Assembly Convenes, Debates and Concedes on 2026 Budget; AB 109 Passes After Heated Floor Debate

The California State Assembly on May 7 approved Assembly Bill 109, the chamber’s 2026 budget act, after extended floor debate and a recorded concurrence vote of 59 ayes and 18 noes. The measure, presented by Assemblymember Gabriel, was taken up for concurrence with Senate amendments and transmitted to the governor immediately after passage.

The budget sponsor told colleagues the agreement balances “compassion and fiscal responsibility,” arguing the plan reduces the structural deficit, builds more than $29,000,000,000 in reserves and preserves health, education and safety-net programs. “We are reducing our structural deficit by more than half, and we are building up over $29,000,000,000 in total reserves and also put forward important reforms to our rainy day fund,” Assemblymember Gabriel said on the floor.

Why it matters: The vote follows weeks of negotiations and more than 60 hearings the budget chair and subcommittees held, and comes amid federal policy changes the majority cited as creating new state fiscal pressures. The package includes funding aimed at preventing hospital closures, expanding housing and homelessness programs, and backing services associated with recent criminal-justice initiatives.

Opponents characterized the bill as fiscally irresponsible and said it shifts costs onto working families. “This budget is a clear reflection of the majority’s values. If you’re a hardworking Californian or a small business owner, your taxes are going up,” Assemblymember Tangipa said, asserting the package increases premiums and broadens state spending on immigration-related services. Several Republican members pressed specific fiscal objections, including claims of accounting choices that they said shortchange education and healthcare.

Supporters disputed the criticism, pointing to line items they said fund priorities critics claimed were omitted. Assemblymember Schultz, who rose to rebut assertions that Proposition 36 (a criminal-justice ballot measure) was unfunded, provided a line-by-line accounting of prior and current-year appropriations and said the Legislature has set aside hundreds of millions for courts, treatment and victim services. “There’s approximately $375,000,000 in new funding in this budget for courts, Prop 47 substance abuse and mental health treatment, additional victim support, rehabilitation, and pretrial services,” Schultz said.

Key allocations and clarifications cited on the floor include: roughly $900,000,000 for homelessness programs, $500,000,000 for low-income housing tax credits, $2,700,000,000 for Proposition 98 education-related programs (as described by proponents), and multi-hundred-million-dollar commitments to hospital stabilization and Medi-Cal supports. Supporters argued those choices protect Californians from federal reductions to health coverage programs.

Process and outcome: The Assembly earlier rejected a procedural effort to amend AB 109 on the floor (a motion to suspend the rules to return the bill to the Senate failed 13–45). After extended debate during evening hours, the clerk recorded the concurrence vote: ayes 59, noes 18; the clerk reported that the Senate amendments were concurred in and the bill was transmitted to the governor.

What’s next: With concurrence completed and immediate transmittal to the governor ordered, any implementation questions will move to executive branch management and subsequent trailer or implementing legislation. Members on both sides said they expect continuing negotiations about specific program details and fiscal pressures in the weeks ahead.