Transcript Highlights:

• And what we're talking about with infrastructure is we need magnetometers, we need X-ray machines, we
• We need more diversion. We need more opportunities, more, um, ways to help these children.
• Juvenile, the juvenile Criminal Code, um, needs to be, needs to be updated.
• Those things need to be looked at.
• Right, we need, we need a place, a safe place where they can get the help. Mr.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so I just need more.
• Do we need public-private partnerships? Do we need incentives? How do we speed this along?
• We need to hear more creativity. We need to hear better thinking. And I give you a thought.
• We need to hear more creativity. We need to hear better thinking. And I give you a thought.
• Yes, she needs to... Help us answer. Go ahead. Yes, she needs to. Okay, all right.

Summary: The Budget Subcommittee No. 4 hearing focused on the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) and cap-and-trade reauthorization, with members and panelists discussing how to balance climate goals, affordability, and legislative oversight. The chair emphasized the hearing as a broad review of past GGRF spending and future options, while the LAO outlined how GGRF revenues are generated, how variable they have been, and the tradeoffs between continuous appropriations and annual budget control. Two academic panelists, Dr. Kyle Meng and Danny Cullen Ward, argued that cap-and-trade remains an effective climate policy, but stressed that future revenue will depend heavily on market design, allowance allocation, and price levels. They also raised the idea that GGRF could be used more directly for affordability, especially by lowering electricity costs, and for targeted investments in technologies that the market would not otherwise support. Committee members pressed the panelists on where revenues come from, how much has actually been spent, and whether continuous appropriations reduce oversight. CARB staff said more than $33 billion has been generated to date and a little over $11–12 billion has been spent, with the rest committed or in process, and noted that project timelines can be lengthy. Members also asked about ways to lower electricity rates, reduce wildfire-related utility liabilities, and support electrification. The panelists said transportation fuels are the largest source of GGRF revenue, that industrial emitters receive a smaller share of free allowances, and that reducing wildfire liability and investing in grid-scale batteries could help lower costs and speed decarbonization. Public commenters largely urged the Legislature to preserve or expand continuous appropriations for specific climate programs. Speakers supported funding for nature-based solutions, natural and working lands, urban greening, agricultural climate solutions, waste and composting programs, clean transportation, AB 617 community air protection, clean cars, transit, affordable housing near transit, and dairy digesters. Several groups argued these programs are cost-effective, provide public health and affordability benefits, and should receive dedicated shares of GGRF. Others urged reducing free allowances and using more GGRF revenue to directly lower energy costs for households. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's badly needed.
• This is badly needed.
• The need is there. The need has been there.
• the clarity they need up front.
• So we need three members up, correct. Okay. And then we need Quirk-Silva. No, not a problem.

Summary: The Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee heard a long agenda of housing-related bills, beginning with AB 518 on low-impact camping areas. The author and supporters said the bill would streamline permitting for small rural camping operations on private land, expand outdoor access, and support rural economies, while opponents from campground associations and counties warned it could undermine existing regulation, create enforcement problems, and allow advertising of unpermitted sites. Members raised concerns about fire safety and local control, but the bill was ultimately passed as amended on an 8-0 vote. The committee then approved AB 635, which would require HCD to refer up to 25 of the most serious mobile home residency law complaints to the Attorney General. Supporters said mobile home residents need stronger enforcement against egregious park-owner violations, while opponents argued the existing program is underused, costly, and should remain subject to a sunset. After discussion of the program’s surplus and enforcement role, the bill passed 9-1. AB 893, which expands ministerial approval for mixed-income housing near college campuses and broadens eligibility for affordable units to students, faculty, and staff, also drew strong support from student advocates and housing groups and respectful opposition from the League of California Cities over local control and height limits; it passed 10-0. AB 925, the Mobile Home Emergency Safety Act, would require stronger emergency preparedness measures in mobile home parks, including accessible exits, working fire hydrants, and gas shutoff access, with a fee increase to fund enforcement. Supporters framed it as a life-safety measure in disaster-prone areas, while opponents argued the bill duplicates existing requirements and imposes an unnecessary fee increase. The committee voted 6-1 to send it to Appropriations, with the bill left on call. The consent calendar, including several other housing and local government bills, was approved 8-0. The committee also heard AB 712, which would increase penalties and attorney-fee protections for applicants enforcing state housing laws against public agencies; supporters said it would improve compliance, while special districts opposed the bill as overly broad and unclear. Members discussed indemnification and timing issues, and the bill was advanced with amendments to Judiciary.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's always needed more resources.
• It's always needed more resources.
• still nowhere near where we need to be. still nowhere near where we need to be.
• Um, but we need housing infrastructure bonds, we need rental assistance, we need manufactured home resources
• says we need to continue this program. says we need to continue this program.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• If my region finds out DeValle needs something, I will send my people if I need to.
• So we, I, need more people that... So we, I, need more people that can be out there.
• I need... I have three people doing that. I need, I have three people doing that.
• But we need the tools.
• So we need to look at that as well. So we have to change our tools to meet the need.

Summary: The committee held its first meeting and received an overview of the Pre-K-12 education appropriations jurisdiction and base budget. Staff explained that education funding is driven largely by enrollment and per-student formulas, with most money coming from state and local sources. The presentation highlighted the major budget areas: early learning, the Florida Education Finance Program (FEFP), non-FEFP K-12 programs, federal programs, and the State Board of Education. Members asked about instructional materials funding and how scholarship students who return to public schools are counted and funded; staff explained that instructional materials remain in the base and that funding depends on survey timing, with districts ultimately funded through the enrollment count process. The committee then reviewed federal IDEA funding for students with disabilities. Department of Education officials explained how IDEA Part B funds are split between state set-asides and local educational agencies, and noted that Florida ranked fourth nationally in total IDEA Part B funding and received a 95% state determination for meeting IDEA requirements. They also described the bureau’s responsibilities, including monitoring, dispute resolution, instructional support, and the Hope Florida unit for ages 3 to 5. Members asked for more information on student performance outcomes and how the state measures success beyond compliance, and the department agreed to provide follow-up data. The final major topic was the Florida Diagnostic and Learning Resources System (FDLRS), including associate centers, multidisciplinary centers, and specialized centers for deaf/hard of hearing and visually impaired students. Presenters described services such as child find, family support, assessments, professional learning, accessible instructional materials, and technical assistance. Committee members focused on whether families and schools have equal access to services across the state, how IEP disputes and reevaluations are handled, and whether more support is needed for parents, teachers, and rural districts. FDLRS representatives said they do not write IEPs but help connect families to districts, provide training and assessments, and support compliance and data collection; they also emphasized staffing and resource needs, especially for low-incidence disabilities and multilingual family outreach.

Transcript Highlights:

• that are in need.
• So you can't tell me that we can't balance the need to protect tenants with the need for growth.
• We need rent control. We need to give communities that option. Thank you.
• I don't think we need more affordable housing. We need senior housing.
• I don't think we need more affordable housing. We need senior housing.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Municipalities and Regional Government held a long public hearing focused mainly on two sets of issues: proposals to amend or repeal the MBTA Communities Act, and bills to allow local rent stabilization. Committee chairs opened by explaining the hearing would be tightly managed because of the very large number of speakers, with testimony limited to two minutes per person and written testimony still accepted by email. Members and witnesses were called in a mix of in-person and virtual order throughout the hearing. On the MBTA Communities Act, several legislators and local officials argued the law is too rigid and should be revised to account for local conditions. Speakers from small, rural, or infrastructure-limited communities such as Hanson, Halifax, Marshfield, Winthrop, Dracut, Carver, Rehoboth, and others said the law’s one-size-fits-all approach does not fit towns with limited water, sewer, transit access, or buildable land. Some filed bills would repeal the law, exempt certain communities, or create appeals processes based on infrastructure, environmental, or historical constraints. Supporters of the law’s changes emphasized local control and the need to avoid forcing development where communities believe it is impractical or inconsistent with town character. A large portion of the hearing was devoted to rent stabilization legislation, especially S. 1447 and related House bills. Supporters included legislators, city councilors, tenant advocates, labor leaders, housing nonprofits, public health organizations, and residents who described sharp rent increases, displacement, homelessness risk, and the strain on working families, seniors, students, and people with disabilities. They argued local-option rent stabilization would let municipalities cap excessive increases and prevent no-fault evictions while preserving flexibility for local conditions. Opponents, including small landlords and property owners, said rent control would discourage investment, worsen housing quality, burden responsible owners, and drive small landlords out of the market. Some witnesses also supported a Cape Cod/Island transfer fee bill and a suburban infrastructure fund, arguing those would provide local revenue for housing or roads. No votes or formal committee actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• need.
• With that, this is an item that needs a motion due pass. So I need a motion due pass.
• We don't need to lose that.
• You need it identified and you need to know how to eradicate it. They can help you with that.
• I need to go back and look. All right, page 7. What was that? I need to go back and look.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But ultimately, we need the funds. We need the money. The ecosystem.
• We need to build subsidies, right? The Pueblos need them; the Apache nations need them.
• We need contractors, we need builders, but we need to make them feel secure.
• We need more private development. We need more outside investment.
• We're not building yet, but we need funding. We need support.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we need to make that point clear.
• in front of students who need them.
• We need to recognize that there was a need. Policy is only as good as how it's implemented.
• We need services like that. We need support.
• Feel comfortable if you need to move the mic. ...the mic to make you feel more comfortable if you need

Bills: SB26, SB 26

Keywords: teacher compensation, education funding, public school educators, teacher retention, teacher designation, SB 26, Texas Property Code, colonia, colonias, Spanish translation, bilingual contract, real estate contract, executory contract, residential property, border county, international border, economically distressed area, consumer protection, language access, translator certified in Spanish

Transcript Highlights:

• needs community.
• So desperately needs.
• We don't need more requirements. We need less. We don't need more. We don't need more.
• We don't need more. We don't need more requirements. We need less. We don't need more risk.
• And what needs to be done is rates need to be reduced, period.

Summary: The Assembly met after a quorum call and first dealt with a procedural dispute over four amendments to AB 1240. The Speaker ruled the amendments out of order as not germane, and the Assembly sustained that ruling on a 49-16 vote. Members then added co-authors to several consent-calendar resolutions, including measures on the National Conference of State Legislators, Suicide Prevention Awareness Month, ALS Awareness Month, and Men’s Mental Health Month, before adopting the consent calendar. The chamber also heard guest introductions, including a welcome for Oakland Mayor Barbara Lee, and took up a motion to bring AB 41 up out of file, which failed 19-48. The bulk of the meeting was floor action on a long series of bills and resolutions, many of which passed with broad bipartisan support. Measures approved included ACR 40 supporting immigrant students and FAFSA privacy; AB 917 on permanent status for certain school employees; AB 985 on anesthesia access; AB 7 and AB 42 on higher education and student services; AB 245 providing property tax relief for wildfire victims; AB 255 allowing funding for drug-free recovery housing; AB 279 updating K-12 library standards; AB 289 creating a pilot for automated speed enforcement in highway construction zones; AB 291 on an educator apprentice program; AB 327 addressing swatting; AB 340 on confidential union communications; AB 341 creating an oral health technical assistance center for people with disabilities; AB 356 on San Diego health care infrastructure; AB 410 on bot disclosure; AB 476 on copper theft enforcement; AB 477 on educator pay targets; AB 485 on stolen wages and business licensing; AB 487, the insurance committee’s technical omnibus bill; AB 573 on tobacco retail license fees; AB 598 on school mapping technology; AB 635 on mobile home law enforcement referrals; AB 651 on remote participation for incarcerated parents in dependency hearings; AB 654 on homelessness hotline assistance in Los Angeles County; AB 662 creating a South County higher education task force; AB 667 on language access in professional licensing; AB 669 limiting early denial of addiction treatment; AB 670 on naturally occurring affordable housing; AB 695 on online continuation of community college for deported students; AB 723 on disclosure for digitally altered real estate images; AB 727 placing Trevor Project information on student IDs; and AB 736, a $10 billion affordable housing bond for the June 2026 ballot, which passed on a 61-11 urgency vote after extensive debate. Debate on AB 736 was the most extensive of the day, with supporters arguing the bond would help address California’s housing crisis and give voters a chance to weigh in, while opponents criticized the state’s bond debt and past spending results. The Assembly then recessed for caucus meetings and later returned to continue the daily file, where additional measures were taken up, including AB 798 adding diapers and wipes to the emergency food bank reserve program, which passed 56-0, and AB 821 on career technical education, which was presented as bipartisan-supported as the transcript continued.

Transcript Highlights:

• this additionally more clarity is needed this additionally more clarity is needed on<00:42:25.280
• My business needs this program in order to compete on a level playing field, and we need it urgently.
• They need you to protect it.
• I needed this program back in 2020 as much as it is needed in 2026.
• can support Working Families I needed can support Working Families I needed this<01:29:43.639>

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• It still needs some work.
• It's something we need to look at.
• Um I know something we need to look at.
• So thank you. or needs therapy or things like that. or needs therapy or things like that.
• That student, uh, need to know about it.

Keywords: Education - Room 216, 2 February, 2026; 1:45 PM, 925, all

Summary: The committee first took up a bill on computer science and CTE. Senator DeLano explained that it updates prior law requiring computer science to be incorporated into curriculum and Carnegie unit credit, and now allows artificial intelligence to be included as a component of a district’s computer science offerings. The committee asked no substantive questions, and the bill received a title sufficient, do pass recommendation by voice vote. The next measure, Senate Bill 2244, would allow students in districts rated F for two consecutive years to transfer to another district or school, with the state covering transportation and related costs in addition to base student cost. Members raised concerns about the estimated fiscal impact, the authority of receiving districts to accept students, whether the bill should apply to individual schools within an F district, and whether a case-by-case or pilot approach would be better. The committee adopted a reverse repealer to keep the bill alive for further work, then voted title sufficient, do pass. The committee then considered Senate Bill 2235, which requires local law enforcement to notify a juvenile’s school district within 24 hours of a felony arrest. Senator Rhodes said the bill was prompted by school resource officers who wanted schools to know when a student had been arrested, especially after violent incidents, so schools could respond appropriately. Senators questioned whether the bill conflicts with youth court confidentiality and records laws, who exactly should receive the notice, and whether false arrests could harm students. The sponsor said the bill was intended to improve communication and school safety, and the committee adopted a reverse repealer and then voted title sufficient, do pass. The chair announced the committee would meet again later that day and rise and report tomorrow.

Transcript Highlights:

• To address all these needs, we need to look at other funding to supplement this funding.
• And I think we need to change that.
• I think that needs to be recognized.
• Uh, needs to be taken with our school.
• We need teachers that are bilingual certified. We need teachers certified.

Transcript Highlights:

• It needs to be modernized. It needs financial support.
• it needs to be modernized it needs financial support there's existing revenues that should be going
• to it and are not and I think that that we that it needs to happen right the money needs to come back
• That it needs to happen, right?
• Yes, there's a significant need in rural communities, but there's also... ...address a need.

Summary: The Assembly Transportation Committee heard several measures, beginning with SB 86, which would extend and expand the CAEATFA sales and use tax exclusion program through 2031, raise the annual cap from $100 million to $200 million, and add fusion energy. Supporters, including the State Treasurer and industry and labor representatives, cited billions in clean-tech investment, job creation, and environmental benefits; county groups opposed the bill over local revenue losses. The committee approved SB 86 on a 12-0 roll, holding the roll open for additional members. The committee then heard SB 545, which would require Go-Biz to study economic development opportunities along the California high-speed rail corridor, including land value, development incentives, and public-private partnerships. Labor, Fresno’s mayor’s office, and other stakeholders supported the bill as a way to spur corridor development and future funding opportunities, while one business group moved from opposition to neutral after amendments. The bill passed on a 9-1 vote, with the roll held open. Members next considered SB 63, a Bay Area transit funding measure authorizing a regional revenue measure to support transit operations amid looming fiscal shortfalls. The author and witnesses described severe service cuts that could follow without new funding, while committee members raised concerns about the bill’s structure, county participation, polling, and whether other revenue options should be considered. The bill advanced on a 9-3 vote, with the roll held open, and the committee also approved SB 263, directing a state study of tariff impacts on California’s economy and supply chains, on an 11-0 vote. Finally, the committee heard SB 661, which would redirect aviation-related tax revenues back to airports for aviation purposes and bring the state into compliance with federal requirements; testimony focused on airport modernization, rural access, and allocation formulas, but no final vote was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Just as needed.
• We're looking at the local need as well.
• And so we have such a need across the state.
• It's very challenging because the need is so high.
• I need everybody doing, being on a screen, trying to talk about how they're feeling, they need to be

Summary: The hearing opened with remarks from the chair and members about recent federal cuts to public health, mental health, family planning, and Title X funding, with strong concern about the impact on California programs and providers. The committee then turned to the Department of State Hospitals, which presented its 2025-26 budget proposal of $3.4 billion, including new positions, capital improvements, and funding tied to increased patient costs and incompetent-to-stand-trial services. DSH reported major progress in reducing the IST waitlist and wait times, said it had met the court’s 28-day treatment benchmark for those without extenuating circumstances, and described workforce recruitment and retention efforts such as residency programs, fellowships, outreach, and hiring streamlining. Members asked about future IST referral trends, SB 1323’s effect on diversion and community treatment, and workforce lessons in high-cost regions; public comment urged reconsideration of county IST growth cap methodology in light of new criminal justice initiatives. The committee next received an informational overview of Proposition 1 and its changes to behavioral health funding and governance. The Legislative Analyst’s Office explained that Prop. 1 restructured county MHSA funding buckets, expanded the Commission for Behavioral Health, shifted prevention and early intervention responsibilities, and authorized a $6.4 billion bond, including $4.4 billion for behavioral health facilities through BHCIP. DHCS said it had released guidance for county integrated plans and was receiving extensive public comment. Members focused on BHCIP application requirements, especially letters of support and tribal projects, and raised concerns about whether DHCS’s implementation matched statutory intent. DHCS said it had authority to set application requirements and that tribal entities were treated differently because of sovereignty and funding structure. DHCS then updated the committee on BHCIP, the Behavioral Health Bridge Housing Program, and related bond implementation. The department said BHCIP had awarded about $1.7 billion across five rounds, with more than 130 projects and 223 distinct facilities funded, and that it was preparing to award the new bond funds after receiving nearly $8 billion in applications. The LAO’s assessment found that more than half of awards served at least 80% Medi-Cal enrollees, but also raised concerns that the regional allocation model could reinforce inequities, that the program had not sufficiently addressed the highest-need regions such as the southern San Joaquin Valley, and that smaller counties and less launch-ready applicants faced barriers. For bridge housing, DHCS said more than $1.1 billion had been awarded, serving over 5,000 people and supporting more than 2,000 operational beds, but the Governor’s budget proposes to eliminate Round 4 funding as the administration weighs other statewide investments and Proposition 1 implementation workload. Public commenters and members urged more accountability, better regional equity, stronger labor and community involvement, and caution about funding for for-profit psychiatric facilities. Finally, the committee heard on the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative. CalHHS and DHCS described CYBHI as a broad prevention- and equity-focused effort with more than 1,300 organizations funded, over $2.1 billion awarded, and multiple work streams spanning schools, community programs, workforce, and digital supports. DHCS highlighted school-based services, the fee schedule rollout, and digital platforms BrightLife Kids and Soluna, which it said are reaching users statewide and providing low-barrier access to coaching and support. Members and public commenters raised concerns about delays in school fee schedule implementation, the large share of funding going to digital tools, the need for more in-person services, and whether the initiative is sufficiently tracking outcomes and equity impacts. No formal votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• She needs to go in. She needs to do this work as part of her responsibilities.
• The here and now needs to be addressed.
• I feel that we need to move swiftly. We need to do a change, and we need to move forward.
• We need you. We need you. Thank you. I'm not going to lie. There was a lot... I'm not going to lie.
• That needs to change.

Summary: The hearing focused first on sexual abuse, harassment, and retaliation in California’s women’s prisons, with testimony from CDCR wardens, the Office of Inspector General, advocacy groups, and formerly incarcerated survivors. Legislators and witnesses described a pattern of staff misconduct, fear of retaliation, gaps in reporting, and the need for stronger accountability, better investigations, and more outside access for survivor support organizations. CDCR said it has expanded training, body-worn and stationary cameras, outside partnerships, and PREA-related response procedures, while the Inspector General requested additional funding and staff to monitor more grievances and staff sexual misconduct cases under SB 1069. Members pressed CDCR on why accused staff are not always placed on leave, how cases are referred to prosecutors, and whether current protections are enough; several members argued the state should aim to investigate all complaints and do more to prevent retaliation and repeat abuse. The second issue was rehabilitative and reentry programming in women’s prisons. CDCR’s Division of Rehabilitative Programs and the wardens highlighted education, vocational training, substance use treatment, peer support, and community reentry programs, citing increased enrollment and recent graduates earning diplomas, degrees, and certifications. They said these programs are intended to reduce recidivism and improve public safety. Formerly incarcerated advocates and community providers argued that current offerings are still too limited, outdated, and not aligned with today’s job market, especially around digital literacy and transferable credentials, and they urged more funding for community-based, trauma-informed, gender-responsive programming. A coalition representative asked for a $20 million continuation and expansion of the Wright Grant program, and members discussed additional budget requests for reentry and related women’s services.

Transcript Highlights:

• The real work we need to do, we need to fight to make our districts more responsive to our students,
• to be, we need to address it.
• Of course we need to know. Of course we need to know, and that gives us visibility.
• A community school framework provides the structure and collaboration needed to meet those broader needs
• Okay, so we’re with you in the need, but we need to understand how big a problem it is in terms of school

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Education heard testimony on several bills centered on school accountability, receivership, graduation requirements, charter school access, community schools, school libraries, and student voting rights. Much of the discussion focused on the Thrive Act, S. 374, which would end state receivership and change the state’s accountability approach. Supporters, including educators, parents, advocacy groups, and students, argued that receivership has not improved outcomes in districts such as Lawrence, Holyoke, Southbridge, Boston, and the Dever, and that local communities should have more control, with greater emphasis on community schools, wraparound services, and broader measures of school quality. They also supported related bills on community schools and school library standards, and several witnesses backed a bill to expand student representative voting rights on school committees. Opponents of S. 374, especially charter school leaders, parents, students, and some education advocates, focused on Section 4 of the bill, which would change the charter school net school spending cap in the lowest-performing districts. They argued that the provision would reduce access to charter seats in communities where families are seeking more options, and that schools such as Roxbury Prep, Excel Academy, Brook, Veritas Prep, and Libertas Academy have produced strong results for students, including students of color, low-income students, and students with special needs. Several witnesses said the section would force schools to shrink or close and would remove opportunities for families in districts with long waitlists. Committee members questioned witnesses on both the effectiveness of receivership and the charter school cap language. Chair Lewis and Chair Gordon emphasized the need for a better accountability system and noted concerns about whether current measures, including MCAS-based designations, accurately reflect school quality. Some witnesses said they had discussed the possibility of removing Section 4 from the Thrive Act and suggested it might be addressed in separate charter reform legislation. No votes were taken during the hearing; testimony was received and the committee later closed testimony on S. 374 and several related bills before moving on to the student voting rights bill, S. 367.

Transcript Highlights:

• will take for us to serve their needs. will take for us to serve their needs.
• <00:19:59.200> to<00:19:59.360> be, don't need to have we don't need to be, don't need
• <00:37:24.560> to we need or that product that we need to we need or that product that we
• chain improvements are needed.
• They need access through transmission, and they need access to markets.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Attendance Roll Call 00:00:10 Approval of Minutes 00:01:19 Helping Power Kentucky's Growth (LG&E/KU) 00:01:39 Update from Kentucky's Electric Cooperatives 00:47:35, 958, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum, approved the minutes from the previous meeting, and then heard a presentation from LG&E and KU representatives Caroline Clark and John Bevington on economic development, energy demand, and the utility’s role in supporting Kentucky’s growth. Bevington described the company’s service territory, generation fleet, and recent economic development activity, including 76 projects supported in 2024, more than $2.8 billion in private investment, and over 3,000 new jobs. He emphasized that data centers are now the dominant driver in the pipeline, with 22 data center projects representing about 8.7 of the 9.7 gigawatts of potential demand, alongside other manufacturing and commercial projects. A major focus was how data centers choose sites and how utilities respond. Bevington explained that hyperscale data centers typically approach utilities first because they need transmission-level access, and that utilities then conduct internal analyses, estimate infrastructure needs, and require financial security before proceeding. He said the company is working through formal transmission studies and long-lead infrastructure planning, and noted that Kentucky’s sales tax exemption for data centers helped attract interest. He also outlined the economic benefits of data centers, citing an announced Louisville project of 525 megawatts and about $11 billion in investment, with an estimated $500 million in new tax revenue over 10 years, plus broader job and GDP impacts. Members asked about whether data centers could generate their own power, the reliability of the pipeline numbers given confidentiality and nondisclosure agreements, and cybersecurity concerns. Bevington said the company does not assume all pipeline projects will materialize in Kentucky and instead assigns probabilities to avoid overbuilding. He also said he was not the right person to address cybersecurity in detail but offered to return to a committee focused on IT or security. In response to questions about future supply, he said LG&E and KU are adding generation through a 120-megawatt solar facility in Mercer County, a 120-megawatt solar purchase in Marion County, and a 645-megawatt natural gas combined-cycle plant in Louisville, with PSC approval recently granted for additional generation and related system upgrades.

Transcript Highlights:

• And while it's easy to assume that students simply need to show up or that someone just needs to pick
• <00:25:55.640> to social workers uh so we just need to social workers uh so we just need to
• would want and so I I just think we need would want and so I I just think we need to<00:37:42.640
• <00:47:26.920> need don't know what that is but we need need don't know what that is but we
• We need to be careful.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• to support their needs. to support their needs.
• They all need to exist because they meet everybody's needs.
• and cognitive needs. and cognitive needs.
• serving folks that really need need you. serving folks that really need need you.
• why we need to decentralize. why we need to decentralize.

Keywords: 1183, house