Transcript Highlights:

• This report really was created as a resource.
• , could actually use this as a resource.
• partners, could actually use this as a resource.
• It's a stakeholder economic and workforce development resources page.
• It's truly a resource of importance.

Summary: The Careers and Workforce Subcommittee met for its first meeting of the year, took roll, and heard member introductions centered on the importance of workforce pathways beyond the traditional four-year college route. Members repeatedly emphasized manufacturing, trades, rural workforce needs, apprenticeships, and helping students and adults find multiple paths to good jobs. The chair outlined the subcommittee’s focus on policies that build a skilled workforce and announced the day’s theme would be manufacturing, with presentations from the Florida Department of Commerce, the Florida Semiconductor Institute, and Fleet Force CDL training. Secretary Alex Kelly presented Florida’s manufacturing report, saying manufacturing is a major economic driver and that Florida has become the 10th largest state in manufacturing employment. He highlighted strong job multipliers, rapid growth in manufacturing GDP and establishments, the importance of logistics and ports, and the state’s small-business-heavy manufacturing base. He also stressed the aging manufacturing workforce, the need for modern skills such as robotics, cybersecurity, and data analytics, and the role of public-private partnerships, apprenticeships, and workforce education investments in supporting reshoring and industry growth. Dr. David Arnold described Florida’s semiconductor sector and the Florida Semiconductor Institute’s mission to grow research, workforce, and ecosystem development. He said semiconductors are strategically important, Florida ranks fifth nationally in semiconductor workforce, and the main bottleneck is mid-level technician talent rather than engineers or entry-level workers. He pointed to NeoCity, Valencia College, and other regional partnerships as models, and said the state needs more proactive planning, better instructor capacity, and stronger pathways from K-12 through postsecondary. Evan Agiloff of Fleet Force discussed Florida’s CDL shortage, saying trucking is essential to the supply chain, Florida has about 18,000 open CDL positions, and Fleet Force’s college-based model can quickly move students into middle-class jobs. Members asked about apprenticeships, CTE pathways, semiconductor training, infrastructure needs, and how to expand and better fund workforce programs; no votes were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• ,<00:28:15.679> policy information, resources, policy information, resources, policy development
• technical assistance, and develop technical assistance, and develop resources<00:29:54.960> to
• And perhaps most impactful statewide is our professional development and resource programs.
• development and resource programs. development and resource programs.
• resource program team development and resource program team and<01:19:38.960> their<01:19:39.440

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The Education Finance Committee met on March 3, 2026, approved the minutes from February 26, and then held a lengthy informational hearing on the Minnesota Department of Education’s funding and internal allocation of resources. House fiscal staff walked members through several spreadsheets showing federal, non-general fund, and general fund administrative spending, noting the data was filtered from SWIFT and was not exact. The chair said the discussion was intended to help members understand how MDE is funded and how those funds are used internally, in advance of later budget decisions and a separate upcoming hearing on the Perpich Center. Commissioner Willie Jett opened by describing MDE’s mission, statewide reach, and FY 2026 budget of about $14.1 billion, most of which flows directly to districts and charter schools for instruction, special education, transportation, nutrition, and operations. He emphasized transparency, accountability, and the department’s role in implementing laws, distributing aid, and supporting schools and students across urban, suburban, and rural communities. He also noted the department serves more than 873,000 pre-K through 12 students in 2,264 schools. Deputy Commissioner Maren Holden outlined the Office of American Indian Education, the Office of General Counsel, and the Office of Inspector General, highlighting support for American Indian students, legal and rulemaking work, special education dispute resolution, fraud prevention, and student maltreatment investigations. Assistant Commissioner Dr. McCari Traum described the Office of Equity and Engagement, including equity and inclusion training, safe and supportive schools work, public engagement, family outreach, and fraud-prevention coordination. Assistant Commissioner Darren Cordy reviewed nutrition programs, special education services, and the charter center, including free school meals, commodity food distribution, IDEA compliance, and charter school support. Assistant Commissioner Bobby Bernham then described the Office of Teaching and Learning, including early education, academic standards, instruction and assessment, state library services, expanded learning, and literacy work. He highlighted early childhood alignment efforts, standards development across core subjects, professional learning, and library grants. No votes were taken beyond approval of the prior minutes, and the meeting remained informational, with members expected to ask questions after the presentations.

Transcript Highlights:

• Was that a resource witness? Members, we do have a resource witness from Jefferson County DD7.
• Was that a resource witness?
• We do have a resource witness from TCEQ if anyone would like to hear from the resource...
• We do have a resource witness from the PUC if anybody would like to hear from that resource witness.
• We do have a resource witness from the PUC if anybody would like to hear from that resource witness.

Bills: HB3115, HB5671, HB5693, SB790, SB1055, SB1302, SB1504, SB1625, SB1663, SB2692

Keywords: Cow Creek Groundwater Conservation District, groundwater, water wells, domestic well, livestock well, exempt well, metering device, well meter, groundwater conservation district, Special District Local Laws Code, Water Code, Section 36.117, groundwater regulation, water rights, aquifer management, municipal utility, retail public utility, groundwater export, water supply contract, election

Summary: The Committee on Natural Resources heard testimony on a series of water, utility, and groundwater-related bills. Early items included HB 5693, which would let Drainage District 7 hold board elections in November of odd-numbered years when a countywide election is occurring, and HB 5671, which would update the Johnson County Special Utility District by clarifying board eligibility, allowing bond issuance, and removing redundant TCEQ approval language to reduce costs and delays. Both bills were left pending after brief testimony from bill sponsors and local witnesses. The committee also heard SB 1504, which would update the Gulf Coast Authority to allow video-conference participation in meetings, and SB 1302, aimed at closing a TCEQ permitting loophole that allowed dischargers with prior denials or suspensions to reapply through an automated process without meaningful review. SB 2692 drew substantial discussion: it would change the signature threshold for outside-city-limits customers appealing municipal utility rates to the PUC by customer class. Valero supported the bill as a way to avoid requiring large-volume users to gather signatures from unrelated residential customers, while the City of Corpus Christi opposed it, arguing that lowering the threshold to one customer could trigger expensive appeals costing $500,000 to $1 million. A PUC witness said such cases are increasing and that the agency would need additional staff under the fiscal note. SB 790, creating a simplified PUC complaint process for small water and wastewater billing disputes, and SB 1663, expanding TCEQ notice requirements for nearby residents when groundwater contamination is discovered, were also heard and left pending. Additional bills included HB 3115, clarifying that the Cow Creek Groundwater Conservation District cannot require meters on exempt domestic or livestock wells; SB 1055, raising the Southeast Texas Groundwater Conservation District’s production fee cap from 1 cent to 7 cents per 1,000 gallons; and SB 1625, requiring private water and wastewater utilities to report cybersecurity incidents to TCEQ and DIR. The committee then took up pending business and adopted a substitute for SB 7, which made several changes to water fund use, eminent domain coordination, and EDAP-related provisions, and voted 10-0 to report it favorably. The committee also adopted a substitute for HB 2347, a county water conservation program bill, and reported it favorably 9-1. HB 5675 and SB 2476 were each reported favorably 10-0. The meeting concluded with adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Unit within the Department of Public Safety before the Committee on Energy Resources.
• Utility district for the committee on land and resource management HB 2472 by Simmons relating to the
• Refer to the Committee on Land and Resource.
• in certain circumstances for the Committee on Land and Resource Management.
• Affirmative to the Committee on Natural Resources, HB 2569.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The Committee on Higher Education and Workforce Development will come to order.
• that are not rich in resources.
• more resources, but drive it down so we give our school districts that are not rich in resources...”
• , more resources, but drive it down.
• So we give our school districts that are not rich in resources. more resources, but drive it down.

Summary: The Committee on Higher Education and Workforce Development heard House Bill 3359, presented by Representative Wilson on behalf of Representative Riggs. The bill would create a 20% state income tax credit, capped at $10 million annually beginning in tax year 2027, for donations to registered school robotics/STEAM programs. Eligible contributions were described as cash, equipment, software, materials, supplies, and possibly employee volunteer hours, with a six-year sunset. Committee members asked for clarification on whether the credit applies to individuals or businesses, whether volunteer time by parents or other non-experts would qualify, which state agency would administer reporting, and whether the 20% rate should be higher. Wilson said the bill would need clarifying language, including on volunteer eligibility and the reporting department, and said he was open to revisiting the percentage and other details with the sponsor. The primary witness in support was Sarah Waldron, an 18-year-old Westminster Christian Academy senior and robotics team CEO who said she wrote the bill. She argued the credit would help businesses invest in robotics programs, address unequal access across Missouri, and strengthen workforce readiness in STEM and AI. She said the bill was intended to support business employee volunteer hours, not individual volunteer claims, and noted she had drafted an amendment to provide larger credits for under-resourced schools based on free-and-reduced-lunch percentages. Committee members praised her work and discussed how to target aid toward rural and under-resourced districts. One witness testified in opposition, State Public Advocate Arne C. A. C. Dinoff, who said he supported robotics and the student’s effort but opposed the tax credit because of the state’s budget deficit and the broader cost of tax credit programs. He objected particularly to subsidizing volunteerism and said robotics should be supported locally rather than through a state tax credit. The hearing concluded without a vote or other formal action on the bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• As with the first, our natural resources and unique biodiversity.
• Brian Cash from the Natural Resources Agency.
• Because we are a market economy, we... ...that resource.
• And that's what I would use as the term exploiting a resource.
• If you take the resource and you don't pay the true cost of taking the resource, you are, from the public

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee heard the administration’s spending plan for Proposition 4’s climate smart agriculture and biodiversity chapters, along with related trailer bill language. CDFA outlined proposed funding for existing programs such as SWEEP, Healthy Soils, Urban Agriculture, and invasive species work, plus new or phased-in programs including year-round and mobile farmers’ markets, tribal food sovereignty, and regional farm equipment sharing. The Department of Conservation described funding for the California Farmland Conservancy Program and Working Lands and Riparian Corridors Program, while the Department of Finance and LAO discussed pending allocations and generally found the overall approach reasonable, though LAO suggested the Legislature may want more statutory guidance and reporting, especially for new programs. Members focused on implementation details, equity, and accountability. Questions covered how programs would serve vulnerable and disadvantaged communities, whether new solicitations would be reopened for previously oversubscribed grants, how outcomes are tracked, and how to structure guidance for new programs such as farm equipment sharing. The chair emphasized that the Legislature wants clearer direction on program design and noted that AB 2313 should guide implementation of the regional farm equipment sharing allocation. The committee also discussed the administration’s request to directly appropriate bond funds to departments and to exempt bond program guidelines from the Administrative Procedures Act; LAO supported the APA exemption with possible legislative guardrails for public notice and comment. The committee then heard on the farm-to-school proposal, with CDFA requesting $24.9 million General Fund for incubator grants, technical assistance, and network support. CDFA said the program has reached nearly half of California schoolchildren and has shown strong demand and positive evaluation results. LAO supported the core program but recommended rejecting the $3 million technical assistance component as too broad and suggested the Legislature consider using Proposition 98 for some of the funding. Members debated that point, with some expressing concern about using General Fund dollars for a new discretionary request during a tight budget year. The biodiversity and nature-based solutions chapter included funding for the Wildlife Conservation Board, state conservancies, and tribal nature-based solutions. WCB described major recent investments and proposed projects tied to 30 by 30, habitat restoration, tribal partnerships, and public access. Members raised concerns about long-term stewardship, the size of the WCB allocation, and whether the Legislature should receive more detail on how funds will be distributed. The committee also heard requests for Bolsa Chica wetlands maintenance and Rincon Island decommissioning funding from the State Lands Commission, with members questioning long-term liability, remediation costs, and the role of private oil operators. No votes were taken, and the hearing ended with public comment from stakeholders largely supporting the APA exemption, farm-to-school funding, biodiversity investments, and related conservation programs.

Transcript Highlights:

• We also have resources and technical assistance.
• Then we have federal and state grant resources.
• School resource officers do more than just that.
• Well, school resource officers are currently... Resource officers are currently not state mandated.
• So we do have those resources at the state level, but there is... ...a resource issue at the local level

Summary: The committee held a hearing on active and mass shootings in California, focusing on prevention, response, training, communications, and gaps in preparedness across law enforcement, schools, campuses, fire, EMS, and state agencies. Opening remarks emphasized the frequency and impact of gun violence, the need for faster coordinated response, and the importance of learning from recent tragedies such as the Stockton-area mass shooting described by Sheriff Patrick Withrow. The first panel included representatives from police, sheriff, and campus public safety agencies, who discussed incident command, interoperable communications, next-generation 911, threat assessment, emergency notification systems, and the value of joint drills and cross-agency planning. Witnesses also highlighted differences in training and authority across jurisdictions, especially for private university public safety departments versus public campus police. Campus representatives said they rely heavily on municipal law enforcement for armed response, while also using run-hide-fight protocols, text alerts, surveillance, and threat assessment teams. Members raised concerns about standardized training, after-action reviews, mental health resources, school resource officers, and whether campus safety plans and drills are sufficiently consistent or workable. Sheriff Withrow argued that early intervention and accountability are being weakened by well-intentioned laws, while other witnesses stressed prevention through relationships, diversion, and coordinated support services. The second panel from Cal OES, the Department of Education, POST, and EMSA described statewide systems and standards. Cal OES outlined its Reduce the Risk initiative, gun violence restraining orders, mutual aid, unified command, after-action reporting, and nonprofit security grants. The Department of Education explained California’s statutory school safety framework, annual safety plans, regulated armed assailant drills, and local flexibility, while acknowledging compliance gaps and the need for more mental health support. POST described the new requirement for 16 hours of standardized active shooter training for recruits and ongoing local training options. EMSA explained its role in medical response and terrorism training standards. No votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is our new team development.
• work uh this is our new team development work uh this is our new team development uh<00:03:07.799
• sure we get them to the right resource sure we get them to the right resource if<00:13:54.600>
• under that um to share those resources under that um to share those resources and<00:16:00.560><
• <00:18:23.039> over something you know to be developed over something you know to be developed

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• University Lands also promotes development of oil and gas resources on the PUF lands through area contracts
• for development, ACFDs.
• The ACFDs and the lease sale are the primary tools used by University Lands to develop oil and gas resources
• Today, AWBD is a respected statewide resource for education, professional development, and advocacy on
• will be inconsistent with development patterns necessary to protect local resources.

Summary: The committee heard testimony first from the Texas General Land Office and School Land Board. GLO officials described the agency’s role in managing more than 13 million acres of state lands and mineral interests for the Permanent School Fund, overseeing the Alamo, coastal programs, veterans’ services, and federal disaster recovery. They said the agency has generated about $6 billion for the Permanent School Fund since Commissioner Buckingham took office, and that its disaster recovery portfolio is about $14 billion across multiple events, with more than 22,000 housing units rebuilt or reconstructed since Hurricane Harvey. Members asked about land purchases such as Brewster Ranch, rare earth mineral leasing, SpaceX-related beach access, and whether the lands are public access lands; GLO staff said the holdings are managed to maximize revenue for education, that most land is leased rather than open to public access, and that they are coordinating on coastal access and compliance. On the School Land Board, members sought clarification on the difference between GLO-managed lands and the Permanent School Fund Corporation’s investment role, and staff explained that GLO generates the revenue while the separate corporation invests it. No votes or formal actions were taken. The Board for Lease of University Lands then testified. University Lands officials explained that they steward 2.1 million acres of surface and mineral interests in West Texas for the Permanent University Fund, which supports UT and Texas A&M institutions. They said a 2025 lease sale produced about $50 million in bonus revenue from 28,000 acres, and described the Board for Lease’s role in approving lease forms, lease sales, and development agreements. Members asked about the size and use of the PUF, how distributions work through UTIMCO, whether PUF money can be used for athletics, and how the land is managed; the witness said the fund is a constitutional endowment, the land is largely leased rather than sold, and distributions are generally used for buildings, labs, and other permanent structures, with some institutions also using a portion for operations. No votes or formal actions were taken. The committee then took up municipal utility districts. Testimony from a law firm, the Texas Municipal League, Fort Bend County Commissioner Vincent Morales, and Johnson Development largely supported MUDs as a financing tool for infrastructure tied to growth. Witnesses said MUDs help fund water, sewer, drainage, roads, parks, and related infrastructure, allowing development to proceed without shifting costs to existing taxpayers and helping keep housing affordable. They emphasized that MUDs are created with disclosure to homebuyers, are subject to the Open Meetings Act and Public Information Act, and are overseen by TCEQ for bond issuance and related financial stress tests. Members questioned whether MUDs are taxing entities, whether they can be created inside city limits or ETJs, how much control cities and counties retain, and whether MUDs are becoming permanent local governments; witnesses acknowledged they levy taxes and debt, can exist within city limits with city consent, and often function as long-term local entities. The committee did not take any formal action during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• to really see if it would match the economics of development of a site, so that we didn't develop rules
• So there’s not a lot of resources even in the...
• And lastly, funding resources... Spaces because of these costs.
• The sewer and water standards were also developed in 2008.
• specifically warranted by the need of that development or not.

Summary: The committee held a work session on form-based codes, child care facility siting, and street standards/frontage improvements. On form-based codes, Commerce’s Dave Anderson explained that these codes emphasize building form, orientation, and the public realm more than traditional use and density tables, and that they are typically applied in specific districts rather than citywide or statewide. Lacey’s Vanessa Dolby described the city’s Woodland District code, developed through community charrettes, fiscal and market analysis, and subdistrict-specific standards to create a walkable downtown. She said the approach has helped produce a more desirable built environment and more flexibility in permitted uses, but also noted it can be less user-friendly for applicants and still requires some use restrictions; both presenters said a hybrid approach is often best. The committee then heard from DCYF and multiple providers about barriers to opening child care facilities. DCYF officials said Washington has more than 6,500 licensed providers and that a new pre-licensing support team is helping applicants navigate licensing, but local zoning, building, fire, parking, utility, and occupancy requirements still create delays and confusion. Testifiers described long permitting timelines, inconsistent local interpretations, costly upgrades, and utility hookup delays; one Yakima provider said county requirements, a floodplain-related elevation certificate, and a private well issue stopped her in-home child care proposal, while others described traffic impact fees, parking mandates, and zoning barriers that made projects infeasible. Enterprise Community Partners highlighted examples of successful local reforms, including fee waivers, expedited permitting, and zoning changes in several cities, and DCYF said it is working toward a 2026 action plan and a resource guide for providers. In the final section, planners and developers discussed how street standards and frontage improvement requirements can undermine infill and middle housing. Poulsbo’s planning manager said current standards were designed for greenfield subdivisions and often force costly curb, gutter, sidewalk, stormwater, and utility upgrades on small infill sites, sometimes adding tens of thousands of dollars and causing projects to be abandoned. A Seattle-based developer made similar points about small middle-housing projects being burdened by frontage work, curb ramps, buried standards, and EV-ready parking requirements that can trigger expensive undergrounding. Committee members asked about possible state-level changes, including whether child care should be treated as an essential public facility and whether parking requirements had already been reduced; one senator noted that minimum parking requirements for child care facilities were eliminated in prior legislation, with implementation phased in over the next few years.

Transcript Highlights:

• the Human Resources Department.
• Was the only year that was passed through our Resource and Development Committee.
• and looking into the development.
• But we've developed, when we developed the truck stop, and so the next aspect would be to do the land
• All of that is already developed.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, the agency encourage development.
• <00:12:55.519> it's scarce resources, we think it's scarce resources, we think it's judicious
• make sure that we're directing resources make sure that we're directing resources to<00:14:59.040
• , the very limited resources we had.
• <00:29:13.679> that homes, but also the resources that homes, but also the resources that

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Water is this state's most precious resource.
• You might have a groundwater district in your area that manages that resource.
• So one of the things that we focus a lot of resources on is outreach.
• Water Development Board so that districts, particularly those that don't have additional resources. for
• Use whatever resources we have to address this issue. Thank you.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• development and renewable resource delivery.
• The economic development folks in the state realize that we need this to meet our economic development
• When you were modeling power resources, just fossil resources, against each other...
• Madam Chair and Representative Garrett, for our business development lead, our Director of Business Development
• , I did hire an economic developer, Dr.

Transcript Highlights:

• where the resources were needed.
• This includes water resource management, waste management, air resource management, and geological surveys
• This includes water resource management, waste management, air resource management, and geological surveys
• This includes water resource management, waste management, air resource management, and geological surveys
• We don't have infinite resources.

Summary: The Agriculture and Natural Resources Budget Committee met to organize for the session, confirm a quorum, and hear introductory remarks from members about their districts and interests. Chair Esposito outlined the committee’s jurisdiction and budget overview, noting a total budget of about $7.2 billion, with major funding tied to the Department of Environmental Protection, the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Fish and Wildlife, and the Department of Citrus. She also described major cost drivers such as Everglades restoration, water quality, resiliency, land acquisition, and rural family lands, and asked members to review agency requests in small groups later in the process. Agency leaders then presented budget and program updates. Agriculture Commissioner Wilton Simpson emphasized department efficiency efforts, including IT modernization, staff reorganization, rural and family lands conservation, best management practices, Fresh From Florida marketing, hurricane recovery loans for farmers, and completion of the Connor Complex headquarters. DEP Secretary Alexis Lambert highlighted record investments in Everglades restoration, water quality projects, resilience grants, land acquisition, state parks, and enforcement. FWC Executive Director Roger Young discussed conservation research, fisheries and wildlife management, law enforcement, disaster response, and pressures from growth, boating, invasive species, and derelict vessels. Department of Citrus Executive Director Shannon Shep reviewed the industry’s decline due to hurricanes and citrus greening, current research and marketing efforts, and e-commerce campaigns to support Florida citrus sales. Members asked questions about citrus production declines, future replanting and therapies, rural family lands, PFOS cleanup, mangrove restoration, flooding and pump infrastructure, agricultural theft, and derelict vessel removal. Officials generally responded with updates, emphasized science-based management and enforcement, and in several cases said they would follow up with more detailed information later. No formal votes were taken; the meeting ended with the chair directing members to provide feedback on agencies for further budget review and then adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• housing resources to build even market-rate housing.
• housing resources to build even market-rate housing.
• resources to build even market-rate housing.
• As an affordable housing developer, I can attest that even with all the local, state, and federal resources
• I'm with the Cooperative Development Institute.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Housing held a hybrid hearing on a broad slate of housing and homelessness bills. Chairs Rich Haggerty and Julian Cyr opened by noting the committee’s focus on EOHLC programs such as RAFT, MRVP, and HomeBASE, and several members and advocates emphasized the urgency of the state’s homelessness crisis, including rising family homelessness and the need for earlier intervention, more stable subsidies, and stronger long-term housing tools. A major theme was homelessness prevention and rehousing. Multiple witnesses supported bills to codify and strengthen RAFT and HomeBASE, arguing that assistance should be available earlier in a crisis rather than only after a notice to quit or imminent loss of housing. Testimony from legal services, homelessness coalitions, social workers, municipal housing staff, and tenant advocates said the programs help families avoid eviction and shelter, but need more flexibility, higher benefit caps, and permanent statutory protection. Several speakers also urged support for codifying the Massachusetts Rental Voucher Program (MRVP), describing it as a critical long-term subsidy for low-income households and older adults, and warning that codification would protect the program from future budget or policy changes. The committee also heard testimony on housing stability for older adults, affordable homes for people with disabilities, supportive housing, housing cooperatives, home sharing, local preference, and reentry housing for returning citizens. Advocates for older adults described a Somerville bridge subsidy pilot that helped stabilize seniors while they waited for permanent housing, and urged statewide expansion. Supporters of supportive housing called for an interagency board to streamline funding and development, while cooperative housing proponents backed creation of a Massachusetts Center for Housing Cooperatives and a dedicated funding reserve. A bill to secure housing for returning citizens drew support from reentry providers and Senator Adam Gomez, who said stable housing is essential to successful reintegration. No votes were taken during the hearing; witnesses generally asked the committee to report the bills favorably, and some members asked follow-up questions on data and program details.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's a big, hotly debated topic surrounding all these developments.
• So these are resources that are essentially shared by everybody.
• They're literally shared resources.
• You know, my background in economic development.
• So all of these resources serve all of our customers.

Summary: The Committee on Utilities held an informational hearing on data centers in Missouri, with the chair explaining that the goal was to hear from three speakers with different perspectives and allow committee questions, but no public testimony. The first witness, Matt Edelow of the International Union of Operating Engineers and Columbia-Jefferson City Area Building Trades Council, spoke in support of data center development for its construction jobs, long-term employment, tax revenue, and local economic benefits. He said the Montgomery County projects had already put about 200 Missourians to work, described the facilities as using closed-loop water systems and generator noise levels that he said would be limited by setbacks and acoustics, and urged local hire and apprenticeship requirements. Committee members asked about water use, noise, cybersecurity, labor, and tax revenue, and he said one project could generate about $13.1 million annually at full buildout. The second witness, Rob Dixon of Ameren Missouri, testified that Senate Bill 4 and the Public Service Commission’s large-load tariff provide strong protections for existing customers. He said large data center customers must sign long-term contracts, pay 100% of interconnection costs, post collateral, pay at least 80% of contracted demand, and face exit and reduction fees, with load-shedding rules applying to them like other customers. Dixon said Ameren’s planning process includes engineering reviews and MISO review before projects proceed, and that the utility’s integrated resource plan calls for 5.3 gigawatts of new generation by 2030, with 2.2 gigawatts of signed large-load agreements already in place. He also said large customers can help spread fixed grid costs and put downward pressure on rates, and noted that the protections apply to investor-owned utilities, not co-ops or municipal utilities. The final witness, John Kaufman of the Consumers Council of Missouri, argued that the current protections are not strong enough and that data centers could raise rates through construction work in progress, stranded generation costs, and other risks if projects change or technology shifts. He urged greater consumer protections, including more upfront financial security from data centers, reconsideration of construction work in progress policies, and possibly requiring data centers to bring their own power in some cases. Committee members debated his claims about SB 4, QIP, and rate impacts, with some members saying the law already contains clawbacks and consumer-benefit requirements, while others echoed concerns about transparency and public understanding. The hearing ended without any votes or formal action, and the chair said the committee would continue the discussion in future meetings.

Transcript Highlights:

• of Business and Economic Development.
• of Business and Economic Development.
• There is limited resources, limited expertise, but through managing resources, we’re going to…” “…and
• And also the continual collection of data and developing of resources that help our ecosystem... ...and
• also the continual collection of data and developing of resources that help our ecosystem partners do

Summary: The joint informational hearing of the Select Committee on Electric Vehicles and Charging Infrastructure focused on California’s EV market, charging infrastructure, and the effects of recent federal actions. The chair opened by emphasizing California’s progress on EV adoption and charging reliability, but also noted ongoing challenges with affordability, access, interoperability, heavy-duty electrification, and federal headwinds. She highlighted interest in technologies such as inductive charging and thanked host organizations and staff before moving to the first panel. State agency witnesses from Go-Biz, CARB, and the California Energy Commission described current programs and priorities. Go-Biz outlined its role in coordinating agencies, supporting permitting, and advancing the state’s ZEV market development strategy and equity action plan. CARB discussed federal attacks on its clean vehicle regulations, litigation to defend waiver authority, and the importance of incentives and regulatory programs such as Advanced Clean Trucks, Advanced Clean Fleets, Clean Truck Check, HVIP, and Clean Cars for All. The CEC detailed its funding and regulatory work on charging and fueling infrastructure, charger reliability, payment methods, roaming, and statewide planning, while stressing the need for more charging in multifamily housing and more public DC fast charging. All three agencies said federal rollbacks and permitting delays are major obstacles, but that California remains committed to expanding ZEV adoption. The second panel featured advocates, local government, utility, and research perspectives. CalETC urged continuous state funding through the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and emphasized the low-carbon fuel standard, multifamily charging, and managed charging. An EV advocacy group proposed a conquest-style state incentive for new and used EV buyers and argued that multifamily housing is a major untapped market, while also favoring Level 2 charging over Level 1 for most home and apartment settings. Los Angeles County and LADWP described large-scale local deployment of chargers, fleet electrification, workforce training, and the need for sustained funding, agency coordination, and streamlined permitting and grid interconnection. UCS recommended prioritizing replacement of older high-emitting vehicles, using fuel policy revenues to support cleaner cars, and expanding bidirectional charging. The chair closed by asking for more discussion on Level 1 versus Level 2 charging and noted the importance of education, affordability, and practical deployment strategies.

Transcript Highlights:

• Resources and support. Yes, sir.
• Development Office.
• As a resource, we have Chief Kidd, which I intend to start with him.
• So that we could keep adding the resourcing capability to it.
• We can talk about additional resources and where they go.

Bills: HB2, HB1, HB18, HB19, HB20, HB1, HB 2, HB18, HB19, HB20

Keywords: emergency communication, interoperability, grant program, first responders, state council, disaster response, emergency management, mass fatality, justices of the peace, training programs, emergency manager license, volunteer management, justice of the peace training, criminal history checks, state health services, broadband, public safety, disaster preparedness, funding, flood disaster plan

Transcript Highlights:

• Additionally, this model helps us leverage resources.
• They don’t have the resources to have staff.
• They don’t have the resources to purchase the materials.
• They don't have the resources to have staff.
• They don't have the resources to purchase the materials.

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.