Senate subcommittee adopts two‑party education budget, rejects proposed UC/CSU cuts and preserves K–14 funding

Senate Budget Subcommittee No. 1 on Education held its closeout hearing and approved a two‑party budget framework that rejects proposed ongoing cuts to the University of California and California State University systems and preserves Proposition 98 protections for K–14 funding.

The subcommittee, chaired by Senator Laird, took public comment and then approved three grouped motions covering 165 individual items. The motions passed with recorded votes of 3–0, 2–1 and 2–0; the items will move to the full Senate for further negotiation with the administration toward a final, three‑party agreement.

Why it matters: The package maintains major state investments in K–12 schools while deferring or reshaping some higher education reductions proposed by the governor. The subcommittee’s actions affect financial aid, community college growth and cash flow, expanded learning programs, school meals and several targeted grants that education stakeholders urged the legislature to protect.

The subcommittee’s work and public comment Senator Laird opened by describing the hearing as the subcommittee’s closeout after seven prior hearings since the governor’s January budget and the May revision. He said the legislative budget “reflects what we were striving to do” and noted the package combines reductions, borrowing and other solutions.

Senator Ochoa Bogue warned that much of the package still relied on placeholder trailer‑bill language and said she wanted final language available before the budget bill is finalized. She said she would support many K–12 proposals but would abstain on one community college deferral item and that she was cautious about penalties tied to transitional kindergarten implementation.

Senator Perez thanked stakeholders and budget staff and highlighted the subcommittee’s decision to reject proposed cuts to K–12 schools and to reduce—but not eliminate—proposed UC and CSU reductions. Perez summarized the subcommittee’s outcome on higher education: the governor’s January proposal included an ongoing 7.95% cut to UC and CSU that the May revision reduced to 3%; the subcommittee rejected the ongoing 3% cut and deferred the reduction to 2026–27 while providing cash‑flow relief to campuses.

Public comment included remarks from college and K–12 groups urging preservation of funding and clarifications on specific items. Jonathan Lyman of the Community College League of California thanked the subcommittee for additional money for growth, reduced retroactive TK “rebenching,” smaller deferrals and funds for student support grants and emergency financial aid. Catherine Hutchinson, representing 35,000 non‑faculty and student assistants, thanked the subcommittee for eliminating the proposed CSU cut and for actions to address CSU cash‑flow and compact commitments. Commenters from the California State Student Association, the Association of California School Administrators, the California County Superintendents and several advocacy groups spoke in favor of preserving funding for school meals, emergency aid, expanded learning and financial‑aid programs.

Key budget details discussed (as stated in the hearing) - The subcommittee said the legislative budget package relies on a mix of reductions, borrowing and other solutions and referenced approximately $12 billion in solutions. - The subcommittee rejected the governor’s proposed ongoing cut to UC and CSU that had been reduced in the May revision from 7.95% to 3%. The subcommittee deferred that reduction to 2026–27 and provided cash‑flow resources to ease near‑term impacts, per Senator Perez. - The middle class scholarship program was restored in part: the subcommittee referenced $513 million in ongoing general‑fund support and $405 million in one‑time funding for 2025–26 (figures provided during public remarks and hearing summary). - Community colleges: the May revision proposed shifting $492 million from community colleges to expand transitional kindergarten; the subcommittee returned $260 million to community colleges and approved $217 million in ongoing Proposition 98 funding to provide a 2.3% cost‑of‑living adjustment. - The subcommittee endorsed investments for universal school meals, infrastructure and training for kitchens, and summer meal expansions, which several public commenters praised. - Special items mentioned by commenters: $30 million in base funding requested for Special Olympics (three years), funding for dream resource liaisons ($15 million noted by commenters), emergency financial aid for community college students (commenters asked for flexibility and access), and support for teacher workforce programs including the Golden State Teacher Grant and student‑teacher stipends.

Votes at a glance (committee motions) 1) Part A consent + Part B consent (large consent motion covering many numbered items listed on the agenda). Motion by Senator Perez. Roll call: Senator Laird — Aye; Senator Ottobock — Aye; Senator Perez — Aye. Outcome: approved (3–0).

2) Second grouped motion (Part A items 52–53; Part B items 6, 21, 33, 42, 66, 71). Motion by Senator Perez. Roll call: Senator Laird — Aye; Senator Ochoa Bogue — No; Senator Perez — Aye. Outcome: approved (2–1).

3) Third grouped motion (remaining items called for separate roll call). Motion by Senator Perez. Roll call record in the hearing: Senator Laird — Aye; Senator Ottobock — no recorded vote during the roll call; Senator Perez — Aye. Committee report stated the motion passed 2–0. Outcome: approved (2–0); these items will be taken to the Senate floor.

What the subcommittee did not finalize The subcommittee repeatedly noted that some actions rely on trailer‑bill language or final package language that was not yet finalized at the time of the hearing. Multiple members and commenters asked for final statutory or trailer‑bill language to be released to ensure transparency and to enable additional public comment before the full budget bill is finalized.

Next steps The approved items will be transmitted to the Senate floor and will be part of continued negotiations with the administration and the Assembly to reach a final three‑party budget agreement by the June deadline. The subcommittee said it will monitor the budget process and may reconvene if further action is necessary.

Ending note Senator Laird closed by thanking staff and stakeholders and noting the subcommittee’s intention to continue discussions as budget negotiations proceed to completion.