Transcript Highlights:

• programs.
• Recently, over the last basically five years, a lot of conservation programs at USDA have gone through
• These big vehicles at the federal level created a lot of changes in conservation, land management programs
• New programs, by the way, new agencies were also brought into the fold in conservation work because agencies
• To me, that is a fundamental change in how that air program is going to be funded in the future based

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Program, which is to assist manufacturers, and the low-carbon construction material rebate program,
• Chair and committee, because programs like the Natural Resources Conservation Service and other well-established
• Chair Committee, because programs like the Natural Resource Conservation Service and other well-established
• And both of these programs are really vital for my career today in conservation.
• these valuable outdoor programs through the Outdoor Equity Fund and other conservation issues that are

Summary: The House Energy, Environment and Natural Resources Committee met on February 3 and first took up House Bill 153, the Low Carbon Construction Material Rebate Act, with a committee substitute that added an Environmental Product Declaration program and shifted administration to the Environment Department. Sponsor Representative Dixon said the bill would create rebates for buyers of lower-carbon construction materials, support local manufacturers, and reduce industrial emissions. Support came from the New Mexico Home Builders Association, Sierra Club, and the Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce. Some members questioned whether the bill would actually lower housing costs or instead create future price pressure once subsidies expire, and raised concerns about rulemaking and whether some materials would be incentivized even without state help. The committee voted 7-4 to do pass the committee substitute and do not pass the original bill. The committee then heard House Bill 154, which would broaden and decouple New Mexico’s advanced energy tax credit definitions from federal law and add fusion energy and related components as eligible advanced energy products. Representative Dixon said the change would give the state more flexibility to include emerging technologies while keeping the existing credit structure and cap intact. The Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce, a Santa Fe fusion company, a Los Lunas economic development official, and an online fusion company all testified in support, arguing the bill would provide certainty, attract investment, and help build a local supply chain. One member suggested future consideration of nuclear fission, while another questioned whether some renewable technologies were still appropriate, but the committee ultimately voted 9-2 to do pass HB 154. House Bill 184, a technical fix to the Land of Enchantment Legacy Fund, was then presented by Representative Small. The amendment adopted by the committee delayed the three-year moving average for distributions by one year and extended the time to use funds from two years to three years, with the sponsor saying this would better reflect the fund’s growth and give projects more time to complete. Witnesses from Western Resource Advocates, conservation districts, and Conservation Voters New Mexico supported the measure, saying it would strengthen successful outdoor, watershed, and conservation programs. The committee adopted the amendment and then passed the bill unanimously. Finally, the committee heard House Memorial 20, which would create a study group to examine barriers to renewable energy transmission and project development. The sponsor said the goal was to bring agencies, stakeholders, and possibly courts together to identify ways to speed up renewable infrastructure while preserving environmental review and public input. Sierra Club, Western Resource Advocates, Defenders of Wildlife, and the League of Women Voters supported the memorial, but several members said it should be broadened to include all energy infrastructure or more clearly address transmission, permitting, tribal, federal, and military coordination. In response to those concerns, the sponsor asked to roll the memorial for further discussion and possible revisions rather than advancing it that day.

Transcript Highlights:

• You are a water resource program manager.
• And to build off Karen's points on future vulnerabilities, recent drought patterns speak to future drought
• future.
• future.
• future.

Summary: The committee heard first from Deputy State Climatologist Karen Bumbacco, who reviewed the weather and snowpack conditions that contributed to Washington’s 2025 drought. She said the state had a very warm and dry water year, with April through September ranking among the warmest and driest periods on record, and that three straight years of below-normal snowpack and precipitation had compounded drought impacts, especially in the Yakima Basin. She also explained that a weak La Niña could bring a wetter-than-normal winter, though temperature forecasts were less certain, and noted that long-term climate projections point to continued snowpack decline and earlier runoff timing. Department of Ecology staff Rea Burns and Caroline Melor then described the state’s drought declaration process and response. They said Washington’s statutory drought threshold is less than 75% of normal water supply plus a hardship finding, and that Ecology extended the Yakima drought declaration in April and expanded it statewide in June. They discussed reliance on federal monitoring data and staffing at NRCS, USGS, Reclamation, and NOAA, and said federal staffing and funding instability has created concerns for snowpack and water data. They also reviewed drought response funding, noting that grants have supported projects in the Yakima and Dungeness basins and that the drought emergency account still has a balance available for current needs. Burns gave a detailed update on the Yakima Basin, saying it experienced unprecedented conditions this year, including nearly empty reservoirs, curtailment orders sent to about 1,500 water users, and the first time even the most senior 1855 surface water rights were turned off. She said widespread compliance occurred, though the process exposed areas for improvement, especially coordination with federal partners. Committee members asked about the long-term basis for climate projections, the 75% drought threshold, federal impacts, drought insurance, reservoir storage, and whether the state should consider more drought funding or new storage projects. No votes or formal actions were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• , the Cheshire Conservation District is the main administrator of the program.
• , the Cheshire Conservation District is the main administrator of the program.
• We bring all of the conservation districts together to support this program annually.
• We bring all of the conservation districts together to support this program annually.
• equipment program is one of the highlights of our conservation district system in the state.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• In 2022, we lost 21,000 acres due to conservation.
• We'd like to see what about 11,000 acres for the future of these ranches and future of farming.
• We'd like to see what about 11,000 acres for the future of these ranches and future of farming.
• </c> is potentially useful for conservation is potentially useful for conservation so<00:33:27.480><c
• </c> 2014 when we were uh the Conservation 2014 when we were uh the Conservation District<00:49:14.040

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Committee on Water and Land heard SR 18, which asks DLNR to transfer active agricultural land leases to the Department of Agriculture to support agriculture. DLNR, through Don Chang, opposed the resolution, saying the department has already been transferring parcels by mutual agreement and should not be required to transfer lands it does not consent to. Ranchers and agricultural advocates strongly supported the measure, arguing that the lands are active production areas, that partial transfers would undermine ranching operations, and that water infrastructure built by ranchers must be protected. Testimony from the Hawaii Farm Bureau and others emphasized the importance of preserving agricultural land for food production, wildfire management, and long-term ranch viability. Committee members pressed both sides on acreage, specific parcels, and whether negotiations were still ongoing, with DLNR later clarifying that some parcels remain under negotiation and that some proposed transfers have been narrowed or adjusted. Several specific ranches and parcels were discussed, including Batello, Diamond B, Delo, Nobriga, and Kapala Ranch. Witnesses described the operational importance of water systems, grazing areas, and access routes, and said that losing productive acreage would threaten business viability. Some members expressed concern that the proposal appeared to transfer productive land while leaving less useful land with ranchers, and urged the department to continue transparent negotiations and consider the practical impact on agriculture and conservation. A DLNR representative said some transfers were tied to other needs, such as transportation mitigation, and not to a broader effort to take more land. The Department of Agriculture later stated it supports the intent of the measure, but suggested its concerns would likely be addressed if the resolution were narrowed to the specific parcels at issue. The chair also announced that the related House bill on the same subject remains alive and will be heard by Water and Land on Thursday. After concluding SR 18, the committee moved on to SCR 51 and SR 33, which seek a working group to evaluate establishing and administratively placing an Office of Resilience and Recovery. The Office of Planning and Sustainable Development indicated support for the concept, noting the office’s value in Maui wildfire recovery efforts.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, for example, were the positions associated with efforts to reform a program or enhance a program
• or improve program outcomes?
• , evaluation program.
• Program.
• is a $35 million amount program.

Summary: The subcommittee met to discuss budget issues related to vacant positions across several natural resources and environmental departments, with no votes taken and all items held open for a future hearing. The Legislative Analyst’s Office and the Department of Finance explained the administration’s proposal to eliminate about 6,000 vacant positions statewide, including roughly 293 positions in the departments before the committee, as a way to capture salary savings and reduce flexible funding tied up in vacancies. The LAO recommended retaining special-funded positions, while noting that eliminating General Fund positions would reduce savings. Finance argued that vacancy levels have remained steady statewide, that departments need flexibility to manage operations and hard-to-fill jobs, and that some vacant positions can be reclassified to higher-priority work. Members raised concerns that many of the proposed eliminations would affect core public-safety, permitting, and environmental-protection functions. The Department of Fish and Wildlife said the cuts would affect permitting, environmental protection, and law enforcement, while State Parks said its proposed ranger reductions were chosen from historically vacant, hard-to-fill positions and would still leave many vacancies to fill through the academy. The Coastal Commission said its positions supported sea-level rise planning under SB 272. The Department of Pesticide Regulation and DTSC said the reductions would affect multiple program areas, though Finance said the special funds involved were not in structural deficit and the cuts could help avoid future fee increases. The State Water Resources Control Board said its proposed reductions were spread across programs, with public-health functions protected as much as possible. The committee then heard an overview from the State Water Resources Control Board on its responsibilities for water quality, water rights, drinking water, and funding for water infrastructure. Chair Joaquin Esquivel described ongoing work on the Bay-Delta Plan update, the Healthy Rivers and Landscapes voluntary agreements, and the need to actively administer water rights. Members also discussed the board’s response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s Sackett decision, which narrowed federal Clean Water Act jurisdiction. The board requested $2.6 million and 12 permanent positions to address resulting permitting and enforcement gaps; the LAO said the request met its high bar for new proposals and was supported by the board’s data and reporting.

Transcript Highlights:

• It will be heard in future meetings. It will be heard in future meetings.
• or reduction programs.
• We conserve since COVID came in.
• We all conserve water. I know the other side... ...of us conserve water.
• A matching grant program endangers the financial health of the fund as a loan program that is required

Summary: The committee began by announcing that House Bill 2094 would be held and not heard that day, then received a lengthy update from Arizona Department of Water Resources Director Tom Buschatzky on Colorado River negotiations and post-2026 operating rules. He described Arizona’s legal position, the basin’s water allocations, current shortages, conservation efforts, and the state’s view that the Upper Basin should share more of the reductions and move more water from reservoirs above Lake Powell to Lake Mead. Members asked about tourism, recreation, tribal water rights, public outreach, and the role of the state’s delegation and the federal government. Buschatzky said Arizona has already made major conservation cuts and that further reductions are likely, whether by agreement or federal action, and emphasized ongoing negotiations and public meetings. The committee then heard House Bill 2758, which would expand McMullen Valley groundwater transfer rules to allow eligible entities, including private water companies, to withdraw and transport groundwater under specified conditions, with ADWR oversight and reporting requirements. Supporters argued the bill would provide a lawful, regulated way to move water for urban growth and housing needs, while opponents from La Paz County and rural advocacy groups said it would accelerate aquifer depletion, harm private wells, and benefit a New York hedge fund at the expense of local residents. After debate over guardrails, stakeholder outreach, and the impact on rural communities, the committee adopted the Griffin amendment and passed HB 2758 as amended on a 6-4 due-pass vote. Finally, the committee took up House Bill 2098, which revises bonding authority and public hearing notification requirements for county water augmentation authorities and allows such authorities to enter into local repayment agreements with WIFA. Pinal County officials and related stakeholders testified in support, saying the changes would help the Pinal County Water Augmentation Authority finance future water and infrastructure projects, including possible augmentation efforts tied to Bartlett Dam, and would clean up statutory language to match the authority’s needs. The transcript ends during testimony on HB 2098, before any committee vote on that bill is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• Foundation School Program.
• We operate a very low benefits program health insurance benefits program.
• funds and the programs.
• That program. Yeah.
• program to date.

Keywords: infrastructure, water supply, flood mitigation, Texas Water Fund, community projects, funding allocations

Summary: During this committee meeting, the focus was on discussing critical infrastructure funding, especially related to water supply and flood mitigation projects. Chairwoman Stepney and the Water Development Board presented extensive details regarding the Texas Water Fund, which included $1 billion appropriated to assist various financial programs and tackle pressing water and wastewater issues. Additionally, funding allocations aimed at compromising the state's flood risk and improving water conservation were hotly debated, emphasizing collaboration among committee members and the necessity of addressing community needs in such projects.

Transcript Highlights:

• customers must provide to one program.
• , or our Project Help Assistance Program.
• . ...for their programs.
• We've focused our conservation programs on the low-income also because they don't seem to be as broad-spectrum
• We've focused our conservation programs on the low income also because they don't seem to that because

Bills: HB2426, HB2373, HB2416

Keywords: pollution control, efficiency, appeals process, environmental regulation, hearing board, electric utility, energy assistance, low-income households, monthly bill assistance, energy equity, waste management, energy, climate action, environmental regulations, fair treatment, renewable energy, sustainability, 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• To address the unknowns in the future. And that led... to do to address the unknowns in the future.
• It's a balancing act in the program, and they set a very ambitious and unique program for us.
• DNR also employs a program administrator who oversees the program.
• And lastly, it's a developing and responsive program. There will be changes in this program.
• challenges and opportunities in the future, something that the program is really proud of is we've reduced

Summary: The committee held a work session on the history, implementation, and current challenges of Washington’s Forest and Fish law and related Habitat Conservation Plan. Testimony from tribal representatives Jim Peters and David Herrera, former Rep. Jim Buck, and mediator Tim Thompson described the original timber, fish, and wildlife negotiations as a broad, collaborative effort intended to balance salmon and habitat protection with a viable timber industry. DNR’s Sabur Jawad outlined the program’s statutory framework, the roles of DNR, Ecology, Fish and Wildlife, tribes, local governments, landowners, and the Forest Practices Board, and explained that changes to aquatic-resource rules can come through adaptive management, legislative direction, or court orders. He also described the permitting and enforcement system, the programmatic HCP, road maintenance and abandonment work, and the adaptive management process, including the long-running NP stream-buffer studies and resulting rulemaking timeline. Agency and stakeholder testimony emphasized accomplishments such as decades of HCP coverage, annual compliance monitoring, road and fish-barrier improvements, small forest landowner assistance programs, and the completion of numerous adaptive management studies. DNR’s Katie Allen said the program has strong successes but also faces resource-intensive implementation, rising costs, and watershed-wide pressures beyond forestry, and she pointed to a State Auditor review that produced 13 recommendations now being addressed through an action plan and a structured decision-making model. Washington Farm Forestry Association executive director Elaine O’Neill said small forest landowners supported the agreement expecting assistance and flexibility, but argued the balance has shifted toward more protection and less practical consideration of rural vitality and property rights. Washington Forest Protection Association executive director Jason Spadero said the agreement has produced measurable environmental gains and regulatory predictability, but criticized the recent NP rule and urged continued science-based, economically balanced management. In the final discussion, tribal representatives said the collaborative, consensus-based process still works in some areas, but that the principals need to be re-engaged more directly and periodically to restore accountability and trust. They said the adaptive management process and funding remain important, but expressed concern that consensus has broken down in some recent rulemaking and that side negotiations or outside pressure can undermine the original agreement. Members asked how to restore the collaborative model; Peters suggested renewed commitment from the principal parties and more regular high-level meetings, while Herrera echoed the need to implement the auditor’s recommendations. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken during the work session.

Transcript Highlights:

• There'll be some adjustments made to federal authority for various programs.
• There will be some adjustments made to federal authority for various programs to reflect updated federal
• The $590 million would come from the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program for projects within the
• So the staff member who said STA, that stands for State Transit Assistance Program.
• I'm Megan Cleveland with the Nature Conservancy.

Summary: The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee heard two measures: AB 107, a budget bill junior making largely technical changes to the 2023, 2024, and 2025 budget acts, and AB 117, a trailer bill authorizing a $590 million loan structure to support four Bay Area transit agencies through the Metropolitan Transportation Commission using unallocated Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program funds. Finance explained AB 107 included technical fixes such as extending encumbrance periods, updating federal authority, correcting fiscal language, moving $20 million for California travel promotion from Visit California to GoBiz, and adding an APA exemption for implementation of already-approved climate bond programs. AB 117 was described as a cost-neutral regional solution with a 12-year loan term, two years interest-only, and repayment secured through existing state transit funding streams, with oversight by CalSTA, CTC, and MTC to limit impacts on other projects. Members raised concerns about transparency, competitive bidding, and whether APA exemptions and no-bid or emergency processes could reduce oversight, while supporters argued the exemptions were needed to get voter-approved climate and wildfire-related funds out the door. On AB 117, senators questioned whether the loan could become a de facto bailout if a Bay Area sales tax measure fails, whether post-pandemic ridership declines and safety/fare-evasion issues are temporary or structural, and whether the loan could jeopardize TIRCP-funded capital projects such as BART Phase 2. Transit agencies and local representatives testified in support, saying ridership is recovering, the loan is critical to avoid service cuts, and the Bay Area economy depends on transit stability. The committee first passed AB 107 on a 9-4 vote and AB 117 on a 9-4 vote, then held both bills on call. After recess, absent members returned and both measures were lifted from call and passed with 11 votes each. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• There'll be some adjustments made to federal authority for various programs.
• There will be some adjustments made to federal authority for various programs to reflect updated federal
• for projects. $590 million from the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program for projects within the
• So the staff member who said STA, that stands for State Transit Assistance Program.
• I'm Megan Cleveland with the Nature Conservancy.

Summary: The Senate Budget Committee heard two bills: AB 107, a budget bill junior making largely technical changes to the 2023, 2024, and 2025 Budget Acts, and AB 117, a trailer bill authorizing a regional transit loan package for Bay Area agencies. Department of Finance staff said AB 107 contains no new state money or new policy items, but makes adjustments such as extending encumbrance periods, updating federal authority, moving $20 million in tourism promotion funding from Visit California to GoBiz, and adding an APA exemption for certain climate bond program guidelines. AB 117 would allow CalSTA to loan up to $590 million from unallocated Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program funds to MTC, which would then lend to BART, Muni, Caltrain, and AC Transit; the loans would run 12 years with two years interest-only, and the state said the structure is intended to be cost-neutral and protected by repayment safeguards. Committee discussion focused heavily on transparency, oversight, and whether the transit loan could jeopardize future projects or become a de facto bailout if a Bay Area sales tax measure fails. Several senators questioned the need for the APA exemption in AB 107, arguing that emergency or existing public processes might provide better oversight, while supporters said the exemption was needed to get voter-approved climate bond funds out the door and that the language had already been agreed to in the budget process. On AB 117, senators raised concerns about declining ridership, fare evasion, safety, post-pandemic travel patterns, repayment sources, and the impact on other TIRCP projects such as BART Phase 2. Finance staff and transit representatives responded that ridership changes were driven by COVID-era shifts, labor and safety issues, and changing commute patterns, and that the loan would be secured against existing state transit assistance streams rather than general fund dollars. Public comment was largely supportive of both bills. Water, natural resources, and environmental groups backed the APA exemption in AB 107, saying it would speed implementation of Proposition 4 funding for water recycling, wildfire, coastal resilience, and related projects. Transit agencies and labor groups supported AB 117, saying the loan is needed to stabilize operations and preserve service while local revenue measures and efficiency efforts are pursued; San Francisco, Caltrain, BART, and AC Transit all testified in favor, though San Jose asked for stronger protections for previously approved TIRCP-funded projects. The committee first passed AB 107 and AB 117 on 8-4 and 9-4 votes, placed them on call, then later lifted the calls and both bills ultimately passed with 11 votes each and were sent out of committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• The hour of 1:30 having arrived, the Resources and Conservation Committee will come to order.
• So that's what I plan on doing with my future. Anything else? That's good. Awesome.
• program.
• Way program.
• The first was from the Idaho Conservation League.

Summary: The committee first handled routine business, including a silent roll call, notice of an upcoming tour of the Veolia water treatment plant, and approval of the February 9 and February 11, 2026 minutes. Members also recognized a departing page, Kaelin, who briefly shared her plans to serve an LDS mission and later attend college for an agribusiness degree. The committee then heard House Bill 652, presented by Representative Stone on behalf of a fourth-grade homeschool student from Twin Falls, Betty Grandi. The bill would designate hunting as Idaho’s official state sport. Grandi testified that she researched the issue, surveyed her community through her newspaper, and found hunting to be the clear favorite. She argued it reflects Idaho’s history, outdoor traditions, conservation values, and family recreation. The committee praised her presentation and unanimously voted to send the bill to the floor with a due pass recommendation. The remainder of the meeting was devoted to pending Idaho Department of Lands rules. Andrew Smith presented changes to mine land reclamation rules, saying the revisions were the product of negotiated rulemaking, public meetings, and comments, and would reduce word count and restrictive language while adding definitions and reorganizing requirements. Will Teeteman of the Idaho Conservation League supported periodic review of reclamation plans but objected that the rule did not clearly reflect statutory five-year review language; the committee nonetheless approved the docket. Marty Menzinger then presented navigable waterways rule changes, describing outreach, no fee increases, and reductions in word count and restrictive terms; the committee approved that docket as well. Finally, Lawson Tate presented right-of-way easement rule changes, including removal of nominal fees, updated compensation language tied to appraised value, emergency-work definitions, and longer temporary permits; after questions about appraisal costs and selection, the committee approved the rule. The meeting adjourned after all pending items were acted on.

Transcript Highlights:

• Program.
• So when you, in other words, the Soil and Water Conservation Program is not able to provide cost-share
• The Soil and Water Conservation Program is not able to provide cost-share practices to permitted operations
• from the Soil and Water Conservation Program, and this amendment will help ensure that that continues
• into the future.

Summary: The Special Committee on Rural Issues met with a quorum and first went into executive session, where House Bill 2686 was voted do pass on a 10-0 roll call. The committee then moved to public testimony on House Bill 3076, sponsored by Representative Doyle Justice, which would remove the words “water contaminant” from a Clean Water Law provision. Justice and supporters said the change is intended to clarify that routine agricultural practices and non-point sources, such as runoff, sediment, manure, fertilizer, grazing, and field drainage, are not subject to DNR permitting, while point sources like wastewater plants and CAFOs would still remain regulated. Committee members focused heavily on the distinction between point sources and non-point sources and on whether the bill would exempt harmful pollution. Justice and witnesses explained that the bill would not remove DNR authority over point sources or egregious conduct, but would prevent permits for diffuse, routine runoff that cannot realistically be permitted event-by-event. Several members used examples like deer, dogs, cattle, and rain runoff to probe the issue, and witnesses repeatedly said the bill is meant to eliminate uncertainty and avoid absurd permitting requirements. Support came from the Missouri Corn Growers Association, Missouri Agribusiness Association, Missouri Farm Bureau, Missouri Soybean Association, Missouri Dairy, and Missouri Wine and Grape Board/Missouri Grape Growers Association. They argued the bill aligns state law with existing federal and state practice, preserves voluntary soil and water conservation programs, and provides regulatory certainty. No opposition testimony was offered, and the hearing on HB 3076 concluded with no further business before the committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• —a coastal restoration heroes program... ...a coastal restoration heroes program competition.
• for administration of the program, program director, personnel, policies, procedures, rulemaking, funds
• , provide for administration of the program.
• Title 40, Louisiana Urban Search Rescue Program, provide for administration of the program, program director
• So does your bill, I saw it provided a pilot program. Is that it? It provides a pilot program?

Bills: HR72, HR73, HR74, HR75, HR76, HR77, HR78, HR79, HR80, HR81, HR82, HR83, HCR36, HCR37, HCR38, HCR39, HCR40, HCR41, HB368, HB433, HB1017, HB1018, HB1019, HB1020, HB1021, HB1022, HB1023, HB1024, HB1025, HB1026, HB1027, HB1028, HB1029, HB1030, HB1031, HB1032, HB1033, HB1034, HB1035, HB1036, HB1037, HB1038, HB1039, HB1040, HB1041, HB1042, HB1043, HB1044, HB1045, HB1046, HB1047, HB1048, HB1049, HB1050, HB1051, HB1052, HB1053, HB1054, HB1055, HB1056, HB1057, HB1058, HB1059, HB1060, HB1061, HB1062, HB1063, HB1064, HB1065, HB1066, HB1067, HB1068, HB1069, HB1070, HB1071, HB1072, HB1073, HB1074, HB1075, HB1076, HB1077, HB1078, HB1079, HB1080, HB1081, HB1082, HB1083, HB1084, HR70, HR71, HCR35, HB31, HB326, HB1013, HB1014, HB1015, HB1016, SB192, SB196, SB198, SB203, SB204, SB214, SB216, SB257, SB291, SB383, HB13, HB23, HB25, HB32, HB41, HB42, HB90, HB120, HB121, HB122, HB127, HB138, HB139, HB141, HB179, HB187, HB213, HB247, HB286, HB332, HB344, HB357, HB367, HB370, HB462, HB505, HB527, HB537, HB605, HB680, HB681, HB725, HB780, HB782, HB847, HB892, HB911, HB916, HB1012, HR15, HR20, HCR14, HB53, HB57, HB64, HB102, HB106, HB111, HB137, HB152, HB155, HB177, HB238, HB256, HB258, HB337, HB359, HB363, HB386, HB434, HB546, HB557, HB584, HB661, HB697, HB726, HB727, HB747, HB756, HB758, HB759, HB765, HB767, HB825, HB858, HB930, HB941, HB957, HB964, HB58, HB69, HB93, HB166, HB199, HB201, HB202, HB218, HB223, HB224, HB231, HB235, HB246, HB338, HB349, HB352, HB379, HB405, HB429, HB535, HB547, HB577, HB588, HB626, HB636, HB652, HB653, HB669, HB688, HB691, HB721, HB738, HB806, HB851, HB857, HB861, HB889, HB904, HB907, HB908, HB929, HB1009, HB868, HB119, HB140, HB739, HB842, HB875, HB919, HB61, HB185, HB233, HB613, HB848, HB52, HB228, HB289, HB735, HB796, HB722, HB284, HB301, HB827, HB953, HB901, HB9, HB46, HB193, HB400, HB436, HB468, HB570, HB582, HB733, HB746, HB923, HB952

Keywords: HR72, House Resolution 72, Sophia Patout, Layla Porter, St. Amant High School, Future Farmers of America, FFA, Coastal Restoration Heroes, coastal restoration, Louisiana coast, coastal land loss, wetlands, saltmarsh, barrier island, West Grand Terre Island, Restore or Retreat Inc., smooth cordgrass, Spartina alterniflora, black mangrove, Avicennia germinans

Summary: The House met on March 26, 2026, established a quorum, opened with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, and then moved through a large number of introductions, resolutions, and committee reports. The chamber recognized Women of the Storm on its 20th anniversary, honored Saint-Amant FFA for winning a national coastal restoration championship, and later recognized Elevate Louisiana. The House also received Senate bills on topics including freshwater fishing limits, bridge preservation, emergency medical services, ambulance reimbursement, eye care coverage, and other matters, and introduced numerous House resolutions and bills covering education, ethics, transportation, elections, public records, criminal law, and appropriations. Several measures were referred to committees or were allowed to lie over, while some resolutions were adopted without objection. The House then considered and passed a series of bills, many by wide margins. Criminal justice and public safety measures included HB 53, adding illegal gambling as a RICO predicate offense; HB 57, allowing courts to consider criminal histories when issuing temporary restraining orders; HB 64, authorizing magistrates to recall arrest warrants; HB 102, creating second-degree cruelty to the elderly and persons with infirmities; HB 106, requiring written parental consent before melatonin is administered to children; HB 137, strengthening penalties and school notification procedures for terroristic threats against schools; HB 152, updating controlled dangerous substances schedules; HB 155, restricting drone use near the Capitol; HB 177, allowing retired court reporters to return on contract; and HB 727, allowing burning of certain untreated construction lumber and wood mats. Members also approved HB 11, adding associate degrees to sentence-diminution eligibility, and HB 726, increasing penalties for abandoning vessels, with discussion noting the need for future funding to remove derelict boats. Education and workforce-related bills also advanced, including HB 238, easing ethics restrictions so former school board members who are certified teachers or school psychologists can return to work sooner; HB 256, clarifying mandatory reporter training for school employees; HB 363, allowing virtual-school students to participate in extracurricular activities and athletics at their resident public school; HB 386, allowing locally authorized charter schools to operate as their own LEA under local rules; HB 434, giving superintendents more authority over probationary school bus employees; HB 557, defining long-term care pharmacies; and HB 584, ending the practice of giving foster children trash bags for belongings and providing proper luggage instead. The House also passed HB 661, expanding nepotism exceptions for certain lower-paid school positions such as paraprofessionals, custodians, cafeteria workers, and bus drivers, and HB 697, recreating the Department of Environmental Quality through 2030. Most bills passed unanimously or with strong bipartisan support, though HB 137 on school threats drew significant debate over parental liability and juvenile intervention before passing 71-26.

Transcript Highlights:

• So they won a coastal restoration heroes program... ...competition.
• for administration of the program.
• for administration of the program, program director, personnel, policies, procedures, rulemaking, funds
• So does your bill, I saw it provided a pilot program. Is that it? It provides a pilot program?
• The bill just made sure the program works in the real world.

Bills: HR72, HR73, HR74, HR75, HR76, HR77, HR78, HR79, HR80, HR81, HR82, HR83, HCR36, HCR37, HCR38, HCR39, HCR40, HCR41, HB368, HB433, HB1017, HB1018, HB1019, HB1020, HB1021, HB1022, HB1023, HB1024, HB1025, HB1026, HB1027, HB1028, HB1029, HB1030, HB1031, HB1032, HB1033, HB1034, HB1035, HB1036, HB1037, HB1038, HB1039, HB1040, HB1041, HB1042, HB1043, HB1044, HB1045, HB1046, HB1047, HB1048, HB1049, HB1050, HB1051, HB1052, HB1053, HB1054, HB1055, HB1056, HB1057, HB1058, HB1059, HB1060, HB1061, HB1062, HB1063, HB1064, HB1065, HB1066, HB1067, HB1068, HB1069, HB1070, HB1071, HB1072, HB1073, HB1074, HB1075, HB1076, HB1077, HB1078, HB1079, HB1080, HB1081, HB1082, HB1083, HB1084, HR70, HR71, HCR35, HB31, HB326, HB1013, HB1014, HB1015, HB1016, SB192, SB196, SB198, SB203, SB204, SB214, SB216, SB257, SB291, SB383, HB13, HB23, HB25, HB32, HB41, HB42, HB90, HB120, HB121, HB122, HB127, HB138, HB139, HB141, HB179, HB187, HB213, HB247, HB286, HB332, HB344, HB357, HB367, HB370, HB462, HB505, HB527, HB537, HB605, HB680, HB681, HB725, HB780, HB782, HB847, HB892, HB911, HB916, HB1012, HR15, HR20, HCR14, HB53, HB57, HB64, HB102, HB106, HB111, HB137, HB152, HB155, HB177, HB238, HB256, HB258, HB337, HB359, HB363, HB386, HB434, HB546, HB557, HB584, HB661, HB697, HB726, HB727, HB747, HB756, HB758, HB759, HB765, HB767, HB825, HB858, HB930, HB941, HB957, HB964, HB58, HB69, HB93, HB166, HB199, HB201, HB202, HB218, HB223, HB224, HB231, HB235, HB246, HB338, HB349, HB352, HB379, HB405, HB429, HB535, HB547, HB577, HB588, HB626, HB636, HB652, HB653, HB669, HB688, HB691, HB721, HB738, HB806, HB851, HB857, HB861, HB889, HB904, HB907, HB908, HB929, HB1009, HB868, HB119, HB140, HB739, HB842, HB875, HB919, HB61, HB185, HB233, HB613, HB848, HB52, HB228, HB289, HB735, HB796, HB722, HB284, HB301, HB827, HB953, HB901, HB9, HB46, HB193, HB400, HB436, HB468, HB570, HB582, HB733, HB746, HB923, HB952

Keywords: HR72, House Resolution 72, Sophia Patout, Layla Porter, St. Amant High School, Future Farmers of America, FFA, Coastal Restoration Heroes, coastal restoration, Louisiana coast, coastal land loss, wetlands, saltmarsh, barrier island, West Grand Terre Island, Restore or Retreat Inc., smooth cordgrass, Spartina alterniflora, black mangrove, Avicennia germinans

Transcript Highlights:

• continued success in all future continued success in all future endeavors.
• from the state federal programs from the state federal programs from the state programs. programs. programs
• Okay. and the federal programs system. Okay. and the federal programs system.
• A similar program has been in place in A similar program has been in place in A similar program has been
• Um I want to look at what we program. Um I want to look at what we program.

Bills: HB 1535, HB 123, HB 111, HB 180, HB 342, HB 1027, HB 1178, HB 610, HB 1277, HB 1615, HB 1620, HB 5342, HB 4885, HB 4751, HB 4689, HB 4530, HB 4488, HB 2149, HB 2041, HB 2071, HB 1813, HB 2282, HB 2248, HB 2243, HB 2522, HB 2310, HB 2513, HB 2300, HB 1902, HB 3719, HB 4284, HB 4327, HB 3743, HB 3778, HB 3801, HB 5153, HB 5147, HB 4877, HB 4850, HB 3158, HB 3261, HB 3005, HB 3033, HB 3138, HB 3099, HB 2849, HB 2967, HB 3488, HB 3477, HB 3466, HB 3396, HB 3469, HB 2594, HB 2776, HB 2564, HB 2298, HB 5331, HB 5646, HB 5247, HB 5323, HB 2015, HB 4384, HB 3896, HB 4014, HB 3627, HB 3594, HB 2524, HB 510, HB 561, HB 5111, HB 5446, HB 1181, HB 3963, HB 2785, HB 1661, HB 2460, HB 24, HJR 138, HB 3800, HB 42, HB 129, HB 677, HB 668, HB 2128, HB 2038, HB 2316, HB 3686, HB 2563, HB 1160, HB 3883, HB 2788, HB 2663, HB 3305, HB 3474, HB 1105, HB 3490, HB 3597, HB 1295, HB 3512, HB 3783, HB 2017, HB 3010, HB 3112, HB 4215, HB 3223, HB 3464, HB 3120, HB 4214, HB 4081, HB 4783, HB 4063, HB 2783, HB 5085, HB 2510, HB 3426, HB 4361, HB 1169, HB 2516, HB 4700, HB 3560, HB 3860, HB 3146, HB 184, HB 198, HB 247, HB 367, HB 449, HB 1778, HB 514, HB 632, HB 2582, HB 766, HB 2715, HB 2712, HB 3069, HB 3505, HB 1269, HB 4224, HB 5032, HB 2240, HB 5180, HB 3348, HB 4668, HB 4665, HB 3395, HB 3157, HB 4395, HB 4325, HB 4386, HB 4273, HB 2760, HB 2820, HB 1828, HB 1579, SB 2349, SB 1268, SB 610, SB 1577, SB 1369, SB 2032, SB 2034, SB 1057, SB 1044, SB 922, SB 1759, SB 1143, SB 1506, SB 1403, SB 2361, SB 870, SB 372, SB 72, SB 1583, SB 2314, SB 1267, SB 1273, SB 765, SB 552, HB 2145, HJR 112, HB 1804, HJR 110, HB 1194, HB 1531, HB 5008, HB 3421, SCR 27, HB 5398, HB 1407, HB 426, HB 1535, HB 123, HB 1773, HB 1871, HB 2035, HB 2448, HB 2492, HB 1411, HB 4753, HB 4666, HB 4529, HB 1499, HB 1610, HB 2028, HB 1506, HB 886, HB 3546, HB 796, HB 223, HB 1475, HB 3556, HB 4638, HB 111, HB 180, HB 342, HB 1027, HB 1178, HB 610, HB 1277, HB 1615, HB 1620, HB 5342, HB 4885, HB 4751, HB 4689, HB 4530, HB 4488, HB 2149, HB 2041, HB 2071, HB 1813, HB 2282, HB 2248, HB 2243, HB 2522, HB 2310, HB 2513, HB 2300, HB 1902, HB 3719, HB 4284, HB 4327, HB 3743, HB 3778, HB 3801, HB 5153, HB 5147, HB 4877, HB 4850, HB 3158, HB 3261, HB 3005, HB 3033, HB 3138, HB 3099, HB 2849, HB 2967, HB 3488, HB 3477, HB 3466, HB 3396, HB 3469, HB 2594, HB 2776, HB 2564, HB 2298, HB 5331, HB 5646, HB 5247, HB 5323, HB 2015, HB 4384, HB 3896, HB 4014, HB 3627, HB 3594, HB 2524, HB 510, HB 561, HB 5111, HB 5446, HB 1181, HB 3963, HB 2785, HB 1661, HB 2460, HCR 98, HCR 92, HCR 126

Keywords: Trinity River Authority, river authority, Sunset Advisory Commission, Texas Sunset Act, board of directors, governor appointment, public water authority, regional water authority, water resources, local government, natural resources, board training, ethics, open meetings, public information, conflict of interest, complaint procedures, public comment, director removal, governance reform

Transcript Highlights:

• Heritage and understand their role in shaping the future.
• HB1269 by Gonzalez of El Paso, relating to the plant disease and ... ...Prevention Grant Program, future
• , real conservative.
• They can contribute three dollars or more to our grant program.
• This is part of the program that we all supported earlier. Yes.

Bills: HB1535, HB 123, HB 111, HB180, HB342, HB 1027, HB 1178, HB610, HB 1277, HB1615, HB1620, HB5342, HB4885, HB4751, HB4689, HB4530, HB4488, HB2149, HB2041, HB2071, HB1813, HB2282, HB2248, HB2243, HB2522, HB2310, HB2513, HB2300, HB1902, HB3719, HB4284, HB4327, HB3743, HB3778, HB3801, HB5153, HB5147, HB4877, HB4850, HB3158, HB3261, HB3005, HB3033, HB3138, HB3099, HB2849, HB2967, HB3488, HB3477, HB3466, HB3396, HB3469, HB2594, HB2776, HB2564, HB2298, HB5331, HB5646, HB5247, HB5323, HB2015, HB4384, HB3896, HB4014, HB3627, HB3594, HB2524, HB510, HB561, HB5111, HB5446, HB 1181, HB3963, HB2785, HB1661, HB2460, HB24, HJR138, HB3800, HB42, HB 129, HB677, HB668, HB2128, HB2038, HB2316, HB3686, HB2563, HB 1160, HB3883, HB2788, HB2663, HB3305, HB3474, HB 1105, HB3490, HB3597, HB 1295, HB3512, HB3783, HB2017, HB3010, HB3112, HB4215, HB3223, HB3464, HB3120, HB4214, HB4081, HB4783, HB4063, HB2783, HB5085, HB2510, HB3426, HB4361, HB 1169, HB2516, HB4700, HB3560, HB3860, HB3146, HB184, HB198, HB247, HB367, HB449, HB1778, HB514, HB632, HB2582, HB766, HB2715, HB2712, HB3069, HB3505, HB 1269, HB4224, HB5032, HB2240, HB5180, HB3348, HB4668, HB4665, HB3395, HB3157, HB4395, HB4325, HB4386, HB4273, HB2760, HB2820, HB1828, HB1579, SB2349, SB1268, SB610, SB1577, SB1369, SB2032, SB2034, SB1057, SB1044, SB922, SB1759, SB1143, SB1506, SB1403, SB2361, SB870, SB372, SB72, SB1583, SB2314, SB1267, SB1273, SB765, SB552, HB2145, HJR112, HB1804, HJR110, HB 1194, HB1531, HB5008, HB3421, SCR27, HB5398, HB1407, HB426, HB1535, HB 123, HB1773, HB1871, HB2035, HB2448, HB2492, HB1411, HB4753, HB4666, HB4529, HB1499, HB1610, HB2028, HB1506, HB886, HB3546, HB796, HB223, HB1475, HB3556, HB4638, HB 111, HB180, HB342, HB 1027, HB 1178, HB610, HB 1277, HB1615, HB1620, HB5342, HB4885, HB4751, HB4689, HB4530, HB4488, HB2149, HB2041, HB2071, HB1813, HB2282, HB2248, HB2243, HB2522, HB2310, HB2513, HB2300, HB1902, HB3719, HB4284, HB4327, HB3743, HB3778, HB3801, HB5153, HB5147, HB4877, HB4850, HB3158, HB3261, HB3005, HB3033, HB3138, HB3099, HB2849, HB2967, HB3488, HB3477, HB3466, HB3396, HB3469, HB2594, HB2776, HB2564, HB2298, HB5331, HB5646, HB5247, HB5323, HB2015, HB4384, HB3896, HB4014, HB3627, HB3594, HB2524, HB510, HB561, HB5111, HB5446, HB 1181, HB3963, HB2785, HB1661, HB2460, HCR98, HCR92, HCR126

Keywords: Trinity River Authority, river authority, Sunset Advisory Commission, Texas Sunset Act, board of directors, governor appointment, public water authority, regional water authority, water resources, local government, natural resources, board training, ethics, open meetings, public information, conflict of interest, complaint procedures, public comment, director removal, governance reform

Transcript Highlights:

• Forest Program.
• So there's $275 million for the Water Quality Improvement Grant Program.
• There's $275 million for the Water Quality Improvement Grant Program.
• , Florida Recreational Assistance Development Program, Florida, Florida Forever Program, Florida Recreational
• Here you can see the citrus marketing program. ...state.

Summary: The Agriculture and Natural Resources Budget Subcommittee met to hear member-led presentations on agency budget requests after prior meetings with the agencies. Representative Barnaby summarized the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services’ fiscal year 2025-26 request, highlighting major funding for the Rural and Family Lands Protection Program, Florida Forest Service wildfire and land management needs, citrus disease and research efforts, a new Conner Complex facility and lab, agricultural water and BMP projects, agricultural law enforcement staffing and equipment, maintenance and vehicle needs, and federal grant-related spending. No vote was taken on the department’s request during the meeting. Representative Bartleman presented the Department of Environmental Protection request and said the subcommittee supported it fully. The request emphasized Everglades restoration, water quality grants, springs, harmful algal bloom and red tide response, alternate water supplies, resilience and flood prevention, beach and coral reef restoration, land acquisition and state parks, and cleanup of petroleum, dry cleaning, and hazardous waste sites. Representative Alvarez asked DEP to provide a list of the most contaminated lakes, along with estimated costs, so the committee could prioritize cleanup efforts. Representative Black summarized the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission request, which included additional law enforcement funding in high-demand areas, oyster and reef restoration, habitat restoration, heavy equipment for land management and prescribed burning, a water survival training center, and red snapper data research. Representative Salzman then presented the Department of Citrus request, describing a lean agency budget focused on operations, PALM readiness, marketing and consumer awareness, greening-resistant plant material, and building repairs; the workgroup recommended fully funding the request. The meeting ended with members thanking the chair and staff for the more member-driven budget process, and the subcommittee adjourned without objection.

Transcript Highlights:

• Credit at risk in future budget years.
• Credit at risk in future budget years.
• So many of the CCA programs that will be cut are affordability programs that lower energy and transportation
• In 2025, the markets program awarded $6.3 million.
• Many of the CCA programs that will be cut are affordability programs that lower energy and transportation

Summary: The House Appropriations Committee continued its public hearing on House Bill 2289, the fiscal biennial supplemental operating budget appropriations bill. The chair and vice chair explained the hearing process, limited testimony to one minute per person, and then heard extensive public comment from a wide range of advocates, local officials, service providers, and residents. No committee vote was taken during the hearing. Much of the testimony focused on opposition to proposed budget shifts involving Climate Commitment Act revenue, especially the proposed diversion of $569 million to other uses, including the Working Families Tax Credit. Environmental, public health, and local government witnesses argued those funds should remain dedicated to climate pollution reduction, wildfire resilience, clean transportation, natural climate solutions, and affordability programs. Several speakers also urged full funding for wildfire response and forest health, including the HB 1168 commitment, and opposed transfers from the Public Works Assistance Account. Other major topics included Medicaid and long-term care rates, with nursing home and assisted living providers warning that freezing or delaying rate rebasing would worsen staffing shortages and threaten access to care. Public health and health care advocates opposed cuts to foundational public health services, Apple Health expansion, and pharmacy benefit changes, while oral health advocates asked to preserve Medicaid dental funding and support Dentist Link. Testimony also supported or opposed funding for K-12 programs such as special education, the Ninth Grade Success Initiative, and homeless student stability; early learning and child care subsidies; disability services; public defense; housing and homelessness prevention; food assistance; higher education; and immigrant legal services. The committee concluded the hearing and adjourned after public testimony ended.