contract exemption language for online clinical/pharmacy subscriptions, reversion of unspent funds, a revised Metro Central Utility Plant replacement project, electronic health record implementation, and workforce development funded partly through Behavioral Health Services Act resources. DSH also described savings and realignments in incompetent-to-stand-trial and conditional release programs, including extending the independent placement panel program and shifting funds to support additional bed capacity and a mental health rehab center. Members asked about the use of BHSA funds for workforce programs, and the department said the proposal would replace General Fund support with BHSA reimbursements. The Emergency Medical Services Authority proposed funding for statewide behavioral health crisis response guidance and for enterprise system development, and the Department of Managed Health Care proposed modernization of its complaint system and claims-settlement data system to improve oversight and comply with AB 3275. The largest discussion centered on the administration’s BHSA spending plan under Proposition 1, including state-directed prevention, workforce, and other uses, plus General Fund offsets for existing programs. The LAO questioned whether some proposed offsets fit Proposition 1’s non-supplant and eligible-use requirements, while the administration argued the uses were consistent with the measure and that the state-directed share can be adjusted annually. The Commission for Behavioral Health’s proposals drew the most public and member concern. The administration proposed cutting the commission’s Innovation Partnership Fund from $20 million to $10 million and reducing the Community Advocacy Program by $6.7 million, while redirecting BHSA dollars to other state purposes and direct services. Commissioners, advocates, and several members argued the cuts would weaken community voice, reduce support for underserved populations, and disrupt grants already in process; they also objected to using BHSA funds to backfill General Fund commitments. Public commenters, including youth, disability, behavioral health, LGBTQ, tribal, veteran, immigrant, and community-based organization representatives, overwhelmingly opposed the cuts and urged preservation of prevention, advocacy, mobile crisis, and innovation funding. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing.