|
Prepared by Precision Advocacy
As the legislature returns from Spring Recess next week, activity in Sacramento is expected to accelerate quickly, with both policy committees and budget subcommittees already well underway and poised to move into a more intensive phase. In the weeks leading up to recess, hearings laid important groundwork on major issues, including health and human services, homelessness, and emerging technologies, while also surfacing growing concerns about the fiscal and administrative pressures facing counties.
Budget negotiations are now beginning to take clearer shape ahead of the May Revision, with early hearings signaling significant tension around funding adequacy, particularly as federal policy changes intersect with state proposals. Testimony to date has consistently highlighted a central theme, that counties are increasingly serving as the primary implementation arm for new state and federal requirements, often without commensurate resources. This dynamic is particularly evident in health and human services, where changes tied to H.R. 1 and proposed IHSS adjustments are expected to increase workload, create enrollment instability, and expose counties to new fiscal risk.
The post-recess period will mark a critical inflection point in the legislative cycle. High-level proposals will begin to translate into concrete policy decisions, and counties and local governments will need to engage actively to shape outcomes on funding, implementation responsibilities, and program design.
Assembly Budget Subcommittee Hearing: Social Services, Health Care Services, & Aging
The March 25 joint budget subcommittee hearing provided a clear and increasingly urgent picture of how federal changes under H.R. 1, combined with the governor’s IHSS proposals, are expected to impact county-administered safety net programs, an issue with direct and disproportionate implications for counties like Orange County.
At a high level, the hearing was framed around the growing senior population and the compounding effects of federal policy changes on Medi-Cal, CalFresh, and IHSS. California is approaching a demographic inflection point, with older adults projected to reach roughly 9 million by 2040, placing sustained pressure on health and human services systems. The agenda itself reinforced this focus, centering on both federal impacts and a series of state IHSS proposals that would restructure cost responsibilities and program design.
From an Orange County perspective, the most consequential theme throughout the hearing was the shift of fiscal and administrative burden onto counties. Testimony from state departments and county representatives consistently underscored that H.R. 1 introduces significant new eligibility requirements, work mandates, and reporting obligations that will be implemented locally. The Department of Health Care Services estimated that these changes could result in hundreds of thousands of Medi-Cal coverage losses in the near term, growing to over one million Californians in later years, while also requiring counties to manage more frequent eligibility redeterminations and increased administrative workload.
This translates into a dual challenge – rising demand for services alongside reduced enrollment stability and higher administrative complexity. County systems, particularly social services agencies, will be responsible for implementing semiannual eligibility checks, verifying work requirements, and conducting outreach to prevent avoidable coverage loss. Notably, the administration acknowledged that the governor’s budget does not yet include sufficient funding for county welfare departments to carry out these responsibilities, raising immediate concerns about unfunded mandates and operational strain.
The IHSS proposals discussed during the hearing further intensify these concerns. The governor’s proposed changes, including cost shifts tied to assessed hours, elimination of certain supports like the Back-Up Provider System, and potential loss of residual coverage, were repeatedly flagged as creating new fiscal exposure for counties.
For Orange County, where IHSS demand continues to grow alongside an aging population, these changes could force difficult tradeoffs within the broader health and human services system. CSAC, the County Welfare Directors Association (CWDA), and SEIU all warned that counties may be required to redirect funding away from other critical programs, including behavioral health and housing services, to absorb IHSS cost increases, directly conflicting with the original purpose of the 2019 financing structure.
Another key theme was the intersection of aging, homelessness, and housing instability. Testimony highlighted that older adults are now the fastest-growing segment of the unhoused population and are increasingly reliant on county-administered programs like Home Safe and housing advocacy services. This trend is particularly salient in Orange County, where housing costs and service demand are already high, suggesting that any reduction in federal or state support could exacerbate local homelessness pressures among seniors.
Finally, the hearing reinforced the broader structural concern that counties are serving as the primary implementation arm for both state and federal policy changes without commensurate resources. CWDA testimony emphasized the need for significant new investments in county staffing and administration to prevent a “combined hunger and healthcare crisis,” highlighting that counties will be on the front lines of mitigating benefit loss and ensuring continuity of care.
In sum, the hearing underscored a convergence of risks – increased administrative workload, potential coverage losses among residents, rising demand for aging and housing services, and significant fiscal exposure tied to IHSS restructuring. Absent additional state funding or policy adjustments, these changes are likely to place sustained pressure on the County’s safety net programs and require strategic decisions about resource allocation, service prioritization, and advocacy moving forward.
Background
Senate Transportation Committee Informational Hearing on Autonomous Vehicles
The Senate Transportation Committee held an informational hearing on March 24 on autonomous vehicles (AVs), providing an overview of the current state of the technology and raising key questions about how to ensure safe and equitable deployment across California. The hearing, chaired by Senator Dave Cortese (D-San Jose), brought together industry representatives, safety advocates, labor, first responders, and state regulators to discuss both the promise and risks of AV expansion.
The hearing highlighted both the potential long-term benefits of AV technology and the immediate operational and public safety challenges that local jurisdictions will need to navigate as deployment expands beyond early pilot regions.
The first panel, focused on industry and safety perspectives, underscored a central tension in the AV space. Industry representatives emphasized that human behavior remains the leading cause of crashes and argued that AV technology has the potential to significantly reduce collisions and improve roadway safety over time. However, this view was sharply contrasted by testimony from safety experts and advocates, who raised concerns about the reliability of current systems and the gap between how the technology is marketed and how it performs in practice. Panelists highlighted issues such as “phantom braking,” limitations in object detection, including failure to recognize school buses, and the continued reliance on remote human operators, sometimes located outside the United States, raising concerns about oversight and accountability. Personal testimony from a crash survivor further reinforced the real-world consequences of these gaps, emphasizing the need for stronger safeguards and transparency.
The second panel, focused on public safety and workforce impacts, raised issues that are particularly relevant for transportation and emergency response systems. First responders described multiple incidents where AVs became immobilized during emergencies or obstructed access for police and fire personnel. These challenges are especially significant for a county like Orange, where high traffic volumes, complex roadway networks, and wildfire risk make rapid emergency response critical. Panelists also raised concerns about the reliability of current mitigation tools, such as company-operated hotlines, and called for stronger mechanisms, such as a public safety override, to allow first responders to directly manage AVs in emergency situations. At the same time, law enforcement representatives acknowledged potential benefits, including the use of AV-related technologies like drones to enhance response capabilities, but emphasized that public safety must remain the top priority as deployment continues.
Labor representatives and safety advocates also pointed to broader concerns around aggressive or unpredictable AV behavior, impacts on transportation-related jobs, and the adequacy of current regulatory approaches, particularly those that rely heavily on manufacturer-provided safety data. These issues could have downstream implications for Orange County’s workforce and goods movement sectors, particularly as AV technology expands into freight and delivery.
The final panel, consisting of state regulatory agencies, provided an overview of California’s current framework, which divides authority between the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) and the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). The DMV oversees testing and deployment, while the CPUC regulates commercial passenger services such as robotaxis. State officials noted ongoing rulemaking efforts, including new regulations for heavy-duty AVs and requirements that companies comply with law enforcement direction, support emergency responders, and implement geofencing where necessary. The DMV also reported that dozens of manufacturers currently hold testing permits, with a smaller number authorized for driverless deployment.
Importantly, the hearing also raised questions about the role of local governments in AV oversight. Senator Cortese specifically asked whether there is a rationale for incorporating local rulemaking authority alongside the state’s existing framework. While state regulators did not provide a definitive answer, the discussion signals a potential opening for counties to advocate for a more formal role, particularly in areas such as emergency response coordination, land use considerations, and local transportation planning.
Overall, the hearing reinforced that while AV technology continues to advance, the policy framework governing its deployment remains in development. The key takeaway is that AV expansion will require proactive engagement on issues such as public safety protocols, infrastructure readiness, data transparency, and coordination with state regulators. As deployment expands into more suburban and regionally complex environments, counties will play an increasingly important role in ensuring that the technology is implemented in a way that protects public safety while capturing potential mobility and economic benefits.
Hearing Materials
February Revenues
The Department of Finance (DOF) and State Controller released reports on February’s revenues as compared to the 2026-27 governor’s budget proposal.
|
Tax Revenues
|
DOF February
|
DOF Fiscal YTD
|
Controller Fiscal YTD
|
|
Personal Income
|
$395 million below projections
|
$4.314 billion above projections
|
$4.694 billion above projections
|
|
Corporation
|
$362 million above projections
|
$1.827 billion above projections
|
$1.809 billion above projections
|
|
Sales and Use
|
$180 million above projections
|
$1 million above projections
|
$12.024 million above projections
|
|
Total Revenues
|
$154 million above projections
|
$7.027 billion above projections
|
$7.445 billion above projections
|
Statewide Homelessness Funding Navigator
The California Interagency Council on Homelessness recently launched the Statewide Homelessness Funding Navigator, a tool mandated by SB 799 (Luz Rivas, 2024). This navigator is designed to simplify the increasingly complex and scattered landscape of homelessness funding, which originates from various state departments and federal sources.
The navigator offers a centralized platform for identifying and aligning available resources with local priorities, such as:
- Emergency shelter expansion
- Permanent supportive housing
- Behavioral health services
- Homelessness prevention efforts
Users can filter funding opportunities by eligible applicants, uses, and target populations. This functionality allows jurisdictions to quickly:
- Determine program accessibility.
- Identify funding overlaps or gaps.
- Better coordinate applications across their region.
The tool is expected to support a more intentional deployment of resources by making distinctions between funding opportunities more transparent. This is intended to strengthen capacity to match funding streams effectively to program design and service delivery needs.
While the navigator streamlines early identification and strategic planning, it is a starting point, not a substitute for program-level requirements. Orange County departments and partners must still meticulously review administering agency guidance to ensure eligibility and compliance, especially for programs with complex statutory mandates.
Overall, the navigator may enhance the County's ability to adopt a more coordinated and data-informed approach to homelessness funding by supporting efforts to braid resources, maximizing competitiveness for state and federal dollars, and aligning investments with the County's comprehensive homelessness response strategy.
Upcoming Hearings
Agendas are typically posted on the committee websites in the Assembly and Senate a few days prior to the hearings. To view hearings after they take place, you may access them in the Assembly or Senate media archives where they are generally available within a few hours of committee adjournment.
Monday, April 06, 2026, 2:30 p.m.
Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 1 on Health
State Capitol, Room 127
California's Response to HR 1: Defending Health Care Affordability and Access – Part 3
Financing California's Health Care Safety Net Under HR 1
4260 Department of Health Care Services
4140 Department of Health Care Access and Information
Overview of the Medi-Cal budget, estimate changes, budget change proposals, and trailer bills
Proposition 56 investments: provider rates support
Managed Care Organization Tax and Hospital Quality Assurance Fee Program
State investments to protect access to reproductive health services and gender-affirming care
Monday, April 06, 2026, 3:00 p.m.
Assembly Joint Hearing Select Committee on the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic Games and Arts, Entertainment, Sports, and Tourism
State Capitol, Room 447
Informational Hearing: An Overview of the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic Games
Tuesday, April 07, 2026, 9:30 a.m.
Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 1 on Education
State Capitol, Room 112
6120 California State Library
Wednesday, April 08, 2026, 9:30 a.m.
Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 4 on Climate Crisis, Resources, Energy, and Transportation
State Capitol, Room 447
Prop. 4 Wildfire and Forest Resilience
Prop. 4 Biodiversity and Nature-Based Solutions
3540 Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
3480 Department of Conservation
3600 Department of Fish and Wildlife
3885 Delta Stewardship Council
3720 California Coastal Commission
Wednesday, April 08, 2026, 1:00 p.m.
Assembly Joint Hearing Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Human Services and Budget Subcommittee No. 3 on Education Finance
State Capitol, Room 444
Early Childhood Education
State of Universal Preschool Oversight
Transitional Kindergarten Implementation Oversight and Proposals
5180 Department of Social Services
6100 California Department of Education
Thursday, April 09, 2026, 9:30 a.m. or upon adjournment of Session
Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 2 on Resources, Environmental Protection, and Energy
1021 O Street, Room 2200
0540 Natural Resources Agency
0650 Governor's Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation
3900 California Air Resources Board
8660 California Public Utilities Commission
Thursday, April 09, 2026, 9:30 a.m. or upon adjournment of Session
Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 3 on Health and Human Services
1021 O Street, Room 1200
4260 Department of Health Care Services
Medi-Cal Benefits
California Advancing and Innovating Medi-Cal (CalAIM)
Medi-Cal - Home and Community-Based Services
Medi-Cal - Other Administration, Fiscal Intermediary
Family Health Programs
4265 Department of Public Health
Center for Health Statistics and Informatics
Center for Healthy Communities
Center for Family Health
Center for Health Care Quality
4140 Department of Health Care Access and Information
4150 Department of Managed Health Care
Thursday, April 09, 2026, 9:30 a.m. or upon adjournment of Session
Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 4 on State Administration and General Government
State Capitol, Room 113
0855 Gambling Control Commission
1045 Cannabis Control Appeals Panel
1115 Department of Cannabis Control
2100 Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control
8570 Department of Food and Agriculture
Thursday, April 09, 2026, 9:30 a.m. or upon adjournment of Session
Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 5 on Corrections, Public Safety, Judiciary, Labor, and Transportation
State Capitol, Room 112
0552 Office of the Inspector General
5225 Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
Grant Opportunities
Below is a list of the latest grant opportunities released by the state. All opportunities for local jurisdictions may be found here.
Application deadline: 5/22/26 23:59
Title: FY25-26 Next Generation Warning System Grant Program – CFO
State Agency / Department: Governor's Office of Emergency Services
Match Funding? No
Estimated Total Funding: $953,958
Funding Method: Reimbursement(s)
Application deadline: 5/12/26 11:59
Title: State-Local Partner Mentorship
State Agency / Department: CA Arts Council
Match Funding? No
Estimated Total Funding: Total funding available will be determined based on passage of the state budget and Council allocation priorities.
Funding Method: Advance(s)
Governor’s Press Releases
Below is a list of the governor’s press releases beginning March 25.
March 31: Governor Newsom proclaims Farmworkers Day
March 31: Governor Newsom’s border strategy intercepts 54 million lethal fentanyl pills since 2021
March 31: As Trump rolls back protections, Governor Newsom signs first-of-its-kind executive order to strengthen AI protections and responsible use
March 30: Governor Newsom proclaims Welcome Home Vietnam Veterans Day 2026
March 27: Governor Newsom announces appointments 3.27.26
- Madeline Drake, of Sacramento, has been appointed Deputy Secretary for Biodiversity and Habitat at the California Natural Resources Agency.
- Julie Clowes, of Pasadena, has been appointed Assistant Deputy Director and Southern California Regional Advisor at the Office of Small Business Advocate.
- Janice Cheung-Powell, of San Francisco, has been appointed to the California Building Standards Commission.
- Olivia Mae Asuncion, of Oakland, has been appointed to the California Building Standards Commission.
- Rhys Williams, of Orangevale, has been appointed to the State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection.
- Jay Bradshaw, of Oakland, has been reappointed to the California Transportation Commission, where he has served since 2022.
- Michele Wyatt, of Lake Forest, has been appointed to the California Earthquake Authority Advisory Panel.
March 27: Governor Newsom announces judicial appointments 3.27.2026
- Ernesto “Ernie” Castillo, of Alameda County, has been appointed to serve as a Judge in the Alameda County Superior Court.
- Hanni Fakhoury, of Contra Costa County, has been appointed to serve as a Judge in the Contra Costa County Superior Court.
- Amanda Karl, of Alameda County, has been appointed to serve as a Judge in the Contra Costa County Superior Court.
- Jennifer Feige, of Kern County, has been appointed to serve as a Judge in the Kern County Superior Court.
- Ismael Rodriguez, of Tulare County, has been appointed to serve as a Judge in the Kings County Superior Court.
- Sarvenaz Bahar, of Los Angeles County, has been appointed to serve as a Judge in the Los Angeles County Superior Court.
- Jessica Vazquez, of Los Angeles County, has been appointed to serve as a Judge in the Los Angeles County Superior Court.
- Cherisse Heidi Alcantara Cleofe, of Orange County, has been appointed to serve as a Judge in the Los Angeles County Superior Court.
- Daniel Walters, of Madera County, has been appointed to serve as a Judge in the Madera County Superior Court.
- Shani Roark, of Sacramento County, has been appointed to serve as a Judge in the Placer County Superior Court.
- John Balla, of San Bernardino County, has been appointed to serve as a Judge in the San Bernardino County Superior Court.
- Justine Cephus, of San Mateo County, has been appointed to serve as a Judge in the San Francisco County Superior Court.
- David Silberman, of San Mateo County, has been appointed to serve as a Judge in the San Mateo County Superior Court.
- Sydney Bennett, of San Luis Obispo County, has been appointed to serve as a Judge in the Santa Barbara County Superior Court.
- Brian Sottile, of Ventura County, has been appointed to serve as a Judge in the Ventura County Superior Court.
March 27: Governor Newsom strengthens bans on insider betting by state officials, takes aim at corruption fueled by Trump
March 26: Governor Newsom signs legislation 3.26.26
March 26: Governor Newsom announces CHP crackdown: 12,600 arrests, 6,400 stolen cars recovered, 25 million deadly fentanyl doses seized in two years
March 25: Governor Newsom issues final warning to 15 communities violating state housing laws
March 25: Governor Newsom convenes leaders to confront crisis facing boys and men
March 25: Governor Newsom launches campaign to recruit young men, and all Californians, to serve communities and gain job skills
|