|
Prepared by Precision Advocacy
The legislature is moving quickly to advance hundreds of bills through policy committees before the May 1 deadline. Simultaneously, budget subcommittees are deep into detailed hearings, preparing for the governor's May Revision. The May Revision will include refined policy proposals, updated revenue figures, and, as Governor Gavin Newsom has recently indicated, further budget cuts.
Within this broader context, recent hearings reflect a legislature that is increasingly focused not only on advancing new proposals, but also on evaluating performance, accountability, and the effectiveness of existing programs. Discussions are shifting toward measurable outcomes, expenditure timelines, and whether state investments are delivering results at the scale and speed intended, particularly in complex areas such as housing, homelessness, wildfire resilience, and infrastructure funding.
As policy committees act on key legislation and budget deliberations begin to solidify ahead of the May Revision, the implications for local governments are becoming clearer. The following report provides an overview of recent budget activity, with a focus on housing and homelessness programs, Proposition 4 wildfire investments, and emerging fiscal pressures tied to state climate and transportation policies.
Assembly Budget Subcommittee on State Administration: Affordable Housing & Homelessness
The Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 5 on State Administration met April 14 to take up a series of housing and homelessness budget items, with Orange County’s Assemblymember Sharon Quirk-Silva chairing the hearing. In her opening remarks, Chair Quirk-Silva emphasized that even in a constrained budget year, housing must remain a top priority because stable housing is foundational to employment, education, health, and overall stability. She stressed that the state must protect what is working, examine what is not, and make careful choices about where limited dollars can have the greatest impact.
On Issue 1, the Governor’s Reorganization Plan codification trailer bill, administration officials presented the proposal to formally implement last year’s reorganization by dissolving the Business, Consumer Services, and Housing Agency and creating separate cabinet-level agencies for housing/homelessness and business/consumer services, along with the Housing Development and Finance Committee and a stand-alone California Interagency Council on Homelessness. Secretary Tomiquia Moss described the reorganization as more than an org-chart change, characterizing it as an effort to create a more focused, accountable, and effective structure for delivering housing and homelessness programs. She emphasized that work is already underway to stand up the new structure, including operational planning, staffing, fiscal coordination, and development of draft guidelines for the new Housing Development and Finance Committee.
A central theme of the hearing was whether the state can translate this reorganization into faster, cheaper, and more predictable delivery of housing. Secretary Moss and Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) Director Gustavo Velasquez argued that California’s current affordable housing finance system is overly fragmented, and that each additional funding source can add at least four months and roughly $20,000 per unit to a project. They described the new structure as a response to long-standing complaints from local governments, developers, and advocates that the state’s housing finance process is too duplicative and slow. Velasquez also pointed to recent statewide progress, including nearly $2.8 billion in HCD funding announced in 2025, nearly $4 billion awarded across three rounds of Homekey, and the view that centralizing financing functions could reduce delays and improve delivery.
Assemblymember Ward pressed the administration on whether improved organization can really offset reduced or limited ongoing budget commitments and asked for more program-by-program data showing how many units were produced, what the per-door cost was, how many people were served, and why substantial balances remain unspent in some programs. The administration responded that millions of dollars remain in the pipeline, including significant unawarded or unspent balances in programs such as Homekey and the Homelessness Housing, Assistance, and Prevention (HHAP) program, and said it would provide more detailed data. This exchange underscores that the budget debate is shifting toward outcomes, expenditure pace, and comparative program effectiveness rather than simply whether a program exists.
The hearing also included significant discussion of HHAP and youth homelessness. Assemblymember Ward highlighted a budget request for an ongoing $80 million youth homelessness minimum within HHAP, noting reported statewide reductions in youth homelessness and unsheltered youth homelessness over the last several years. Chair Quirk-Silva explicitly agreed that youth homelessness funding is important and said she did not want that issue to get lost. Later public comment strongly reinforced support for both broader HHAP funding and a youth homelessness set-aside, including testimony from CSAC supporting $1 billion for HHAP round seven and from multiple youth advocates urging the state to maintain at least $80 million for youth homelessness. Homelessness and youth housing instability remain major concerns, with the discussion suggesting that HHAP and youth-focused investments will remain key parts of the budget conversation moving forward.
Another Orange County-relevant point was Chair Quirk-Silva’s focus on maintaining a balanced housing strategy. In response to discussion about homeownership programs, she asked clarifying questions about the MyHome down payment assistance program and signaled interest not only in homelessness and rental housing programs, but also in preserving tools that support broader housing access. At the close of Issue 1, she stated that while HHAP is clearly a priority, the committee is also looking at low-income housing tax credits, multifamily housing, CalHOME, and other programs, and does not want to put all of its eggs in one basket.
On Issue 2, the California Housing and Homelessness Agency development proposal trailer bill, the administration proposed a major restructuring of how affordable housing finance is administered. The proposal would reserve 90% of private activity bond authority for affordable rental housing through 2037 and create a special set-aside of 4% tax credits for projects receiving Housing Development and Finance Committee (HDFC) gap funding. Officials described this as a “one-stop shop” model that would allow applicants to use a single application for multiple state funding sources, rather than navigating several separate and overlapping processes. The proposal also uses a “two-door” structure, with half of the housing reservation going through HDFC and half through California Debt Limit Allocation Committee housing.
The administration argued this approach would improve coordination with local partners and reduce the time and cost burdens that currently accumulate over years-long financing processes. The Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) generally agreed there is merit in the effort to address fragmentation and supported the idea of more administrative allocation of bonds and credits for certain projects, but raised concerns that the automatic 50% set-aside could leave funds idle if demand does not line up cleanly, recommending that the legislature retain greater flexibility to reallocate unused amounts.
Chair Quirk-Silva also highlighted the significance of the recent federal tax credit changes discussed in the hearing. She emphasized that the federal changes increase 9% tax credit authority and effectively expand the reach of 4% tax credits by reducing the bond financing threshold from 50% to 25%. In practical terms, that means California may be able to stretch scarce bond authority further and finance more affordable housing projects. These changes could affect the number of projects that are able to move forward if the state’s proposed one-stop financing model is implemented effectively.
On Issue 3, the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (AHSC) proposal, the administration proposed splitting AHSC administration between the Housing Development and Finance Committee for the housing allocation and the Strategic Growth Council for the sustainable communities allocation, while also transferring positions and General Fund resources from HCD to support the transition. The LAO again saw merit in the proposal but recommended that developers still be allowed to submit a single application for integrated housing and transportation projects.
Finally, Issue 4 addressed HCD’s proposal to adjust certain codes and standards fees annually by CPI, including fees affecting mobile homes and mobile home parks. That proposal drew substantial public opposition focused on affordability concerns, particularly for residents on fixed incomes. All items heard that day were left open, and several later agenda items were postponed to a future May hearing because of time constraints.
Overall, for Orange County, the hearing signaled three main themes – first, Chair Quirk-Silva continues to position housing as a top-tier budget priority even in a constrained year; second, the administration is attempting to restructure housing finance and homelessness governance around efficiency, accountability, and faster deployment; and third, the legislature is increasingly focused on measurable outcomes, funding balances, and whether programs like HHAP, youth homelessness investments, tax credits, multifamily housing, and other housing tools are producing results at the pace and scale expected.
Background Materials
Assembly Budget Subcommittee Hearing: Proposition 4 Wildfire Prevention & Resilience
The Assembly Budget Subcommittee’s April 8 hearing provided important insight into how California is deploying Proposition 4 to strengthen wildfire prevention and resilience, while also highlighting key dynamics that shape how these investments will affect Orange County.
The hearing opened with a broader framing of wildfire governance in California, emphasizing that responsibility is divided across federal, state, and local levels. In Local Responsibility Areas, counties and local fire agencies lead prevention and response efforts, even as funding and program design are largely determined at the state level. This structure is particularly relevant in its wildland-urban interface areas, such as canyon and foothill communities, where local agencies are responsible for frontline implementation of defensible space, vegetation management, and emergency response.
Within this context, Proposition 4 plays a central role in scaling up wildfire resilience efforts statewide. The bond is part of a broader investment totaling roughly $4 billion across wildfire and forest resilience programs, with hundreds of millions proposed annually to support activities like fuel reduction, habitat restoration, and community hardening. These investments are designed to move the state toward a more proactive approach, addressing wildfire risk before catastrophic events occur.
However, the hearing made clear that this shift remains incomplete. Despite increased funding over the past decade, the majority of state wildfire spending is still concentrated on response and suppression. Only a relatively small share, roughly 10- 20% of CAL FIRE’s budget, is dedicated to prevention and resilience activities. For Orange County, this reinforces an ongoing challenge – while the state is investing more in mitigation, local jurisdictions continue to operate in a system that prioritizes reacting to fires rather than systematically reducing risk in high-exposure communities.
A central theme of the hearing was the sustainability of these investments. Proposition 4 represents a significant but time-limited funding source, and the legislature is already grappling with what happens when those funds are exhausted. Ongoing funding streams, including cap-and-invest revenues, are uncertain and may fall below projected levels in the coming years. This creates a structural concern for counties where wildfire risk is persistent but mitigation efforts, such as fuel management in open space areas and coordination with utilities, require long-term, stable funding commitments.
The hearing also highlighted challenges in evaluating the effectiveness of wildfire prevention efforts. Unlike fire response, where outcomes are immediate and measurable, resilience investments often produce benefits that are less visible, fires that spread more slowly, neighborhoods that avoid evacuation, or ecosystems that remain intact. Legislators noted the difficulty in assessing which strategies are most effective and emphasized the need for stronger data and performance metrics. This signals a growing expectation that local projects will not only be implemented, but also clearly demonstrate outcomes tied to state-defined priorities.
At the same time, the administration pointed to efforts to improve how Proposition 4 funds are delivered, including new mechanisms to support multi-jurisdictional and regional projects. These changes are intended to streamline funding and better align investments with landscape-scale wildfire risks. This presents an opportunity to partner regionally, particularly with neighboring counties and state conservancies, to pursue funding for projects that address shared risks across Southern California’s fire-prone landscapes.
Overall, the hearing reflected a state making significant progress in elevating wildfire resilience as a policy priority but still working through how to sustain and measure those efforts over time. For Orange County, the implications are twofold, there is meaningful opportunity to leverage Proposition 4 funding in the near term, particularly for projects in high-risk interface areas, but there is also a clear need to plan for long-term funding uncertainty and increasing expectations around accountability and outcomes.
Background Materials
Senate Budget Subcommittee Hearing: Aviation Fuel Tax
The April 9, 2026, Senate Budget Subcommittee No. 2 hearing underscored a growing tension that is particularly relevant for counties – the state’s push to advance ambitious climate policies is increasingly intersecting with, and potentially drawing from, core local government funding streams.
Although the hearing focused on the governor’s proposed sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) tax credit, the discussion quickly broadened into a debate over fiscal tradeoffs. The central issue for local governments was not aviation policy itself, but the proposal’s reliance on the diesel excise tax, one of the primary funding sources for local streets and roads, highway maintenance, and transportation infrastructure. For Orange County, where maintaining a highly utilized and aging transportation network is already a significant challenge, this funding stream is critical.
The Legislative Analyst’s Office and other experts raised concerns that the proposal could reduce these revenues by tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars annually, depending on how widely the tax credit is used. That uncertainty was a key theme throughout the hearing, with implications for counties that rely on predictable funding to plan and deliver infrastructure improvements.
While Orange County was not mentioned directly, its interests were clearly reflected in the opposition raised by local government stakeholders. Organizations representing counties and cities warned that the proposal would further strain already limited transportation funding, potentially delaying road maintenance and increasing long-term infrastructure costs.
Supporters of the proposal emphasized the need to invest in hard-to-decarbonize sectors like aviation and highlighted potential economic and environmental benefits. However, from a county perspective, those benefits appear less immediate or direct than the potential loss of transportation funding.
Ultimately, the hearing highlighted a familiar challenge – balancing statewide policy goals with local fiscal realities. As the legislature continues to refine climate investments, the key issue for the County will be ensuring that progress in new areas does not come at the expense of stable, reliable funding for the infrastructure systems residents depend on every day.
Background Materials
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 20, 2026, 2:30 p.m.
Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 1 on Health
State Capitol, Room 127
4140 Department of Health Care Access and Information
0977 California Health Facilities Financing Authority
4150 Department of Managed Health Care
4800 California Health Benefit Exchange
4140 Department of Health Care Access and Information
Overview of budgets, budget change proposals, and trailer bills
Distressed Hospital Loan Program and CHFFA programs
Rural Health Transformation Program
Health Care Payments Database Implementation
Monday, April 20, 2026, 2:30 p.m.
Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 6 on Public Safety
State Capitol, Room 447
5225 Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
0552 Office of the Inspector General
Tuesday, April 21, 2026, 1:30 p.m.
Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 5 on State Administration
State Capitol, Room 447
0890 Secretary of State
8620 Fair Political Practices Commission
7501 Department of Human Resources
7920 State Teachers' Retirement System
0950 State Treasurer
0971 Alternative Energy and Advanced Transportation Financing Authority
1701 Department of Financial Protection and Innovation
0509 Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development
Wednesday, April 22, 2026, 9:30 a.m.
Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 4 on Climate Crisis, Resources, Energy, and Transportation
State Capitol, Room 447
Prop. 4 Climate Smart Agriculture
Prop. 4 Extreme Heat Mitigation
8570 Department of Food and Agriculture
0650 Governor's Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation
3100 Exposition Park
3790 Department of Parks and Recreation
3600 Department of Fish and Wildlife
Thursday, April 23, 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
3860 Department of Water Resources
3885 Delta Stewardship Council
3940 State Water Resources Control Board
3600 Department of Fish and Wildlife
3790 Department of Parks and Recreation
3930 Department of Pesticide Regulation
3960 Department of Toxic Substances Control
3560 State Lands Commission
3970 Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery
3720 California Coastal Commission
3820 San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission
Thursday, April 23, 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
5180 Department of Social Services
Child Care
Child Welfare and Foster Care
Immigration and Refugee Programs
Thursday, April 23, 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
0559 Labor and Workforce Development Agency
7100 Employment Development Department
7120 California Workforce Development Board
7300 Agricultural Labor Relations Board
7320 Public Employment Relations Board
7350 Department of Industrial Relations
7501 Department of Human Resources
7900 Public Employees' Retirement System
7920 State Teachers' Retirement System
Grant Opportunities
Below is a list of the latest grant opportunities released by the state. All opportunities for local jurisdictions may be found here.
None this week.
Governor’s Press Releases
Below is a list of the governor’s press releases beginning April 8.
April 15: On Tax Day, Governor Newsom encourages families to claim free college savings, invest in their children’s future
April 14: Governor Newsom issues proclamation setting special election for California Congressional District 14
April 14: California, Native American tribes break ground for California Indian Heritage Center
April 14: Governor Newsom announces the latest digital technology at the DMV to fight identity fraud and reduce wait times
April 13: Governor Newsom calls on Trump administration to remove roadblocks to California’s expansion of essential health benefits, including IVF
April 13: Let’s go fishing! Salmon fishing is back in California after more than 3-year closure
April 13: As weekend one of Coachella wraps, Governor Newsom highlights economic power of Indio’s world-renowned music festivals
April 10: Governor Newsom welcomes NASA’s Artemis II crew back to Earth, touching down in the Golden State
April 10: Ready to serve: 133 CHP graduates report for duty across the Golden State
April 10: As Trump erodes the nation’s disaster response, California kicks off Earthquake Preparedness Month by leading the country in readiness
April 10: Governor Newsom proclaims Dolores Huerta Day
April 10: Governor Newsom launches first new conservancy in 15 years to accelerate progress at the Salton Sea
April 9: Governor Newsom honors fallen Tulare County Sheriff’s Deputy Randy Hoppert
April 9: California’s economy leads again, grows another 5% in 2025 to record $4.25 trillion GDP
April 9: California stops major hospice fraud scheme in LA, brings criminal charges to hold fraudsters accountable
April 9: Governor Newsom expands apprenticeships and workforce training for more than 60,000 Californians
|
