Transcript Highlights:

• And so there's long-term impacts to the unfunded COLAs.
• What impact will that have on the... ...What impact will that have on the members, state employees, and
• And they also, at the same time, CMS changed how they fund those plans, which had a very direct impact
• on us of increasing... ...very direct impact on us of increasing, basically shifting the burden.
• What has impacted us with Medicare is unique to the Medicare program, but I could only imagine what has

Committee: Senate Finance and Taxation Education

Transcript Highlights:

• . budget will experience no negative revenue impacts due to the OB3 tax conformity.
• It's a federal deduction, not a state deduction, so it doesn't impact—that's why I say it does not impact
• So that one has a fiscal impact for fiscal year 26. This fiscal year, it's about $98 million.
• She proposes an impact-triggered, time-limited conformity review process for large-impact changes.
• That will disproportionately impact low-income families and people of color and further...

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Revenue

Summary: The Joint Committee on Revenue held a public hearing on H. 4975, Governor Healey’s bill to manage the impact of the federal “One Big Beautiful Bill” (OB3) on Massachusetts tax law and state revenues. Administration officials, led by Secretary of Administration and Finance Matt Gorowitz, said OB3 would otherwise reduce FY26 revenue by about $442 million and argued for a phased-in conformity approach that would preserve the current-year budget while still adopting selected federal business tax provisions over time. The proposal would phase in the research and experimental expenditure deduction first, delay other major corporate provisions for two years, extend the pass-through entity excise to income subject to the 4% surtax, add a one-year delay mechanism for future federal tax changes over $20 million, limit opportunity zone benefits to Massachusetts investments, and make smaller technical changes to DFML contributions and casino reporting thresholds. Committee members questioned the rationale for phasing in rather than fully decoupling, the effect on the budget if the bill did not pass, and the treatment of opportunity zones, the surtax, and future federal tax changes. Public testimony was split. MassBudget, Progressive Massachusetts, and several labor and public-sector groups urged the committee to permanently decouple from the federal corporate tax changes rather than delay them, arguing that the bill would still send state revenue to corporate tax breaks, often for investments outside Massachusetts, and that the state should protect funding for schools, health care, human services, and other public services. The Massachusetts Society of CPAs supported the administration’s timing and the research-and-development provisions, citing filing deadlines and the importance of certainty for businesses and startups. Business and tax experts also testified that rushed conformity can create revenue losses and that the governor’s review-and-delay framework was a prudent improvement, though some said decoupling should be the default if the Legislature does not act. Unite Here Local 26 testified against sections 3 and 4, which would raise the slot-machine jackpot reporting threshold from $1,200 to $2,000, arguing the current threshold helps with problem-gambling intervention, preserves slot attendant jobs, and generates revenue. Several union leaders, including the Massachusetts Teachers Association, AFT Massachusetts, SEIU 509, the Massachusetts Building Trades, the AFL-CIO, and 1199 SEIU, urged permanent decoupling, warning that OB3’s federal tax cuts and related spending reductions would worsen budget pressures, harm public services, and shift costs onto workers, patients, and schools. No votes were taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, it also impacts our energy demand, right? So now we can't use that hydrogen.
• The impacts on the not to build there.
• I want to help people who can’t pay their bills because we’re artificially inflating the cost.
• I what I see the biggest impact is that I what I see the biggest impact is that what<01:43:04.440><c>
• </c><01:44:45.400><c> also</c> that will really impact also that will really impact also not<01:44:47.000

Committee: Senate Energy, Utilities, Environment, and Climate

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> the inflated cost. the inflated cost.
• I'm the chief impact officer at the Groundbreak Coalition.
• Well, I think the developers are saying we can't do that because that impacts their profit.
• </c><00:56:57.960><c> on</c> the the slow and indirect impact on the the slow and indirect impact on
• </c> we can't do that because that impacts we can't do that because that impacts their<00:57:25.600><

Transcript Highlights:

• So the dollars might impact more to us than the percentages.
• So if you're talking about impact for kids and impact both special education and all kids, you know,
• So what would the financial impact of that be if we lowered that threshold?
• financial impact that it would have.
• Is that—what's the impact on that? And how's that affecting school districts?

Committee: Joint Special Education Funding Committee

Summary: The committee met with a quorum, approved the March 4, 2026 minutes, and received a lengthy Department of Public Instruction presentation from Stanley Schauer Jr. on North Dakota student performance data in math and ELA, with comparisons between students with disabilities and students without disabilities. Schauer explained the assessment systems used, the 1% alternate assessment cap for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities, the absence of 2019-20 data due to the pandemic, and how state standards are set by North Dakota educators. Members asked about cohort trends, the role of alternate assessments, grade-level patterns, and whether the state should focus more on reducing the novice category than on moving students from approaching to proficient. Schauer also discussed the new NDA Plus assessment, the state’s planned growth model, and the possibility of future breakdowns by disability category or by schools using science-of-math approaches. Special education educators testified that students with disabilities continued to receive services during COVID because of FAPE obligations, which likely helped limit learning loss, and emphasized that IEP teams focus on individual growth rather than only proficiency buckets. Committee members then shifted to special education funding and possible funding models. Brandon Bombach of Grand Forks Public Schools presented on the state aid formula, focusing on the special education weighting factor and arguing that the current formula does not adequately respond to growing student needs because it counts enrollment but does not adjust when the number of students with IEPs rises. He used examples to show that a district can have the same enrollment and receive the same weighting even if the number of students needing services increases. Members discussed whether the formula should be tied more closely to actual need and accountability, and the chair indicated that the committee would continue gathering data and ideas for a later meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• This means tax increases follow inflation, not unpredictable real estate markets, as it is now.
• When inflation is 5%, families adjust their budgets around that number.
• Yeah, and there were a lot of, I will say, inflated values, and then due to supply and demand in the
• I think we're confusing market rate with inflation rate.
• If government can't keep up with inflation rate, that's all I'm trying to do.

Summary: The Ways and Means Committee met on March 26 and first reported favorably HB 287, which renews the Louisiana Tax Commission’s authority to levy certain fees used to fund its operations. The author and Tax Commission representatives said the fee supports the commission’s appeals and assessment work and is not a new charge. The committee then adopted a technical amendment and reported HB 553 favorably as amended; that bill expands the Assessor Certification Program Committee from 5 to 11 members and adjusts education and recertification requirements for assessors. The committee then took up HB 412, a constitutional amendment on property assessment and reappraisal. After an amendment in concept was adopted to remove the bill’s proposed 30-year homestead exemption, members questioned the remaining provisions, which would tie annual assessment growth to CPI and move the reassessment cycle from four years to five. The author, assessors, and local government representatives debated whether the proposal would create predictable tax growth or instead leave many properties assessed below market value and shift burdens to businesses and local services. The author ultimately voluntarily deferred HB 412 and its companion HB 340 for further work. Members next heard HB 514 and HB 961, both senior-property-tax measures, but both were voluntarily deferred after brief discussion and technical amendments. HB 514 would have created an optional additional homestead exemption for certain homeowners age 65 and older, phased in over time and tied to income and a surviving-spouse provision; HB 961 would have extended related eligibility to certain trusts. The committee also deferred HB 515, 543, and 540 to future meetings. Finally, the committee favorably reported HB 521 and HB 570, both dealing with millage and reassessment rules. Supporters, including local government and industry groups, argued the bills would give taxing authorities more flexibility to avoid being forced to levy the maximum millage simply to preserve future authority. Assessors and local officials explained current reassessment and roll-forward rules, while the author said the bills would reduce pressure to overtax residents and businesses. HB 521 was reported favorably, and HB 570 was reported favorably as amended after adoption of a six-part amendment set, mostly technical changes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Every day, I see the impact that dedicated, passionate.
• Moreover, while inflation has impacted the cost of all aspects of the universe, the costs associated
• As both inflation and enrollment. have increased.
• That's 100,000 new students in inflation.
• How will vouchers impact your schools?

Bills: SB451 , SB762 , SB1490 , SB1262 , SB1459 , SB1750 , SB1962 , SB2252 , SB2253 , SB2365

Committees: Senate Education , Senate Education K-16

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><01:24:11.520><c> Um,</c><01:24:11.920><c> also</c><01:24:12.400><c> I</c> be directly impacted by
• Um, also I be directly impacted by this.
• Um, I'm looking at, uh, I went on a field trip over Lake Winnipesaukee and saw many inflatables that
• Um, I'm looking at, uh, I went on a field trip over Lake Winnipesaukee and saw many inflatables that
• Thank you. inflatables that actually take um a inflatables that actually take um a massive<01:38:29.199

Summary: The committee began with introductions and a description of the day’s process: a full committee work session on four bills, with no public testimony, followed by caucus and then executive action. The first bill discussed was HB 113, concerning OHRV operation on certain highways in Windsor. Representative Nab presented an amendment that would require a public hearing and Department of Transportation approval, modeled on procedures used in Coös and Grafton counties. Members discussed whether Windsor had already held a local vote or hearing, whether minutes from a town meeting existed, and whether the amendment truly preserved local control. A Windsor resident testified informally that the town had not taken a final vote and that the matter had been left to the state. Committee members also raised concerns about noise, dust, public safety, and the fact that the road in question would connect OHRVs on a state road rather than a trail system. The chair closed the work session on HB 113 and said the committee would return after caucus to vote on the bill and amendment. The committee then took up HB 595FN, relative to coastal resilience zones. Representative Nat said the bill addressed flooding concerns in both coastal and inland New Hampshire, but that the sponsor viewed it as too complex and had recommended breaking the issue into separate parts in future legislation. On that basis, Nat said it was appropriate to ITL the bill, and noted that the sponsor supported that course. No further discussion followed, and the work session was closed. Next was HB 629FN, funding the operation, maintenance, and repair of state dams. Representative Darby explained that the original bill had proposed both a waterfront frontage tax and a $5 charge tied to boat registration, but that the amendment would replace the bill by removing the frontage tax, moving the $5 dam-maintenance fee to the boat decal section of statute, and changing the effective date to January 1, 2027. Darby said the larger fee had raised concerns about impacts on current-use property and enforcement, while the revised $5 fee would raise roughly $500,000 to $600,000 annually. Representative Dunn thanked Darby and said the Marine Trades Association supported the revised approach. A question was raised about whether the original prime sponsors supported the amendment; the chair said they were on board, and Darby added that the proposal reflected recommendations from a prior study committee. The committee then closed HB 629FN and opened SB 27FN, relative to dwellings over water. On SB 27FN, Representative Derby said he opposed the bill because it would take away public access rights and amounted to a one-off legislative solution for a private concern. Representative Donnelly asked how many similar structures might be affected and whether the Department of Environmental Services knew of other cases; DES responded that there was one other related case under settlement compliance and no other active cases with the same issue. In follow-up discussion, DES clarified that the proposal was not a shoreland 50-foot setback issue, but rather involved structures extending over public water. The discussion remained focused on the scope of the bill and its potential precedent-setting effect, with no vote taken in the portion of the transcript provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> tax credit structures including inflated tax credit structures including inflated development<01
• Inflate<01:09:06.680><c> the</c><01:09:06.920><c> The</c><01:09:07.359><c> economists</c><01:09:07.920
• ><c> and</c><01:09:08.000><c> policy</c> Inflate the The economists and policy Inflate the The economists
• :10.200><c> programs</c><01:09:10.720><c> can</c><01:09:10.880><c> sometimes</c><01:09:11.440><c> inflate
• And they are fully capable of contributing to the decisions that impact their very lives.

Transcript Highlights:

• So also one thing that everybody fails to realize on this is Missouri contractors pay inflated, super-inflated
• So you pay an inflated rate at the bid opening as well, because every contractor that's going to be in
• coverage to say, hey, we're still going to pay if we're at fault, obviously, but this potential inflation

Committees: House Commerce , House Commerce, Consumer Protection, Energy and the Environment

Transcript Highlights:

• The potential impacts.
• Rightfully so, given the impact of the cost.
• Healthcare inflation is a real thing. And so The cost is going up.
• There are, of course, financial impacts to the administrative burden.
• So I think, you know, does it have budgetary impacts?

Committee: House Federal Funding Stabilization Subcommittee

Transcript Highlights:

• Communities, especially low-income communities and communities of color, are disproportionately impacted
• Inflation.
• ; they directly impact the resources schools need to serve them.
• California is not the only state that has been impacted by this.
• And system-impacted people are two separate categories of Californians, but we are not.

Summary: The committee heard several immigration-, health-, food access-, and tribal-rights-related bills. AB 1725 would require disclosure of oil wells near homes and sensitive sites and stronger methane monitoring; supporters described health and safety harms in communities near wells, while apartment, realtor, building, and chamber representatives opposed or sought amendments, arguing the bill should better target the responsible industry and fit existing disclosure processes. AB 1650 would require privately rented or leased vehicles used by government agencies for enforcement to be clearly identifiable and equipped with safety lighting; supporters, including immigrant-rights advocates and local officials, said unmarked vehicles create fear and confusion during ICE operations, while the chamber sought clarification and noted exemptions for ordinary undercover law enforcement. AB 1857 would prohibit grocery restrictive covenants that keep new supermarkets from opening after a store closes, with supporters framing it as a food-access and anti-hunger measure; grocers and retailers raised concerns but said amendments addressed many issues, and the committee moved the bill forward as amended to Appropriations on a recorded vote, with all members present voting aye except one absent member and the bill placed on call. The committee also heard AB 1876, which would codify federal health-care nondiscrimination protections in state law. Supporters from Equality California, Disability Rights California, Planned Parenthood, and other health groups said it would preserve coverage protections for LGBTQ people, people with disabilities, and other protected classes amid federal rollbacks; opponents argued it would entrench gender-affirming-care standards and criticized the underlying medical framework. The bill passed to Appropriations on a recorded vote, with most members voting aye and one no vote, and was placed on call. AB 1908 would allow public entities to use judgment obligation bonds to finance self-funded victim compensation funds; Los Angeles County said the bill would fill a financing gap for faster compensation, and the committee advanced it on a recorded vote and placed it on call. AB 1881, the California Indian Freedom Act of 2026, would protect California tribes’ access to sacred sites and traditional practices on state public lands and require meaningful consultation; it drew extensive support from tribal leaders and Native organizations, while cities, counties, utilities, builders, and business groups were opposed unless amended, largely seeking clarification and narrowing. The bill was amended to focus on state public lands and passed to Appropriations on a recorded vote, then placed on call. Later, AB 2465 would bar businesses that profit from private detention facilities or contract with immigration-enforcement agencies from receiving state grants, loans, or tax credits and create an immigrant resilience fund. Supporters said the state should not subsidize businesses tied to immigration raids and detention; opponents, including the chamber, bankers, and contractors, raised vagueness and scope concerns, especially over what contracts would be covered. Members said they supported the concept but wanted the bill tightened, and it passed to Revenue and Taxation on a recorded vote with one no vote and was placed on call. The committee then heard AB 2662, which would create a formal state process to monitor and report on federal immigration enforcement actions and their impacts; supporters from legal aid and health centers said raids have chilled access to work, schools, clinics, and naturalization, and the bill was presented as a modest accountability measure. The transcript cuts off before any vote on AB 2662. The committee also approved a consent calendar of several bills and resolutions, sending some to Appropriations and others to the floor.

Transcript Highlights:

• We didn’t invest in them because they were impact funds.
• We didn’t invest in them because they were impact funds.
• By the time the median public employee intends to retire, climate impacts will inflict persistent inflation
• The fiscal impact to the substitute will be lower.
• local prosecution impacts.

Summary: The committee began with a work session from the State Investment Board, where staff described the board’s structure, $230 billion in assets under management, and its mandate to maximize returns at a prudent level of risk for pension and other state funds. They reviewed long-term performance, noting strong historical returns and explaining that the board generally invests public equities passively through low-cost index funds. Members also discussed sustainability practices, including ESG integration, proxy voting, climate and DEI blueprints, and the board’s view that divestment or asset-class restrictions can reduce returns and increase costs. Senators asked about deferred compensation, legislative influence over investment policy, and digital assets; staff said the board is slow-moving and that any major change would be studied carefully. The public hearing then focused on SB 5439, which would prohibit new thermal coal investments beginning in 2026 and require full divestment by 2030, with limited exceptions. Supporters argued coal is a poor long-term investment and a major climate and health risk, and several said the bill still gives the board flexibility to retain holdings in companies transitioning to clean energy. The committee also heard testimony on SB 6109, which would bar investments in private detention facilities and require divestment by 2030; supporters said state money should not profit from immigrant detention, while staff confirmed the board currently holds a small investment in Geo Group. SB 6304 would require responsible investment principles for the State Investment Board, including consideration of human rights, environmental degradation, corruption, and related risks, along with proxy voting guidelines and annual reporting. Testimony in favor emphasized ethical investing, climate risk, and avoiding complicity in human rights abuses, while board staff had earlier said they view such decisions through an investment-risk lens rather than a values-based lens. The committee also heard Substitute SB 5945, which would exclude most offenses committed before age 18 from counting as strikes under the state’s persistent offender law and would allow retroactive resentencing for affected people, with exceptions for first- and second-degree murder and serious sex offenses. Staff said the substitute would likely affect fewer cases than the original bill, with estimates ranging from about 10 to 24 resentencings. Public defense, prosecutors, and sheriffs’ representatives raised concerns about workload, victim impacts, and retroactive application, while supporters and pro bono providers said they were prepared to help with resentencing and reentry support. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• We also oppose a three-year delay to transportation greenhouse gas impact assessment and the transit
• Trust Fund in any meaningful way, and secondly, this is not a fair way to do this because it hardest impacts
• This impacts those with lower incomes and those who drive less, and therefore have the lowest impact
• This EV tax would have a significant impact on the budget of that family, especially since this doesn't
• delay in immigration implementing reductions in greenhouse gases and VMT called for in the climate impact

Bills: HF2438

Committee: House Taxes

Transcript Highlights:

• The dollars might impact more to us than the percentages.
• So if you're talking about impact for kids and impact both special education and all kids, you know,
• So what would the financial impact of that be if we lowered that threshold?
• financial impact that it would have.
• Like we were talking about the impact not being as— I don't know.

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes and then received a lengthy DPI presentation from Stanley Schauer on statewide reading and math assessment data for students with and without disabilities. He explained the assessment systems used over time, the absence of 2019-20 data, and how North Dakota’s standards are set by educators. Members asked about alternate assessments, cohort trends, the apparent drop in proficiency in higher grades, and the new NDA+ assessment. Schauer emphasized that the biggest pattern in the data was the relative stability of students with disabilities, the post-pandemic drop and partial recovery, and the need to focus on reducing the novice category. He also said the state plans to revisit high school standard setting and that future data could be broken out by program, disability category, and schools using science-of-math or other initiatives. Public testimony from special education staff suggested that the flat performance of students with disabilities during COVID likely reflected continued services and intensive supports, and committee members discussed whether the current disparity goal is realistic and whether growth measures would be more useful than simple proficiency buckets. After the presentation, the committee took a short break and then moved into discussion of special education funding models. Chair Richter said members should contact Schauer directly with ideas for additional data views and noted that the committee would continue its work on funding and possible model changes. Brandon Bomback of Grand Forks Public Schools began a presentation arguing that the special education funding formula, especially the weighting factor, should be reconsidered if the committee wants a system that better reflects accountability and student needs. He said his comments were based on the perspective of a larger district and focused on the special education weighting factor rather than other parts of the formula. The remainder of his presentation was not included in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• all... ...be sued for because we're impacting or trampling on the dormant commerce clause.
• And so you don't see this at all impacting that? The Constitution?
• Representative McMakin, is this adjustment part driven in part by inflation? Yes, sir. Okay.
• And when they do, the impact depends on placement and proximity.
• I don't see an amendment impacting paragraph E.

Bills: HB220 , HB259 , HB463 , HB536 , HB750 , HB830 , HB950

Committees: House Commerce , House Commerce, Consumer Protection, and International Affairs

Keywords: child exploitation, online reporting, platforms, cyber crime, PROTECT Act, excavation, demolition, infrastructure repair, BEAD Program, utility damage, construction coordination, contact point, emergency services, telephone charge, wireless service, reporting requirements, communications district, wireless communication, school safety, community permits

Transcript Highlights:

• We certainly are impacted by the funding cuts sent our way by H.R. 1, which passed by one vote in the
• We are impacted by those decisions when tariffs are announced.
• Those impact us; they acutely impact us here in Washington.
• House of Representatives impact Washingtonians as much as they impact people in Texas or North Carolina
• the people's right to initiative, this one seems to impact it.

Summary: The committee heard House Bill 2260, House Joint Resolution 4209, and House Bill 2259, with testimony and questions on each. HB 2260 would require petition signature gatherers to sign and date each petition sheet, provide their address and county, and require voters’ residence addresses for signature verification; supporters said this would improve accountability and help prevent fraud or duplicate signatures, while opponents argued it would burden volunteers, risk disenfranchising voters who move or use incomplete addresses, and add unnecessary penalties. The Secretary of State and former Secretary of State opposed the bill, saying existing verification methods are effective and that the measure could create costly, unintended barriers. HB 2259 would require 1,000 registered-voter signatures before filing an initiative or referendum and prohibit pay-per-signature compensation, with civil penalties and a private right of action; supporters said it would reduce frivolous filings, title shopping, and fraud incentives, while opponents said it would chill initiative activity, especially for rural communities and referenda with tight timelines. The Secretary of State and former Secretary of State also opposed HB 2259, saying the initiative process should remain accessible and that the bill would add barriers and workload. House Joint Resolution 4209 would amend the state constitution to allow the legislature to modify congressional districts mid-decade by simple majority if another state adopts a new congressional map absent a court order. The prime sponsor argued Washington should not unilaterally stay passive if other states engage in partisan mid-decade redistricting, while opponents said the proposal would weaken Washington’s bipartisan redistricting system, set a bad precedent, and invite retaliation. Testimony on the resolution was sharply divided, with supporters warning that partisan redistricting elsewhere threatens fair representation and opponents saying Washington should preserve its existing commission-based process rather than respond in kind. The hearing on HJR 4209 was concluded after testimony. No votes or final committee actions were taken in the excerpt. The chair suspended and reopened hearings as planned, and testimony was taken on all three measures, with HB 2260 and HB 2259 drawing extensive public comment and questions about fraud, access, and administrative burden.

Transcript Highlights:

• Substance use disorder also disproportionately impacts our industry.
• The Board is here testifying as other, only as we are waiting whether there is a fiscal impact.
• The Board is here testifying as other, only as we are waiting whether there is a fiscal impact.
• Adjusted for inflation, growers are earning far less today than prior generations.
• Adjusted inflation, growers are earning far less today than prior generations.

Summary: The committee held public hearings on several Labor and Workplace Standards bills. HB 2492 would require building and construction apprenticeship programs, beginning in 2027, to include two hours of behavioral health and wellness training covering topics such as suicide prevention, substance use disorder, recognizing distress, peer support, and connecting to resources. The prime sponsor and many labor, apprenticeship, and contractor witnesses supported the bill, describing high suicide and overdose rates in construction and sharing personal stories about losses and struggles in the trades. No vote was taken on the bill during the hearing. The committee then heard HB 2405, a Department of Labor and Industries request bill creating a pilot to allow earlier treatment for PTSD claims in workers’ compensation, including up to 11 treatment sessions before claim adjudication and limited follow-up treatment after closure. L&I and NFIB supported the measure as a way to speed treatment and reduce barriers, while one legal advocate supported it but raised technical concerns about pre-claim treatment and urged more focus on workplace prevention; another witness cautioned against emphasizing psychiatric drug treatment. The bill was heard only; no action was taken. HB 2406 would expand L&I’s ability to send notices electronically, with opt-in/opt-out provisions and some changes to timing rules for workers’ compensation and WISHA notices. L&I supported the bill as a modernization measure, while labor and workers’ advocates opposed changes affecting workers’ compensation notices, arguing that email should not become the default for vulnerable workers who may miss deadlines. HB 2478 would give L&I discretion, rather than a mandate, to investigate wage complaints and allow penalties when the department initiates an investigation; L&I supported it as a more efficient enforcement tool, and the committee discussed how complaints would still be handled and communicated. Finally, HB 2471 would create a state collective bargaining framework for private-sector workers if federal labor law or the NLRB no longer covers them. Supporters said it would preserve organizing and dispute-resolution rights if federal protections fail, while agricultural employers and NFIB opposed it, arguing it would inappropriately apply to agriculture and small businesses, could disrupt perishable harvests, and should rely on secret-ballot elections rather than card check. No votes were taken on any of the bills in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Rising temperatures and extreme heat impacts.
• But no impact on projects, right? Correct.
• So we don't anticipate that it will have that impact because of the surplus.
• How are the L.A. fires impacting the generation of hazardous waste?
• We're seeing positive impacts on that front as well.

Transcript Highlights:

• If you were to have an impact in impact.
• So much into a 15 to20 million impact. So much larger<00:12:19.279><c> impact.
• </c> feel the impact in 27. feel the impact in 27.
• And there's no impact.
• </c> the impact of your amendments. the impact of your amendments.

Committee: House Labor, Industrial and Rehabilitative Services