Transcript Highlights:

• This is our most recent year of data that we collected through the 2025 data call.
• We have 36 plus entities that are providing us data. They do control their data.
• We have the Medicaid data from the state as well as commercial data.
• So that's the data we have.
• So this is using HRSA data.

Summary: The Senate Health and Long-Term Care Committee opened its 2026 session with a work session focused on the committee’s priorities of access, quality, and affordability. Health Care Authority staff Michelle Needham and Ross Florey reviewed the Health Care Cost Transparency Board’s work, noting Washington’s uninsured rate has fallen from 15% in 2010 to 5%, but health care spending growth remains above the benchmark. They said 2023 spending grew 6.2% versus a 3.2% target, with prescription drugs, hospital outpatient care, professional services, and non-claims spending driving growth. They highlighted ongoing work on market transparency, hospital spending, primary care, and federal policy changes that could reduce coverage and increase uncompensated care. Dr. Drew Oliva of the Washington Health Alliance added quality and safety data, saying many measures remain below top national performance, primary care attachment is weak, hospital pricing varies widely, and behavioral health data are limited. He urged stronger primary care investment, more transparency, and better patient safety oversight. Committee members then introduced themselves and staff before moving to public hearings. The committee first heard Senate Bill 5877, a technical fix expanding the physician health program surcharge to certified anesthesiologist assistants so they can participate in the Washington Physicians Health Program and related educational resources. The bill sponsor and witnesses from the Washington Medical Commission, the Washington Academy of Anesthesiologist Assistants, and the Washington Physicians Health Program all supported the measure, describing it as a consistency and access fix for a newly licensed profession. The bill drew 12 pro, 2 con, and 0 other sign-ins. The committee then heard Senate Bill 5967, which would preserve access to preventive services by allowing the Department of Health to issue immunization recommendations based on multiple expert sources and by freezing state insurance coverage protections for preventive services and vaccines as of mid-2025, with OIC rulemaking authority to keep coverage at least as favorable. The sponsor, Insurance Commissioner Patty Kuderer, Secretary of Health Dennis Worsham, and Governor’s office staff said the bill is intended to protect existing coverage, not create new vaccine mandates, and to keep recommendations grounded in science amid federal uncertainty. Supporters included Dr. Helen Chu, Dr. Beth Harvey, Dr. Maria Huang, Dr. J. Miller, and Dr. Matt LaGalbo, who emphasized vaccine safety, rising vaccine-preventable diseases, and the importance of no-cost preventive care. Opponents, including Bob Runnels and Natalie Chavez, argued the bill politicizes vaccines, reduces transparency, and expands state authority without adequate fiscal detail. The hearing continued with additional testimony after the excerpt ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• We don't have that data.
• have all the data.
• However, neither the Early Childhood Integrated Data System (ECIDS) nor the New Mexico Launched data
• This type of analysis shows the power of linking data sets and underscores.
• We also agree with them on our data collection. We're very excited this year.

Committee: House Legislative Health & Human Services Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• I don't have the data. You don't have that data.
• We'll get you that data from the constables because I don't have access to their data.
• have that data, because we want this... ...decision to be data driven.
• Well, you just can't do that without the data. I need the data to be able to do that. Okay?
• We're fact- and data-driven.

Bills: SB39 , SB2129 , SB2141 , SB2246 , SB2323 , SB2439 , SB2722 , SB 39

Committee: Senate Transportation

Keywords: commercial motor vehicle, truck liability, motor carrier, trucking, civil liability, respondeat superior, negligent entrustment, negligent maintenance, negligent loading, negligent repair, bifurcated trial, exemplary damages, punitive damages, personal injury, collision, employer liability, vicarious liability, Civil Practice and Remedies Code, Texas tort reform, commercial truck accident

Summary: The Senate Transportation Committee reconvened on SB 2722, as substituted by Senator Bettencourt, which would redirect a portion of Harris County Toll Road Authority surplus revenues to the City of Houston and impose audit and tax-rate penalty provisions. Houston Police Chief Noe Diaz and Fire Chief Thomas Munoz testified in support, arguing that Houston bears a large share of toll-road public safety burdens, citing thousands of police and fire responses on toll-road property and the need for compensation for emergency services. Bill King, testifying neutrally, said the toll authority generates large excess revenues and urged stronger oversight and clearer controls on how the money is spent. Opponents, including Harris County officials, business and neighborhood representatives, and toll-road critics, argued the bill would divert transportation dollars, create a precedent for taking toll revenues for general municipal use, and could worsen project delivery and incentives; several also questioned the accuracy and interpretation of the revenue figures and the lack of comparable audit requirements for the city. The committee took extensive testimony but left SB 2722 pending without a vote. The committee then heard SB 2129, which would increase fines for motorists who disregard railroad crossing gates or flaggers, and SB 2323, which would redact railroad crew members’ personal information from public accident reports. Both bills were presented as safety measures, with railroad labor testimony in support, and both were left pending after brief public testimony. The committee also heard SB 2141, a Zaffirini bill concerning specialty license plates for judges, with the substitute aimed at reducing security risks by changing how judges are identified on plates; it too was left pending. Finally, the committee heard SB 2439, another Zaffirini bill, described as a TDLR cleanup measure related to ATV and off-highway vehicle safety certification. The bill would abolish the current training and certification program, which supporters said was burdensome and underused given the small number of approved instructors statewide. With no significant opposition on the record, the committee closed testimony and left SB 2439 pending as well.

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill enacts data protections that prohibit employers from sharing worker data for purposes beyond
• interpreting the data.
• in its being shared. ...data, and makes both the employer and third-party entity liable if worker data
• Transparency and data protections.
• Also, again, you would have to make any third party you transfer this data to jointly liable for a data

Summary: The committee heard a series of labor-related bills, with most measures focused on worker training, privacy, wages, and safety. AB 296 would require schools or districts to host apprenticeship fairs at least once a year, with flexibility on how they are run and whether programs outside the county can participate. Supporters said it would help connect students to skilled trades and address workforce shortages; school administrators opposed the bill as an unfunded mandate that could be impractical for elementary schools. The bill was later moved on call, with the committee noting it could not vote until quorum was established. AB 1221 and AB 1331 both addressed workplace surveillance. AB 1221 would restrict invasive monitoring tools, require notice to workers, limit the use and sharing of worker data, and require human review before discipline based on surveillance outputs. Labor groups supported the bill as a response to AI-driven monitoring, while business groups raised concerns about broad definitions, security cameras, investigations, and data-access provisions. AB 1331 focused more narrowly on privacy in off-duty and private spaces, limiting surveillance in places like restrooms, break areas, vehicles, and homes; hospitals and business groups opposed it as too broad and potentially disruptive to safety, cybersecurity, and facility monitoring. Both bills were advanced by committee vote. The committee also heard AB 1181, which would require firefighter turnout gear to be free of cancer-causing chemicals such as PFAS by 2027, and AB 1198, which would require prevailing wage rates on public works to reflect the wage in effect when the work is performed rather than when the project was first advertised. Firefighter representatives strongly supported AB 1181, while the chemical industry asked to continue working on scope and timelines. AB 1198 drew support from labor and contractor groups but opposition from local governments and housing groups concerned about mid-project cost increases; it was passed to Appropriations after a roll-call vote. Other measures approved included AB 1235 on skilled-and-trained workers for CSU construction, AB 1251 on ghost job postings, AB 552 on locating the Agricultural Labor Relations Board office outside Sacramento, AB 1110 on updating Cal/OSHA workplace posters, AB 1136 on expanding high road training partnerships, and AB 1234 on wage claim enforcement. AB 692, which would ban employer debt agreements that require workers to repay training or other costs if they leave a job, drew strong support from nurses and labor advocates and opposition from business and health care groups; it was also passed on a roll-call vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• To predict future populations, CDCR utilizes historical trend data, including data on court commitments
• So that meant they had about six months of implementation of Prop. 36 in their data.
• Again, the administration uses data up through June 30.
• But as a... ...court commitments data just started to continue decreasing.
• If there are specific requests, we can provide data. Okay.

Transcript Highlights:

• the committee, and we've updated those data with the new revenue forecast numbers.
• months where the data was final.
• So what you'll see is And those are the months where the data was final.
• from the National Economic Estimating Conference, and that data was largely unchanged from the data
• And so those forecasts incorporate all of that data.

Bills: S0110 , S0434 , S0856

Committee: Senate Finance and Tax

Keywords: property assessment, wind damage, home improvements, real estate, tax exemption, Florida statutes, ad valorem taxes, property listings, tax estimation, disclosure, Florida, residential property

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> calculations that draw from various data calculations that draw from various data sets. sets. sets
• Just like you all, we want to have very accurate data. Attendance data goes into this too.
• We pull that data out of the questions.
• Uh we want to have very accurate data.
• Uh attendance data goes into this too.

Summary: The House Budget Review Subcommittee on Primary and Secondary Education and Workforce Development met without a quorum at first, so it did not approve minutes and instead heard agency capital requests. The Education and Labor Cabinet presented a $6.2 million reauthorization for renovation of the Charles W. McDow Center for the Blind in Louisville, which serves blind and visually impaired individuals through the Office of Vocational Rehabilitation. The project would update mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and HVAC systems. Members asked about the number of students served and the facility’s location; the cabinet said it would follow up on the enrollment figure and explained that prior funding had been redirected to expanded services for people with disabilities and employment needs. The Kentucky Department of Education then presented its request to replace the SEEK system, the state’s primary school funding formula and calculation platform. Officials said the current in-house system dates to about 2008 and is increasingly difficult to maintain, especially as legislative changes require complex recalculations. They explained that a prior vendor contract was terminated after change orders and cost overruns made the project unworkable; the original contract was about $2.8 million, and the proposed change order would have more than doubled that amount. KDE said it is seeking additional funding while also trying to recover the prior vendor’s work product so it can potentially reuse parts of the code and proceed in modules if necessary. Members questioned the cost, the statewide role of SEEK, and whether state staff familiar with the system would be involved in any new procurement. KDE officials said they had already assigned internal staff and a project manager to the earlier RFP process and would do so again. They also noted that SEEK calculations, tax calculations, and attendance data all feed into the system, making it critical for accurate and timely district payments and data requests. The meeting ended with no votes taken, and the chair announced the next meeting would be held the following Tuesday, the 27th, at 10:00 a.m. in the same room.

Transcript Highlights:

• WE WERE AT THE MERCY OF LOCAL DISTRICTS THAT HAD THEIR OWN TEACHERS AND OWN LOCAL DATA AND WE DIDN'T
• FOR THESE OUTCOMES WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE DATA MOVING THE NEEDLE SO AS WE MOVE THROUGH THIS PATH AND
• WE DON'T HAVE ANY DATA BACK WHATSOEVER?
• NO DATA?
• TO YOUR POINTS ON THE DATA WE HAVE TO DO A DATA REQUEST TO THE DISTRICTS THEMSELVES FOR KIDS WHO TRANSITION

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> data belonged to the state. data belonged to the state.
• It's the data that I'm concerned about. It's not the systems. It's the data.
• It's the data that I'm better than I do. It's the data that I'm concerned<00:33:38.640><c> about.
• </c> It's the data.
• So, if we get the data It's the data. So, if we get the data I'm<00:33:44.960><c> happy.

Summary: The committee received an update from the LBA on three audits related to education programs. Christine Young reported that the special education audit is in report-writing, with 44 of 81 observations completed, and that a draft is expected early in the third quarter with a final report later in the summer. She also said the doorway program audit has a draft report with 12 observations, auditee responses were received May 14, an exit conference was held May 18, and the report is now expected to be presented at the June fiscal committee meeting. The bulk of the discussion focused on the education freedom accounts audit and a proposed expansion of scope. Beulah Skids explained that the original audit, required by the 2022 law creating the EFA program, would be expanded to examine whether students were New Hampshire residents at enrollment and throughout participation, and whether records of educational attainment satisfied program requirements. She described the current work, the draft cooperation agreement being developed with the Department of Education and the Children’s Scholarship Fund, and the department’s concerns about the audit period and the term "educational progress," which the LBA said it would revise. The committee discussed that the expanded work would depend on a written agreement giving the LBA access to needed records, policies, and staff, with the Department of Education potentially serving as an intermediary for data access. Members raised concerns about the scope period and data access. Senator Lang asked that the residency review be limited to the 2024-25 and 2025-26 school years, rather than the broader 2022-25 period, because those years captured the major program expansions; the committee appeared to agree, with clarification that the reference was to school years, not fiscal years. Members also discussed reconciliation of EFA funds, noting that the department has agreed to reopen rulemaking to make reconciliation more frequent so unused funds can be returned to the state sooner. Several members expressed frustration that access to data had been delayed, while LBA staff said the cooperation agreement is intended to prevent further roadblocks and that the AG’s office could review it if needed.

Transcript Highlights:

• that would make partisan data appropriate to be used versus race?
• Pereda, said on behalf of the governor that political data was used along with all other data.
• Well, first of all, we weren't supposed to use partisan data.
• It was simply one more data point among many.
• And when we talk about maps and we talk about looking at data in terms of Looking at data in terms of

Summary: The Senate convened in special session and took up Senate Bill 8D, later substituted with House Bill 1D, both establishing Florida’s congressional districts. The sponsor, Senator Gates, explained that the Governor had transmitted a proposed redistricting plan on short notice and argued that mid-decade congressional redistricting is legally permissible, citing population growth and the Governor’s view that race-based provisions in the Fair Districts Amendment are unconstitutional. He repeatedly said the Legislature was not being asked to prove the Governor’s legal theory, only to consider the proposal, and noted that no amendments were offered. A lengthy question-and-answer period followed, with senators raising concerns about the rushed process, lack of statewide public hearings, and the map’s effects on minority communities, compactness, communities of interest, and partisan fairness. Senators questioned whether the map cracked Latino and Black communities, whether partisan data was used, whether the Governor’s office had outside consultants, and whether the plan complied with the Florida Constitution, the Fair Districts Amendment, and the Voting Rights Act. Gates generally deferred on legal conclusions, said the Governor’s representatives had testified the map was race-neutral and used political data only as one factor, and emphasized that any constitutional challenge would be for the courts. After a motion to temporarily postpone failed by a recorded vote of 12 yeas to 23 nays, the Senate continued debate. Senators Rouson, Bernard, and others spoke in opposition, arguing the proposal was rushed, partisan, and harmful to communities of interest and minority voting power. Gates maintained that the Governor had a constitutional prerogative to propose the map and that the Legislature could accept, reject, or amend it. The House companion bill was then substituted for the Senate bill, read a third time, and the chamber moved into final debate on the congressional redistricting plan.

Transcript Highlights:

• ,</c><00:17:18.959><c> we</c> look at these this kind of data, we look at these this kind of data, we
• Um I do think that these data the day.
• So sort of flesh out our data picture.
• </c><00:35:38.560><c> and</c> What we really need is better data and What we really need is better data
• It was detailed on labor data, individual island data. So it wasn't even just a Hawaiʻi study.

Transcript Highlights:

• Through ensuring that data is sent into one single system as a data, I call it a data lake; they probably
• To end on the issue of the data, I mentioned the data lag.
• Yeah, I do believe there should be that data available.
• Data, so we provided on page 3 an example of how we disaggregate data—in this case, by ethnicity—in this
• This is the kind of data that we provide.

Transcript Highlights:

• We need to see experiential data. We don't just use lab testing data.
• We need to see experiential data around it.
• We've seen some lab testing data, but we don't have experiential data yet, but they seem cost effective
• I don’t have data on...” “No, not liters.
• It has to be on very firm data.

Committee: Senate Banking and Insurance

Summary: The Banking and Insurance Committee heard a series of presentations focused on mitigation, flood and wind resilience, and insurance discounts. Kevin Guthrie of the Florida Division of Emergency Management outlined several funding streams for mitigation, including federal Hazard Mitigation Grant Program dollars, BRIC grants, flood mitigation assistance, and the state hurricane loss mitigation program. He emphasized the new Elevate Florida initiative, which will use about $400 million initially to elevate or reconstruct flood-prone homes, starting with National Flood Insurance Program properties and severe repetitive-loss homes, with no current per-home cap. Guthrie said the state will contract directly with licensed vendors and aims to reduce future flood losses, lower insurance costs, and keep properties on the tax rolls rather than relying on buyouts. Insurance Commissioner Mike Yaworski described Florida’s windstorm mitigation discount program, explaining that the 1802 inspection form is used to assess a home’s overall “envelope” and determine statutory discounts. He said the office is updating the program based on a new wind loss study, with likely changes including greater recognition of roof types such as metal roofs and possible territorial risk adjustments. He also said the Legislature now requires the office to revisit the study every five years. Stephen Fielder of the Department of Financial Services reported on My Safe Florida Home, noting that the program offers inspections and grants for roof and opening protections, has completed more than 100,000 inspections, and has reimbursed hundreds of millions of dollars. He said the department has validated its discount calculations with insurers and that the program is intended to help homeowners reduce premiums through verified mitigation work. Michael Newman of the Insurance Institute for Business and Home Safety said Florida’s building code is nationally leading and that post-Ian surveys found no wind-driven structural damage in buildings built after adoption of the code. He argued that mitigation should be treated as a system, not isolated upgrades, and suggested adding Fortified designation to the state’s mitigation form to better document verified resilience improvements. Bill Truex, a county commissioner and builder, stressed the need to educate homeowners about floodproofing and roof choices, citing examples where flood panels prevented damage and noting that asphalt shingles often do not last as long in Florida as their marketing suggests. In panel discussion, senators asked about program eligibility, outreach to elderly and digitally challenged residents, contractor vetting, roof-life disclosures, and whether flood insurance should be more broadly required. Officials said outreach will include call centers and in-person assistance, and several participants urged better consumer disclosure and more data-driven guidance on roof and mitigation choices.

Transcript Highlights:

• for this report, looking at 2025 data mostly for crisis services.
• And once we get the data from DSS — so we got a lot of the data today, we've just got it — we're going
• Phase two, stakeholder engagement and data collection.
• Phase two, stakeholder engagement and data collection.
• Again, data requests: we've dropped in a list of requests for data from them specifically.

Summary: The meeting began with approval of the May minutes and then moved into administrative updates on several 2025 legislative workstreams. Staff reported progress on two marketing efforts tied to the youth mental health crisis: one focused on increasing awareness and use of urgent crisis centers, and another broader crisis-continuum campaign led by United Way. Both projects are refining materials based on working-group feedback and aim to have materials ready before the start of the school year. Updates were also given on the UCC private insurance review and the crisis continuum review, both of which are gathering data and reconvening working groups over the summer. The main discussion centered on a Civic Solutions Group update on Medicaid school billing. The contractor explained that the project is examining why Connecticut schools are not billing for behavioral health and related services, with the goal of maximizing federal reimbursement. Members clarified that the study is about schools billing for services, not private providers billing in schools. Questions focused on whether Medicaid has caps or authorization issues when students receive services both in school and in the community, and whether recent federal or state changes affect billing. The contractor said the work is still in data collection and analysis, and that some issues, such as reauthorization procedures, were outside his scope. Participants also raised concerns about perceived barriers, fee-for-service limitations, and the need to distinguish school-based billing from provider billing. A second major presentation came from Disability Rights Connecticut on a separate legislative study concerning behavioral health issues affecting students receiving special education. The subgroup is examining the feasibility and impact of requiring evidence-based interventions, especially for challenging behaviors that can lead to restraint and seclusion, and is also looking at monitoring and random audits of restraint and seclusion practices. The team described its project plan, including literature reviews, interviews, focus groups, surveys, and data requests from the State Department of Education and other stakeholders. Members emphasized that the work is aimed primarily at private providers under the statute, but may have broader relevance. Questions from the group focused on whether the study would include public schools, how evidence-based practices apply to students with intellectual disabilities and autism, and whether caregivers or parents would be interviewed; the presenters said caregiver input is not currently part of the charge. The meeting ended with reminders about the July 15 meeting, which will include a Solnit briefing, and a note that August TCB meetings will not be held, though a workshop on the Connecticut Children’s Behavioral Health Provider Survey is being planned for late July or early August.

Transcript Highlights:

• The data is there. Right.
• </c> all the data. The data is there. Right. all the data. The data is there. Right.
• they</c> data, they look at hard data, and they data, they look at hard data, and they they<04:16:49.680
• They enter hard data, they look at hard data, and they use hard data.
• </c> don't even really care about the data? don't even really care about the data?

Summary: The committee first took up SB 209, which would require schools seeking building aid for construction or reconstruction projects to use an owner’s project manager. The chair explained an amendment that would remove the bill’s requirement that the manager be engaged before application and instead revert to current law, while updating the project threshold from the older $1 million figure to a more current amount and clarifying that the manager’s role is to protect the project owner’s interests. Members asked about the cost of hiring a project manager over several years before a project is funded, the 1.5% fee in rule, and whether the rules already define the manager’s duties. The chair said the amendment addressed those concerns by leaving the timing to current law and relying on existing administrative rules for qualifications and responsibilities. The committee then voted 18-0 to adopt the amendment and 18-0 to recommend SB 209 OTPA, placing it on the consent calendar. The committee then moved to SB 99, which concerns allowing students enrolled in career and technical education programs at receiving comprehensive high schools to take additional academic courses there. The chair said the bill was intended to make it easier for students to access CTE without being blocked by scheduling conflicts in their sending schools, and to clarify how agreements between sending and receiving districts would work. He described concerns about the bill’s cost formula, transportation, part-time versus full-time status, and whether the proposal could unintentionally create open-enrollment or athletic-transfer issues. He said the amendment would mirror existing treatment for homeschool and charter school students, use a familiar funding model, and limit participation to students already enrolled in one or more CTE classes at the receiving school. The chair also emphasized that comprehensive high schools already have a statutory definition and that the bill would help more students participate in CTE, which he said currently reaches only a relatively small share of students statewide. He noted that transportation would be covered only when a CTE bus is available, otherwise students would be responsible for arranging travel as under current practice. After brief discussion, the committee voted 18-0 to adopt the amendment and 18-0 to recommend SB 99 OTPA, also placing it on the consent calendar.

Transcript Highlights:

• , the selling of your data.
• Access to the categories of data collected about the person and where the data came from, access to who
• the data was transferred to, and it requested the data.
• You could request your data be deleted, including processors, which could be whomever they sold the data
• I think he's litigating a data privacy case right now.

Transcript Highlights:

• our data dashboard—all of our data in-house.
• . data, and really verify the accuracy of that data, which we don't have right now with federal Title
• I data.
• Census data.
• transfers to Public Education Department data and then to higher education data.

Committee: Senate Senate Education

Transcript Highlights:

• Most legislators had probably not focused yet on data centers, never mind hyperscale, large-scale data
• Since then, the data center landscape has shifted significantly.
• order that barred federal agencies from collecting the data themselves.
• The rise of AI requires a corresponding buildout of data centers.
• This would ensure data centers are not exempt from CEQA and creates a pathway for data centers built

Transcript Highlights:

• Successful efforts to solve homelessness require comprehensive, data-driven planning.
• Additionally, some of the data included in SB 866 is already collected by existing systems.
• Additionally, some of the data included in SB 866 is already collected by existing systems.
• And we don't want to create any confusion there between the data.
• Data in California.

Committee: Senate Housing

Summary: The committee heard SB 866, which would require jurisdictions that do not receive HAP grants to include homelessness data, strategies, and regional coordination in their housing elements. The author and supporters said the bill would close a gap in planning and create more consistent, data-driven local responses to homelessness. Opponents, including the League of California Cities and several cities, argued the bill would impose costly and duplicative reporting requirements on small jurisdictions, require data cities cannot control, and should instead be aligned with existing regional planning processes. Members raised concerns about burden on small cities, but also emphasized the need for statewide, standardized homelessness planning. The committee then heard SB 967, which would allow jurisdictions to count qualifying interim housing toward a portion of their acutely low-income RHNA obligations, with safeguards against double counting and reporting requirements for moved units. Supporters said interim housing is a faster, less expensive way to get people indoors and should be incentivized as a bridge from encampments to permanent housing. Opponents, including housing law experts and advocacy groups, argued the bill would blur the line between temporary shelter and permanent housing, weaken obligations to build deeply affordable housing, and create a two-tier system for the lowest-income Californians. After discussion, the committee passed SB 967 on a due pass motion to Appropriations, with several members voting aye and the bill held on call for absent members. The committee also considered SCR 131, a resolution calling for a coordinated state effort to end unsheltered homelessness and prioritize a broader set of interventions, including interim housing, prevention, and permanent supportive housing. Supporters described unsheltered homelessness as a moral and public health crisis and urged stronger state alignment and funding. One member explained an abstention based on concerns that the resolution’s language could be read as endorsing more funding without clear metrics or evidence of effectiveness. The author said amendments had already narrowed the language and was open to further changes. The resolution was adopted on a motion, with the roll held open for absent members. Finally, the committee heard SB 1238, which would strengthen oversight and transparency for homeowners associations and HOA management companies, including disclosures, reserve-fund protections, and a fiduciary-duty provision. The author and supporters said the bill would protect homeowners from mismanagement and improve financial clarity in common interest developments. Opponents from community manager and HOA groups said managers are administrative agents, not decision-makers, and objected especially to imposing a fiduciary duty to individual homeowners. Members generally supported the bill but flagged the fiduciary-duty issue and reserve-fund language as areas for further review, noting that some amendments had been agreed to and others would be addressed later in the process.

Transcript Highlights:

• What's the data for that?
• We're open to all of that data and that dialogue.
• under old data to what they're going to be receiving under the new data.
• We want to make sure it's based in data. Got it.
• It should be based on data, like you said.

Committee: Senate Joint Legislative Committee on Climate Change Policies

Summary: The committee heard an overview of CARB’s proposed amendments to California’s Cap-and-Invest program, implemented under AB 1207 and SB 840 after last year’s reauthorization through 2045. CARB said the draft rule changes are intended to support affordability, market certainty, and the state’s 2030 and 2045 climate targets, while also addressing offsets, utility allowance transfers, leakage protections for industry, and post-2030 allowance budgets. Members emphasized the importance of completing the rulemaking on schedule this spring so the changes can take effect by September 1, 2026. A major focus was how allowances are allocated among electric utilities, natural gas utilities, industry, and the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. CARB explained that the proposal transfers natural gas utility allowances to electric utilities over time to support electrification and ratepayer protection, while maintaining free allowances for industry to reduce leakage risk and preserve in-state manufacturing and refining. Several members and panelists questioned whether the proposed utility changes could raise rates, whether the transition from gas to electric credits should happen faster, and whether the industrial allocation changes reduce climate credit and GGRF revenues more than necessary. CARB and panelists said they were open to additional data and comments, and noted that the proposal is still in public comment. The committee also discussed carbon capture, carbon removal, and refining. Members asked CARB to ensure that CCUS and CDR are clearly recognized as viable compliance pathways and to keep SB 905 rulemaking on track. On refining, members raised concerns about imported gasoline, leakage, and the need for better data on the carbon intensity of imported fuels; CARB said cap-and-invest applies to fuel suppliers at the rack, while life-cycle accounting issues are handled more through the Low Carbon Fuel Standard and related modeling. CARB said it is continuing technical work on those data tools. In the second panel, the LAO, IEMAC, EDF, and SCAPA representatives generally agreed that the program faces real tradeoffs between affordability, ambition, and leakage protection. The LAO and IEMAC stressed that the Legislature should scrutinize how CARB divides the allowance “pie,” since more free allocations to utilities or industry mean less revenue for GGRF. EDF argued the program could be somewhat more ambitious in the near term without harming affordability, while SCAPA said the proposal would reduce allowances for publicly owned utilities and could undermine early decarbonization investments and ratepayer benefits. No votes were taken during the hearing.