Transcript Highlights:

• permitting process.
• There has to be due process.
• Going on down, we have an appeals process.
• There is a process that we have to go through.
• There is a process that we have to go through.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and first took up Senate Bill 2276, which addresses water projects that cross county lines. Senator Larry Luick and Danny Quissel of the North Dakota Water Resource Districts Association explained that the bill would require joint boards for multi-county projects, with equal representation from each county, and would add a dispute-resolution process: mediation through the Agriculture Department, then appeal to the Department of Water Resources, and finally court if needed. An additional cleanup amendment was adopted to clarify that a district could proceed if a joint board or district refused to participate. Members raised concerns about possible county-versus-county litigation, but the committee approved the amendment and then passed SB 2276 as amended on an 11-0-2 roll call. The committee then heard the final bill of the day, Senate Bill 2267, on on-site wastewater treatment systems. DEQ Director Dave Glott presented a revised amendment reflecting prior discussion and input from local public health units and installers. The proposal would give the Department of Environmental Quality exclusive rulemaking authority, require public health units to inspect systems within 24 hours, allow MOUs with neighboring counties or health units, prohibit local rules that conflict with state standards, and create a state licensing system for installers while exempting homeowners working on their own property. It also set up permitting and appeals procedures, civil penalties for violations, and a $99,000 appropriation, with the department saying it would also rely on fee revenue and report back later on whether the program is working. Members asked about homeowner installation, local permitting, technical assistance, and whether the $99,000 appropriation and expected fees would be sufficient. Glott said homeowners could still consult with local health units and would likely still need permits, and estimated fees might be around $200 per year for installers, generating roughly $50,000 annually. The committee adopted the amendment and then passed SB 2267 as amended on a due-pass motion, with one no vote recorded. The chair then adjourned the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• or building permit process.
• process.
• It's a good process.
• It's a very long process.
• , and it's a public process.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Summary: The committee met to monitor implementation of several housing-related bills from the 89th session, with the chair emphasizing Texas’s housing shortage and the need to review land-use laws. For House Bill 24, witnesses from the Texas Public Policy Foundation, Reason Foundation, a church-affordable housing project, Habitat for Humanity, developers, and housing advocates said the bill’s higher protest threshold and simpler council override had reduced procedural barriers to rezoning, helped projects move forward, and supported lower rents and more multifamily development. Public testimony largely praised HB 24 as working as intended, and the chair noted it had passed the committee 6-1, the House 83-56, and the Senate unanimously. The committee then heard testimony on Senate Bill 1567, which preempted certain municipal occupancy limits based on unrelated-adult restrictions. Supporters, including Texas Public Policy Foundation, Texas Realtors, Texans for Housing, and Texas A&M student leaders, said the law improved clarity, reduced arbitrary local limits, and helped students and property owners use existing housing more efficiently. Opponents from College Station and Bryan-College Station neighborhood groups argued the law has encouraged investor purchases, tear-downs, and “stealth dorms,” displaced working-class residents, and harmed family homeownership. The chair noted SB 1567 had passed the committee 5-1, the House 101-19, and the Senate 30-1. The committee also reviewed Senate Bill 15, which reduced minimum lot sizes in covered jurisdictions. Ed Pinto of AEI said the law had already led to thousands of new small lots and lower-cost starter homes, while recommending expansion to more counties and broader application to attached housing. Other witnesses from builders, Pew, and housing advocates said smaller lots can increase affordability, but some cities, such as College Station and Grand Prairie, were adding local standards that could blunt the bill’s effect. City representatives from El Paso described how they implemented the law by reducing lot sizes and widths, while urging broader applicability to more of the city. The chair said SB 15 had passed the committee 7-0, the House 86-43, and the Senate 24-7. Finally, the committee began hearing testimony on Senate Bill 840, a by-right multifamily redevelopment measure. City officials from Garland and Plano described how they had updated local standards to comply while preserving design and setback rules, and said the bill could help redevelop built-out commercial corridors and add housing without expanding city footprints. The transcript ended as the committee continued taking testimony on SB 840.

Transcript Highlights:

• attached. uh the accreditation process attached. uh the accreditation process here.<00:24:13.600
• track a claim through the whole process. track a claim through the whole process.
• I expedited the processing paper.
• that they're okay during that process. that they're okay during that process.
• <01:35:46.040> Leort process because you know Mr. Leort process because you know Mr.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• process process is an important process process is an important safeguard<00:46:28.760> that<
• Minnesota law also outlines a process for resolving election disputes through the contest process.
• the contest process election through the contest process election contests<00:49:55.599> must<
• <00:56:13.559> of you know an error in the process of you know an error in the process of
• What's the process?

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They would have to do the same thing if we went through the process.
• You're going to transplant trees, and it's a process.
• to get that through the process and to become the new fee level.
• there is, in statute, a process for that question.
• there is there is in statute of process for that question so mr.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The Arizona Off-Highway Vehicle Study Committee met with a quorum and heard opening remarks from members and stakeholders representing OHV users, ranching, state agencies, land management, law enforcement, and industry. The committee reviewed Senate Bill 1519, which would raise the OHV/ATV weight threshold from 2,500 to 3,500 pounds, create an OHV Law Enforcement Fund, direct certain vehicle license tax revenue to that fund, and allow some OHV recreation on state trust lands under existing permit rules. Members discussed the fiscal and policy implications of changing the weight threshold and whether to keep the current Highway User Revenue Fund structure intact or redirect revenue for OHV enforcement and mitigation. Industry testimony estimated roughly 11,000 new off-road vehicles were sold in Arizona in 2025, with about 24% over 2,500 pounds, and committee members debated whether a flat sticker fee increase or a revenue-neutral adjustment would be cleaner than shifting VLT revenue. The committee also reviewed Senate Bill 1567, enacted in 2024, which requires OHV owners to complete an online education course before receiving an OHV indicia, with a report due December 1, 2026 and repeal of the requirement in 2027. Game and Fish staff said the education requirement has already appeared to improve behavior, especially helmet use by children. Several witnesses supported expanding education to all operators, not just owners, and suggested a single statewide course for consistency and easier enforcement. A nonprofit representative described plans for an OHV ambassador/education program and said it would support a universal training requirement and self-policing efforts. A major portion of the meeting focused on funding needs for OHV law enforcement and resource mitigation. Based on prior committee direction, outside stakeholders presented estimates that county law enforcement needs could total about $3.5 million annually, while natural resource damage and road decommissioning needs could average about $7.5 million annually over time, for a combined target of roughly $11 million per year. The discussion emphasized that the estimate was intended as a broad target rather than a precise census, and that it did not include all possible costs such as fence repair, tank restoration, or environmental compliance. Members and witnesses discussed soft versus hard road closures, the need to prioritize resource protection areas, and the importance of pairing mitigation projects with enforcement and education so that repaired areas are not quickly damaged again. No formal votes were taken in the portion provided, but the committee appeared to be gathering information to guide future recommendations on fees, funding channels, and education policy.

Transcript Highlights:

• As my first year law professor explained to me, due process is about what is the process that is due?
• the legal process.
• The whole process takes a few minutes.
• Restrict individuals' due process.
• We deserve due process.

Bills: HB256, HCR19, HB256, HB1308, HB1554, HB1743, HB2308, HB2351, HB2858, HB3676, HB3784, HB4312, HB4552, HB4823, HB4852, HB5007, HB5010, HB5520, HB5524, HCR19

Keywords: severe weather, adaptation plan, vulnerability assessment, environmental protection, state agencies, federal agents, transparency, law enforcement, identification, public trust, immigration enforcement, HCR 19, Texas concurrent resolution, federal immigration enforcement, masked agents, facial coverings, visible identification, uniforms, badges, name tags

Transcript Highlights:

• Duran said throughout the process is that at times this process felt that it was moving too quickly and
• I track the master plan process closely. I think it was a great process in many ways. new web page.
• I track the master plan process closely. I think it was a great process in many ways.
• The master plan process closely. I think it was a great process in many ways.
• This is not an easy process. Individual outcome measures. This is not an easy process. As Mr.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Human Services held a hearing on developmental services, rehabilitation, and related supports, with no votes taken. The first major topic was the Master Plan for Developmental Services. Administration officials described a year-long, community-driven process that included a steering committee, work groups, and statewide engagement sessions, and said the final draft would be released that Friday with about 170 recommendations. The Department of Developmental Services said the plan would inform future work, but did not offer a detailed implementation roadmap. The LAO said the plan contains significant policy and budget implications, may require statutory changes, and needs further analysis to turn recommendations into actionable proposals. Advocates and regional center representatives urged the Legislature and administration to avoid letting the plan sit on a shelf, called for prioritization and ongoing stakeholder oversight, and emphasized the need to address equity, workforce, service coordination, and cross-system collaboration. The chair said he wanted to work with the LAO on trailer bill language and future reporting to create a clearer path forward. The second topic was the Office of Employment First and competitive integrated employment. Administration witnesses said California has ended subminimum wage under SB 639, but that moving people into competitive integrated employment remains a major priority. They described existing efforts such as DDS’s coordinated career pathways pilot, paid internships, job development services, benefits counseling, and DOR’s career counseling and referral services, along with pilot projects in San Diego and Orange County. The State Council on Developmental Disabilities and advocates argued that employment outcomes have remained stuck at roughly 15% and that a dedicated Employment First Office is needed to coordinate across agencies, align goals, and improve outcomes. The LAO recommended regular legislative oversight on people transitioning out of subminimum wage and asked for technical assistance on coordinated career pathways. The chair criticized the administration’s decision to effectively eliminate funding for the office, requested a detailed implementation timeline and quarterly transition reports, and said the committee would continue pressing for the office to be implemented. The final issue was respite services, utilization trends, and access. DDS reported that in-home respite use and spending have risen sharply over several years, with about 150,000 people using respite in 2023-24 and expenditures reaching about $1 billion. Officials said access depends on families knowing the service exists, service coordinators identifying need, and having enough providers, especially in rural and linguistically diverse communities. The San Diego Regional Center said utilization generally mirrors statewide trends, but access is stronger in some areas, such as Imperial County, where families often prefer family-directed or agency-supported models that allow them to hire trusted workers. Committee members emphasized the importance of respite for family health and caregiver well-being, asked whether service coordinators are asking practical questions about sleep and stress, and discussed the need for better identification of complex behavioral and medical needs. DDS said a standardized family support tool and updated IPP process are intended to improve consistency, transparency, and person-centered assessment for respite and related services.

Transcript Highlights:

• So in the process of the courtroom process, with information that's received statutorily and legally
• How’s that process look?” “Yeah. Well, yeah.
• “So it’s a fairly substantial process.
• process, it needs to be an actual process, an actual hearing where the person who is at jeopardy of
• “Yes, so the process.”

Summary: The committee first deferred Senate Bill 49, which would remove the State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education from the list of offices subject to closed party primary elections, after the sponsor said additional amendments were being prepared. It then took up House Bill 1247, which creates a statewide sexual assault nurse examiner coordinator within the Department of Justice to improve access, evidence collection, and coordination for sexual assault survivors. Members adopted a committee amendment package that clarified the coordinating structure, geographic response considerations, reimbursement language, and related public records issues, and the bill was reported favorably as amended with support from health care and law enforcement-related groups. House Bill 1245, also dealing with public records, was amended to protect certain personal identifying information in criminal history records of criminal justice agency employees who serve as witnesses in criminal proceedings. The discussion focused on limiting release of Social Security numbers, home addresses, and dates of birth while preserving disclosure required for court proceedings and impeachment-related purposes. The committee adopted a further amendment narrowing the protection to those PII items in records held by the clerk of court, and the bill was reported favorably as amended. House Bill 1011, allowing jurors to donate per diem compensation to CASA, and House Bill 1186, which standardizes construction code and inspector licensing records while protecting inspectors’ personal information, were also reported favorably. Senate Bill 425, which implements the constitutional mandate for removal by suit of certain elected officials for felony conviction, malfeasance, or gross misconduct, drew the most extended debate. Supporters said it creates a civil process to address serious misconduct when criminal prosecution is unavailable or incomplete, while opponents warned it could be abused for political targeting, duplicate existing remedies, and rely on vague standards. After amendments clarifying the process and standards, the committee voted 10-5 to report the bill favorably as amended. The committee also adopted amendments and reported favorably House Bill 1057, extending absentee-by-mail eligibility for overseas service members from one year to two years, and began discussion of House Bill 709, which would create a rulemaking notification system, a 10-year sunset for certain rules, and an Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in the governor’s office.

Transcript Highlights:

• It creates a faster process than you...
• I'm sure that's a huge factor in getting the process to run smoothly.
• We will go through a review process with that.
• to make that a more reliable process overall.
• and also the permit review stage of the process.

Summary: The Senate Housing Committee heard presentations on a range of housing finance, permitting, and affordability tools. Chattanooga described its affordable housing PILOT program, which uses a per-unit property tax abatement tied to the rent loss from providing affordable units, with a 15-year term and annual compliance monitoring. Committee members asked about the program’s structure, whether it had been used elsewhere, and who was participating; the presenter said the first mixed-income project would bring 278 units with 42 affordable units and that the model was attracting private market-rate developers. Shoreline then described its MFTE and inclusionary zoning approach, emphasizing that longer tax exemption periods and station-area zoning changes had helped spur development, with most current pipeline projects concentrated near light rail stations. The committee also heard from the Municipal Research Services Center and the Department of Commerce on tax increment financing, proportional impact fees, and permit timelines. Commerce explained that TIF can fund public improvements such as roads, utilities, broadband, and some affordable housing or child care facilities, while proportional impact fee guidance is intended to help jurisdictions charge fees more closely aligned with actual project impacts. On permit timelines, Commerce presented its first annual report under recent law changes, using 2024 as a baseline year and noting that reported timelines were generally longer than statutory goals; members asked about outliers, paper versus electronic processing, and whether back-and-forth between applicants and staff was driving delays. Commerce said it would follow up with more data, including on CHIP funding and permit reform practices. Several local governments then shared permitting process improvements. Auburn reported relatively short review cycles and described its move to fully electronic permitting, internal performance standards, and a stock plan program that speeds review for repeated home designs. Bellevue described an AI permitting pilot with a local startup to help with pre-application questions, document triage, and plan review, aiming to reduce incomplete applications and revision cycles. Seattle presented a pilot for accessory dwelling unit co-development in which a mission-driven partner would help homeowners split lots, finance, build, and manage ADUs, with the homeowner eventually buying out the partner and retaining ownership; committee members asked about rent setting, management fees, and default risk, and staff said they would follow up. The committee also heard brief overviews of community land trusts and limited equity cooperatives as permanent affordability models, with presenters urging continued state and local funding support and policy recognition for these approaches.

Transcript Highlights:

• uses a standard and consistent process.
• It's a very labor-intensive process.
• So currently, we start processing ballots as soon as we have ballots to process.
• But it's still all the same process, same secure.
• They're impeding the hand-count process.

Summary: The committee heard House Bill 3709, which would change the partial manual audit process so early voting could be audited by voting location rather than by randomly selected precincts. The author and several supporters said the current precinct-based process is antiquated, labor-intensive, and especially difficult in countywide voting systems and large counties. Opponents and some neutral witnesses raised concerns about whether the change would still allow an apples-to-apples audit against official precinct results, whether random selection procedures should be more clearly defined, and how ballot secrecy and mail ballots would be handled. The Secretary of State’s office said counties already use random selection methods and that the bill would largely standardize early voting audits with election-day procedures, while also noting ballot privacy issues can arise in public records requests. After testimony, the bill was left pending. The committee then took up House Bill 766, as substituted, which would require precinct chair applicants to provide an email address, phone number, or both, while making that contact information confidential. Supporters said the change would help parties and local officials contact applicants more efficiently. Opponents argued it could expose personal contact information to public records requests and harassment, and some suggested the information should instead be handled through party rules. The bill was left pending after the committee substitute was withdrawn. House Bill 3775 followed and would set clearer timelines for when early voting ballot boards may begin opening carrier envelopes, with different start times based on county size. Supporters said the bill would address counties opening ballots too early and improve ballot security, while opponents warned it could delay defect notices and cure opportunities for mail voters and create problems in large counties that process high volumes of ballots. Testimony also focused on whether the bill referred to carrier envelopes or secrecy envelopes and on how counties like Harris County currently image and secure ballot materials. The bill was left pending. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 4275, which would require countywide polling systems to have polling places in each election precinct, intended to address uneven distribution of polling locations across county commissioner precincts. Supporters said the bill would make polling place distribution fairer and more consistent, especially in Harris County, while opponents said it would undermine countywide voting, increase costs, require more equipment and staff, and reduce local flexibility. Several witnesses also raised concerns about ballot secrecy and the practical burden on large and rural counties. The bill remained under discussion as testimony continued.

Transcript Highlights:

• It would aid the vetting process to ensure that a licensed therapist is truly a vetted process and shows
• It would aid the vetting process to ensure that a licensed therapist is truly a vetted process and shows
• differences um is one um the process differences um is one um the process that<00:37:35.480>
• <00:48:31.240> is drawing process and when that process is drawing process and when that process
• by establishing redistricting processes by establishing redistricting processes and<00:58:14.160

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• We found the agency lacked a systematic process to evaluate Community engagement process.
• as part of the cleanup process.
• Like, where, like, obviously throughout the cleanup process, but which part within the process would
• They could be in the process of being cleaned up.
• They could be in the process of being cleaned up.

Summary: The I-900 Subcommittee held a public hearing on the State Auditor’s performance audit, Community Engagement During Contaminated Site Cleanups. Auditors said Ecology directly conducts or supervises cleanup at only about 8% of active contaminated sites, while most sites are handled by third parties or have no cleanup plan yet. The audit found that Ecology generally met legal requirements at the sites it oversees, but community engagement varied, was not consistently tailored to local needs, and lacked a systematic “lessons learned” process. Auditors also found inconsistent coordination between Ecology and the Department of Health, and limited guidance for staff on when to collaborate. Tribal feedback was mixed: some tribes said engagement met their needs, while others wanted earlier and more tailored outreach. Committee members pressed the auditors on why many third-party-managed sites appeared to have little or no public involvement, and whether Ecology has broader authority to require public engagement and oversight. The auditors responded that their review focused on community engagement requirements, not the full cleanup permitting process, and said the gap they identified was the lack of required oversight for third-party engagement. Members also asked about tribal engagement, exposure scenarios, and the meaning of “active” and “planless” sites. Ecology officials said they agreed with many of the findings, were already taking steps to improve community research, lessons-learned reviews, tribal guidance, and coordination with Health, and had recently launched a public email notification system for site status changes. They also said some recommendations would require additional funding or staff resources. Public testimony supported stronger community engagement and more resources for Ecology. Washington Conservation Action said contaminated sites disproportionately affect communities of color and low-income communities, praised the audit for highlighting the need for better site-specific engagement, and urged full funding for MTCA-related work. The hearing ended with the chair inviting written comments and adjourning the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• AB 930 updates and aligns election code with modern election processes and procedures.
• This is sweeping overhaul changes to California's direct democracy process.
• These changes don't restrict anyone's ability to participate in the process.
• It takes the deliberative process out of what the legislature is doing.
• and referenda that would increase processing times and is not supported by current.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And we did make sure that in both instances that due process, applicable due process and appeal rights
• , both instances that due process, both instances that due process, applicable<00:10:42.240> due
• c> rights applicable due process and appeal rights applicable due process and appeal rights uh<00
• bill the specific appeal and due process bill the specific appeal and due process language,<00:20
• Um, and I process and appeal rights.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We are generally trying to find a better process.
• there is a suggestion, but the actual process itself.
• or her budget that mirrors the appeal process for local sheriffs.
• So what we did is a matching process.
• I don't know the particulars of that particular process. Mr.

Summary: The committee first heard SB 1134, which would extend the use of qualified private providers in the building permit process to residential solar energy systems and certain single-trade inspections, and would allow computer-based plan review tools. The sponsor said the bill is intended to reduce long solar permitting delays and lower costs. A late amendment clarifying the word “application” was adopted, and after some discussion about local permitting problems and the need to work with municipalities, CS/SB 1134 was reported favorably, with Senator Pizzo voting no. The committee then took up SB 784, dealing with issuance of addresses and parcel identification numbers for plats. The bill sets a 14-day timeframe, and an amendment was adopted that would allow use of a private provider if the deadline is missed and would limit fee collection if verification is not completed. Members discussed whether the bill should include more flexibility and whether private providers are appropriate for this function, but the committee ultimately reported CS/SB 784 favorably. SB 1738, allowing counties that previously opted out of transportation concurrency to opt back in while maintaining current levels of service, was also reported favorably without significant opposition. Next, SB 1080 on local government land regulation was presented as a measure to speed up development permit and order approvals, limit repeated information requests, prevent hearing delays, and impose penalties for noncompliance. Local government testimony argued it would rush planning and weaken public input, while supporters called it common-sense streamlining. After debate, the bill was reported favorably, with several no votes. SB 1260, which clarifies county constitutional officer budget procedures and creates an appeal process for clerks and supervisors of elections similar to that used by sheriffs, was also reported favorably after members raised concerns about county budget timelines. Finally, the committee considered SB 420, as amended by a strike-all, which would prohibit counties and municipalities from adopting or funding DEI-related ordinances, programs, or policies, while carving out compliance with state and federal law and defining DEI-related terms. The amendment removed retroactivity and delayed the effective date, but members from both parties raised concerns about vague definitions, impacts on women- and minority-owned business programs, local commemorations, and the loss of attorney’s fees for prevailing counties. Public testimony was sharply divided, with many speakers opposing the bill as an attack on local control and inclusion, and a few supporting it as a merit-based standard. The amendment was adopted, but the bill drew extensive opposition in debate and was not yet reported in the portion of the transcript provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Or deciding on serious policy through a budget trailer process.
• the budget must be an all-inclusive process.
• CEQA is all about public process. This process provides environmental justice communities a voice.
• We don't have a public process around big, big changes.
• The process is absolutely wrong here.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Committee held an informational hearing on the final three-party budget agreement and related trailer bills, with the Department of Finance outlining the major budget bill and omnibus measures. Finance described a package built around balancing the state budget amid economic uncertainty, preserving core health and safety-net programs, and making significant ongoing reductions in some state programs. The budget bill included major items such as shifting $1 billion from the General Fund to the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund for Cal Fire, funding universal transitional kindergarten, deferring some UC and CSU funding, supporting foster care and homelessness programs, providing Proposition 36 implementation funding, and achieving Medi-Cal savings through changes to benefits and eligibility. The committee also heard that votes on the budget bills were expected later in the week and the following Monday. Finance then walked through the trailer bills, including health, human services, early learning, education, resources, energy, transportation, labor, housing, tax, public safety, courts, general government, cannabis, and energy-related measures. Notable provisions included a Medi-Cal enrollment freeze for certain adults, new premiums and benefit changes for some immigrants, child care COLA changes, education funding for literacy, teacher support, universal meals, and community college student support, as well as resource and climate measures affecting Cal Fire staffing and energy permitting. The housing trailer bill drew the most discussion, with provisions on CEQA streamlining, a vehicle miles traveled mitigation banking program, a renters’ credit trigger, and a six-year moratorium on new residential building standards. Members also discussed a film tax credit expansion, cannabis enforcement funding, a tribal police pilot program, and changes to tax policy, including military retirement income exclusions and wildfire settlement payment exclusions. Committee members largely praised the staff and the budget process, but several raised concerns and asked detailed questions, especially about the housing trailer bill’s new wage standards, tribal consultation provisions, and possible effects on prevailing wage protections. Finance explained that the housing language was intended to set wage floors for market-rate projects receiving CEQA streamlining, with different county-based tiers and a notwithstanding clause preserving existing prevailing wage laws. Members also questioned the size and timing of funding for the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative, Clean Cars for All, Proposition 36, and the film tax credit expansion. Other members highlighted support for public safety, veterans’ tax relief, child care providers, housing production, and higher education, while some expressed concern that the budget’s policy changes were being negotiated too quickly or without enough stakeholder input.

Transcript Highlights:

• the process.
• <00:12:14.199> of impose a time limit on processing of impose a time limit on processing of
• So what should that process be? Witness: Typically, it's just a notification process.
• process under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the mitigation process described
• 4 line 3-2 3 to2 to indicate the process 4 line 3-2 3 to2 to indicate the process if<00:54:35.559

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several housing-related measures, with most witnesses supporting bills aimed at expanding affordable housing tools and financing. SB 1169, creating a Community Land Trust Equity pilot program, drew support from HHFDC and Nahal UI, which said revolving funds would help community land trusts build permanently affordable housing more efficiently. SB 1200, establishing a workforce housing regulatory sandbox within HHFDC, also received support from HHFDC and others, though HHFDC noted concerns about whether the measure could be read to preempt county permitting and zoning powers. SB 511, which would require county legislative bodies rather than HHFDC to approve certain housing project exemptions, prompted HHFDC to suggest revised language and a possible processing deadline for applications; the discussion focused on avoiding indefinite delays and clarifying county and state roles. SB 1283, creating an emergency home loan assistance revolving fund, was introduced with comments from the Department of Budget and Finance and HHFDC. SB 612, on rent-to-build equity agreements for exempt housing projects, drew support and questions about how many affected projects are rentals versus for-sale units. SB 944, extending and expanding low-income housing tax credit provisions, received support from Sugar Creek Capital, Hawaii Housing, and the Chamber of Commerce, while the Tax Foundation raised a technical concern about inconsistent use of the term “taxpayer.” HPHA-supported bills SB 1413 and SB 1412 were also heard, along with SB 1632, which would direct DBEDT to develop a comprehensive action plan for a local housing market; testimony on that measure was strongly supportive but included calls to examine constitutional and legal issues and broader market-structure concerns. The committee also began discussion of SB 1033 and noted it was closely related to SB 1131, with the chair indicating an inclination to move only one of the two similar tax proposals forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• So there is a process to it.
• I have asked them if our processes stand distinct from or in harmony with the admissions processes at
• I'd like to see what their process is.
• We're not supposed to— we shouldn't be processing an application or helping go down and help John process
• And as I understand it in that process, they had issued their limit fairly quickly in the process, in

Summary: The committee convened, approved the prior meeting minutes, and received a memo summarizing major audit items. The State Auditor’s office and outside auditors then presented a series of audits, many of which were clean with unmodified opinions and no findings, including the Bank of North Dakota, the Guaranteed Student Loan Program, the Office of the Governor, the State Treasurer, the Office of Management and Budget, the Department of Transportation, the Department of Environmental Quality, Lake Region State College, and the Office of the Governor. The North Dakota Stockmen’s Association audit was also clean overall, but it repeated findings about limited segregation of duties and auditor assistance in preparing financial statements, which the auditor said were expected to continue because of the organization’s small size. Committee members asked about out-of-state board addresses, and the association explained those members were North Dakota residents using South Dakota mailing addresses. Several audits did include findings. The Council on the Arts audit identified two issues: payroll charged to federal awards without supporting time records, and $12,825 in Cultural Endowment Fund spending that was not allowable under state law, including staff training, retreats, and executive director candidate travel. The Department of Public Instruction audit found unsupported scholarship applications in the paraprofessional-to-teacher program, but additional testing confirmed the funds were credited properly and students completed required school district work, so no improper payments were identified. The University of North Dakota audit found a lack of documentation and transparency in School of Law admissions decisions; the auditor said the law school used a holistic process but did not keep notes or evaluation tools to show why applicants were admitted, waitlisted, or denied. UND leadership said the school is in good standing with the American Bar Association and agreed better documentation is needed, and the auditor said the issue was the missing documentation, not ABA accreditation itself. The most extensive discussion centered on the North Dakota Racing Commission audit, which found four findings: overspending the promotion fund’s 25% operating cap, grant conditions not being met, improper breeder fund awards, and improper procurement. The auditor said promotion fund spending exceeded the cap by $327,447 and the fund balance dropped sharply over the audit period. Racing Commission director Bruce Johnson said the agency had become complacent, that grant requests were treated as routine, and that controls and documentation need to be tightened. He also explained that the breeder fund overpayments involved two horses whose ownership transfers were not properly documented before racing, and that the procurement issue stemmed from an advertising contract that proceeded without proper written procurement procedures after a misunderstanding with the State Procurement Office. The auditor said the Racing Commission will now be audited every two years because of the findings. The committee also received updates on Dakota College at Bottineau’s bank reconciliations, which Minot State University said had been brought current after an 18-month backlog, with only one account still needing cleanup; members asked for a written report on the corrective actions. The North Dakota Fair Foundation was reported to have dissolved, with remaining funds transferred to another nonprofit account for continued support of the state fair. Finally, the Department of Public Instruction provided an update on school meal debt, revising the earlier estimate to about $1.1 million based on incomplete district survey responses, and said the Anti-Lunch Shaming law likely increased meal debt because schools must feed students regardless of account balance. Members discussed the need for a more accurate year-end debt figure and possible future reporting at a later committee meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• We do the way the process works.
• Can you share with us your current process or your your process for ensuring all available tax credit
• And that process was successful.
• 24 25 to thank you, Madam Chair. >> So the process that we had for 24, 25 is the process that we had
• I know it's very the complicated process is and it's an important process and we're all growing together

Transcript Highlights:

• The historic review process is necessary, but it does add time to the development process, so this bill
• review proc to the development process review proc to the development process so<00:13:52.880>
• We don't think it meets due process requirements. It doesn't lay out a process.
• We don't think it meets due process requirements. It doesn't lay out a process.
• We support this process.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several housing, land use, and preservation bills. HB 1008 HD2 would require the Department of Land and Natural Resources to complete historic preservation determinations for state affordable housing projects within 90 days and create sensitivity-based review pathways. HHFDC, DLNR’s State Historic Preservation Division, and written testimony from DBEDT supported the bill as an expedited process for projects unlikely to affect significant historic resources. Members asked how the bill would define significant versus non-significant historic properties, how it would interact with Kapakai analysis, and whether burial councils had been consulted; SHPD said the bill would not replace Kapakai review and that burial councils had not been included. Written support also came from OHA, Hawaii Realtors, and the Maui Chamber of Commerce. HB 1093 would clarify the Hawaii Public Housing Authority’s powers relating to housing projects. HPHA supported the measure, saying it would align definitions with prior law and help deconcentrate poverty by allowing mixed-income rebuilding. The director also said the bill was increasingly urgent because of reported federal HUD priorities that could affect public housing and Section 8 funding. HB 1096 HD1 would repeal state low-income housing preferences for disabled veterans and spouses of deceased veterans, with HPHA saying federal veteran programs such as VASH are a better mechanism and that the state preference has not been used in years. HB 1411 would allow HHFDC projects to give sale or lease preferences to applicants who live or work within five miles of a project; HHFDC and the Hawaii Chapter of NAIOP supported it as a way to keep residents connected to their communities, while members raised constitutional concerns about broader local-preference policies. The committee also heard HB 367 HD1, which would create county permit exemptions for certain agricultural and maintenance activities. Written testimony included opposition from the Department of Planning and Permitting and support from the Hawaii Farm Bureau, Grassroot Institute, and others. A public testifier opposed the bill, arguing that permit exemptions could worsen safety and compliance problems. Finally, HB 826 HD1 would allow county planning commissions, by special permit, to authorize residential housing in agricultural districts for agricultural workforce housing, long-term rental, or fee simple ownership under certain conditions. HHFDC supported it as a faster alternative to lengthy state land-use redistricting, but the Department of Agriculture, Land Use Commission, and Office of Planning and Sustainable Development raised concerns about food production impacts, due process, service provision, jurisdictional conflicts, and the use of special permits for what could amount to district boundary changes. Public testimony was mixed, with some support and some opposition. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion provided.