Transcript Highlights:

• development program of the LSU AgCenter that engages young people in meaningful, learnful experiences that build
• So members, I would ask that you do what we've been doing on the past laws in the past years and build
• So members, I would ask that you do what we've been doing on the past laws in the past years and build
• What we've been doing on the past laws in the past years and build on that and provide clarity and pass
• 1984 and 1988 as a Democratic nominee, where he won 13 primaries, proved that a Black candidate could build

Bills: HR210 , HR211 , HR212 , HR213 , HR214 , HR215 , HR216 , HR217 , HR196 , HR197 , HR198 , HR199 , HR200 , HR201 , HR203 , HR204 , HR205 , HR206 , HR207 , HR208 , HR209 , HCR87 , HCR88 , HCR89 , HCR90 , HR118 , HCR63 , HCR69 , HCR86 , SCR6 , SCR18 , HB79 , HB165 , HB175 , HB198 , HB437 , HB457 , HB488 , HB603 , HB646 , HB763 , HB902 , HB909 , HB971 , HB981 , HB1066 , HB1089 , HB1099 , HB1125 , HB1154 , HB1231 , HB1245 , HB1246 , HB1247 , HB1248 , HB1249 , SB47 , SB82 , SB106 , SB206 , SB210 , SB248 , SB305 , SB376 , SB397 , SB441 , HCR41 , HCR76 , HCR77 , SCR19 , SCR3 , HB64 , HB68 , HB92 , HB316 , HB549 , HB578 , HB748 , HB798 , HB824 , HB988 , HB989 , HB1001 , HB1032 , HB1081 , HB1108 , HB1129 , HB1140 , HB1157 , HB1192 , HB1195 , HB1198 , HB1244 , HB167 , HB227 , HB243 , HB321 , HB335 , HB398 , HB492 , HB624 , HB689 , HB708 , HB804 , HB906 , HB926 , HB955 , HB968 , HB969 , HB978 , HB985 , HB1005 , HB1029 , HB1069 , HB1077 , HB1095 , HB1104 , HB1107 , HB1187 , HB1203 , HB1217 , HB1220 , SB73 , SB89 , SB128 , SB149 , SB191 , SB196 , SB238 , SB318 , SB340 , SB66 , SB68 , SB76 , SB139 , SB336 , SB475 , HCR32 , HB181 , HB1118 , HB1082 , HB225 , HB864 , HB1166 , HB1189 , HB59 , HB617 , HB897 , HB911 , HB1223 , HB901 , HR20 , HR74 , HB284 , HB306 , HB366 , HB393 , HB458 , HB459 , HB577 , HB582 , HB605 , HB614 , HB682 , HB733 , HB752 , HB773 , HB996 , HB1035 , HB1113 , HB1180 , HB1234 , HB1240

Keywords: renewable energy, job creation, veteran employment, economic development, energy security, asthma, allergy, awareness, healthcare, public health, Louisiana, St. Bernard Parish, special recognition, parish day, state capitol, Louisiana resolution, ceremonial resolution, honorary resolution, community celebration, local heritage

Summary: The House met on April 27, 2026, with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and a series of personal privileges recognizing Domestic Violence Prevention and Advocacy Day, Guarantee Corporation’s 100th anniversary, Delta Waterfowl, FFA and 4-H students, St. Bernard Parish Day, the Louisiana Notary Association, and New Orleans Day. The chamber also received Senate messages, committee reports, and introduced several resolutions, including measures on Gulf States renewable energy, asthma and allergy awareness, St. Bernard Parish Day, and other commemorations. The floor then took up a long series of bills and resolutions. Among the notable measures were House Bill 316 on literacy and tutoring, House Bill 578 changing statutory references from gender to sex, House Bill 748 expanding toll exemptions for school board vehicles, House Bill 101 redesignating a portion of U.S. Highway 190 as the Jesse Jackson Memorial Highway, House Bill 1032 cleaning up DWI terminology, House Bill 1081 transferring the Louisiana Ports and Waterways Investment Commission, House Bill 1108 creating a homeschool pride prestige plate, House Bill 1129 giving in-state auctioneers preference for selling surplus state property, House Bill 1157 creating a Louisiana State Infrastructure Bank, House Bill 1192 creating a dental hygienist prestige plate, House Bill 1195 revising athletic commission rules and NIL-related provisions, House Bill 1198 barring arbitration in child custody and visitation matters, House Bill 181 allowing limited tax-data sharing for Medicaid/SNAP integrity, House Bill 1118 requiring disclosure of hospital ownership by real estate investment trusts, House Bill 1082 changing venue rules in suits involving municipal police employees’ retirement systems, House Bill 225 proposing a lifetime two-term limit for governor, House Bill 864 on municipal fire limits and storage of flammables, House Bill 1189 requiring captain’s licenses for certain freshwater charter guides, and House Bill 549 creating the Bayou Growth Opportunity Workforce Program. Most measures passed, often after brief debate and technical amendments. Several bills were recommitted or returned to the calendar, including House Bill 902, House Bill 1245, and House Bill 1247, while House Bill 225 failed on final passage. The House also considered and passed multiple Senate bills dealing with tax administration, child custody testimony, Supreme Court disciplinary jurisdiction over out-of-state lawyers, civil investigation demands in Medicaid fraud cases, service of process fees and notice, and permanent homestead exemption registration. The session ended with the House in recess after completing its bill agenda for the day.

Transcript Highlights:

• My name is Greg Anderson, Austin Habitat for Humanity, and even though we build only in five counties
• You know, the county mantra is, if you've been to one county, you've been to one county.
• In 2003, the legislature passed a bill that authorized the counties to require that buildings, that inspections
• We also have a minimum building standard code for counties, and correct me if I'm wrong, but they both
• The county can take on the building code that the county seat requires, is the way the statute is written

Committee: House Land & Resource Management

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Louis County. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To inquire the gentleman from Bates County?
• So if they can sell those buildings or lease those buildings... School systems.
• school buildings.
• buildings.
• We're trying to build new buildings, but we don't want to just sell that old building right away because

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• related to building construction.
• the program, and allows county and city building departments to review plans for a period of no less
• build those.
• But also for home building, we know an architect is not required to design home building.
• Factory building...

Summary: The committee heard public testimony on several housing-related bills. On SB 6054, Senator Hunt’s bill to prohibit common-interest community rules from blocking wildfire home-hardening materials, staff explained that HOA and condominium governing documents could still impose reasonable aesthetic rules, but not ones that make fire-resistant materials infeasible or more than 10% costlier. The sponsor described the bill as a response to HOA requirements for less fire-resistant roofs. Testifiers generally supported the goal but objected to the 10% cost cap, saying it could limit community-specific design choices and create unintended conflicts with aesthetic standards. The committee also heard SB 601 on scissor stairs in the building code. The sponsor and supporters from Futurewise, architects, and housing advocates said scissor stairs could make mid-rise and high-rise housing more efficient, reduce corridor space, and improve unit layouts without sacrificing life safety. They noted the design is used in places like Vancouver, B.C. and in some Washington venues, and argued the bill would help lower costs and increase housing supply. No opposition was presented during the hearing. For SB 6015 on permit-ready residential plans, staff said L&I would create a process for publishing approved plans for factory-built housing and certain small residential types, with local governments required to approve applications using those plans on qualifying lots starting in 2027. Supporters from builders, architects, Habitat for Humanity, and Sightline said statewide standard plans could reduce duplication, speed permitting, and help scale factory-built and potentially site-built housing. Counties and L&I were supportive in concept but raised concerns about mandating local adoption of model ordinances and about whether the bill should include site-built plans as well. The committee also heard SB 5470 on detached ADUs outside urban growth areas, with supporters saying it would help rural homeowners and intergenerational living, while Futurewise opposed the bill as written and sought tighter density, lot-size, and metering limits. Finally, the committee heard SB 5729, a permit-streamlining bill that would deem completeness for applications prepared by licensed professionals and limit local governments to three review cycles. Builders and business groups supported it as a way to reduce delays and costs, while counties, cities, and Futurewise argued it could lead to more denials, less communication, and unintended liability concerns. In executive session, the committee adopted the proposed substitute for SB 5884 and moved it forward with a do-pass recommendation to Ways and Means.

Transcript Highlights:

• our counties' building permit process and our building code officials.
• our counties' building permit process and our building code officials.
• Neil Tanaka, County of Hawaii Building Division.
• Um, for our county, we have a separate planning department and building division.
• State Building Code Council. >> Support. >> Kawaii County. >> Support. >> Hawaii County Planning Public

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• What about athletic buildings? You said buildings.
• , West Harris County, East... ...supplying North Harris County, West Harris County, East Fort Bend County
• So they can build roads, build a water treatment plant, charge for garbage, and build parks.
• And then you have to raise the taxes on everyone else in the county to help build that road.
• I have a MUD in eastern Hays County where GBRA runs our wastewater system. We simply build it.

Committee: House Land & Resource Management

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• In my counties, three of the four of my counties are township counties.
• Louis County and Green County will run at no cost to the taxpayers of those counties.
• Louis County and Green County will run at no cost to the taxpayers of those counties.
• Some counties are three. You have some flexibility by county.
• Louis County essentially aligns us to the county charter.

Committee: House Local Government, Elections and Pensions

Summary: The committee first met in executive session and voted House Bill 1867 do pass by a 15-1 roll call. It then considered House Bill 2394, where a committee amendment changing “get” to “obtain” was adopted and rolled into a substitute. Testimony focused on efforts to work with plumbers and pipefitters on the bill’s scope, but the committee proceeded with the substitute, which passed do pass by a 10-7 vote. House Bill 2600 was then amended with clarifying language about petition signatures tied to the most recent gubernatorial election in the district, rolled into a substitute, and passed unanimously 17-0. The committee then held public hearings. House Bill 1906, sponsored by Rep. McGaugh, would remove township counties from a restriction so they can offer installment property tax payments like other counties. Support came from county collectors and a collector-treasurer, who said taxpayers want the option; one member suggested adding monthly payments as well. No opposition testified. House Bill 3003, sponsored by Rep. Steinmeyer, would require regular inspection and qualified testing of fire, smoke, and combination dampers under statewide standards, with documentation, reporting, and penalties for noncompliance. The sponsor and several witnesses from the fire protection and sheet metal industries said the bill would improve public safety and accountability; one opponent argued the certification standard was too broad, the penalties too steep, and the fiscal impact too high. The hearing also included discussion of hospital inspection cycles, local code variation, and the need for qualified inspectors. Finally, House Bill 2898 was heard. Rep. Owens described it as a revival of the land bank legislation previously enacted but struck down because of an unrelated amendment; the bill would restore land bank authority, expand eligibility beyond the original cities, and adjust St. Louis County appointment language to align with the county charter. Supporters from realtors, St. Louis County, municipal groups, and Springfield said it would help clear title, repurpose vacant properties, and return land to productive use, while one opponent argued the bill could weaken tax-delinquency protections and raise costs. No committee vote was taken on the public hearing bills, and the committee adjourned after closing the hearing on House Bill 2898.

Transcript Highlights:

• Oh, who is the county planning manager from Pierce County?
• ...the county planning manager from Pierce County, and then Carl Schroeder from AWC.
• I am Alon Basak, County Planning Manager for Pierce County.
• So if a county were to build to city stormwater standards, they might require developers to put in stormwater
• You're not building it.

Committee: House Local Government

Keywords: 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Provide us an update on the temporary building. I realize we're going to be again in that building.
• </c> with the estimates or or all the build with the estimates or or all the build are<00:25:57.440><
• </c><00:26:46.559><c> utilities</c> about the site and building utilities about the site and building
• For the county, and the much larger area, Pike County, I think it's 787 square miles, the largest county
• another County I me um Martin County another County I represent<00:38:29.079><c> that</c><00:38:29.240

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Roll Call 00:00:05 Capitol Renovations Update 00:00:40 Damage from Recent Disaster Discussion 00:33:25, 958, all

Summary: The committee met for its third meeting of the session and received an update on the Capitol renovation project from Finance and Administration Secretary Holly Johnson and State Budget Director John Hicks. They reported the project budget remains $291.52 million, with Messer Construction as construction manager, and said the temporary legislative chamber completion has slipped into 2025 because of wiring, voting machine, KET camera, and canopy work. They outlined the current bid schedule: site and utility bids due February 27, 2025; roofing and fourth-floor structural work due April 24; major renovation bids due May 23; bid review in late May and early June; roofing and fourth-floor work beginning in late June; and overall construction starting July 7, 2025. A major focus of the discussion was the project contingency, which officials said is only $10.8 million for an older building with significant unknown conditions. They explained that earlier investigations led to about $60 million in value engineering cuts, including more than $40 million tied to unexpectedly extensive terrace damage on the north, south, and east sides. The terraces were originally expected to need only minor work, but officials said investigations showed reconstruction would eventually be necessary and could not be handled by simple restoration. They also said the mechanical equipment plan changed from a basement location to a vault under the east parking lot, and that the west terrace will still see some ADA-related work. Committee members questioned why the terrace work was not included in the current budget, whether doing it later would cost more, and why bids and construction planning had taken so long. Officials said the terraces were left out because of cost, that future work would likely be more expensive because of market escalation, and that the timing reflected extensive investigation needed to produce reliable bids. Members also raised concerns about scaffolding and the temporary chambers; officials clarified that the scaffolding discussed was for the separate Capitol Dome project, not the chamber project, and said the Dome scaffolding is part of that project cost and is expected to come down in early 2027. They said the temporary chambers are expected to be used for three sessions, through the 28th session, with a return to the Capitol planned for the 29th session, and that public tours of the Capitol would likely end around June depending on the bid results and construction schedule.

Transcript Highlights:

• But to be clear, cities don't build. They are, however, required to plan for building.
• Thank you for the opportunity to present Assembly Bill 1044 on behalf of my home county, Tulare County
• Orange County Building and Construction Trades Council, Public Counsel, IBEW Local 11, L.A., Southern
• put in place a process school districts and county offices of education can use to build workforce housing
• And so in those 48 counties, like in our county, the sheriff can make that determination.

Summary: The Assembly Local Government Committee heard a long agenda of housing, water, and local finance bills, with the chair repeatedly reminding attendees about hearing rules and noting that several measures were being heard without a quorum at first. Early items included AB 407, which would broaden eligibility for state-run loan and financing programs to help small businesses fund environmental, seismic, and ADA upgrades, and AB 93, which would require data centers to estimate and report water use and follow state best practices. AB 93 drew support from water advocates and local government groups, while the Data Center Coalition opposed it, arguing the bill could be overly restrictive, difficult to retrofit, and raise trade secret or security concerns. The committee also heard AB 650 on housing element review, AB 1044 on creating a new Tulare County groundwater sustainability agency, and AB 523 on allowing proxy voting for single-representative member agencies on the Metropolitan Water District board; all drew broad support from local agencies and related stakeholders and no recorded opposition in the room. Several housing bills were presented as part of a broader fast-track housing package. AB 507 would streamline adaptive reuse of office buildings into housing, especially in downtowns with high vacancy; supporters said it would revive urban cores and help meet housing and climate goals, while the League of California Cities and a few cities opposed it unless amended, citing concerns about one-size-fits-all by-right approval and fee limitations. AB 1294 would create a universal housing application and limit early application requirements; it drew strong support from housing and business groups, with the American Planning Association and League of California Cities seeking more flexibility and input. AB 610 would require local governments to disclose housing constraints in their housing elements and limit new constraints after certification for three years unless disclosed; supporters said it would improve transparency and certainty, while opponents warned it could chill legitimate local policy choices and inclusionary housing requirements. Both AB 610 and AB 698, which would require analysis of the housing and property tax impacts of proposed transfer taxes, were moved out of committee on 7-0 votes after discussion and amendments. The committee also heard AB 1112, which would repeal an outdated Riverside County property tax provision affecting Rancho Mirage; the city argued it was the only qualifying no-low property tax city not receiving the standard minimum and sought equal treatment. After quorum was established, the bill was passed 6-0 with amendments and sent to Appropriations. AB 1021, heard later, would make it easier for school districts and other local education agencies to build employee housing, with the author citing teacher recruitment and retention problems and support from education stakeholders. Throughout the hearing, members and witnesses repeatedly emphasized the need to balance housing production, local fiscal tools, and infrastructure needs, and several authors accepted committee amendments and committed to continued negotiations with opponents.

Transcript Highlights:

• buildings.
• buildings.
• You know, we build a building across the street, moved all our offices over there, scraped the old building
• , and now they're building the adjacent building for our offices.
• This is not just about a building or buildings for our community.

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Corrections, Public Safety, Judiciary, Labor, and Transportation held a hearing focused first on courthouse facility funding and then on the Governor’s proposed court facilities budget. Legislative Analyst’s Office staff outlined the state’s court-facilities funding structure, including the 2002 shift of trial court facility responsibility from counties to the state, the main funding accounts, the insolvency of the construction fund, the move to General Fund support, the backlog of deferred maintenance, and the large estimated cost of needed new construction and repairs. Judicial Council representatives and judges from Los Angeles and Mendocino described severe seismic, safety, ADA, security, and maintenance problems, with examples of floods, elevator failures, asbestos-related closures, and long-delayed or underfunded projects. They argued that chronic underinvestment is making facilities less safe and more expensive to maintain, and that courthouse conditions directly affect access to justice and public confidence. Committee members pressed witnesses on how projects are prioritized, whether population and filing volume are adequately reflected, why reassessments have not been updated since 2019, how long acquisitions and construction take, and what level of funding would actually close the gap. Members also questioned the fixed county contribution, the use of General Fund backfills, and whether the state should set a clearer long-term funding target for the judicial branch. LAO staff emphasized that any new General Fund commitment would require tradeoffs with other budget priorities and said the Legislature must decide its appetite for funding. Judicial Council staff said the current prioritization was based on the 2019 reassessment and trailer bill language, that a new reassessment would cost about $14 million, and that acquisition delays are often driven by willing-seller issues and CEQA requirements. The chair asked for written testimony and indicated the committee would consider a future field hearing. In the second panel, Judicial Council and Department of Finance representatives reviewed the Governor’s budget proposals for court facilities. They said the proposal includes continued backfill for the State Court Facilities Construction Fund, several new construction and reappropriation items, relocation of Los Angeles courtrooms from the Spring Federal Building, and completion of a fire/life-safety project in Orange County. A court executive from Ventura testified that courthouse conditions affect public trust, employee morale, and the quality of service, citing roof leaks, elevator breakdowns, and HVAC failures as examples of why sustained facilities funding is needed.

Transcript Highlights:

• Charles County. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
• They’re from the largest county in the state of Missouri, Texas County.
• The largest county in the state of Missouri, Texas County, we have fourth graders from Raymondville,
• Missouri, in Texas County, the largest county in the state of Missouri.
• It should not be in Jackson County.

Summary: The Missouri House convened with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, approved the prior day’s journal 117-1, and held several points of personal privilege and guest introductions. Members recognized Women Legislators of Missouri for raising $100,000 for scholarships, honored fallen officer James Anthony Mitchell, Sr. with a moment of silence, welcomed the Blair Oaks state championship football team, visiting students from Bakersfield, Kirbyville, and Raymondville, hospital representatives promoting healthy eating, a former member of the House, and several interns. The chamber then took up committee reports and a supplemental budget measure, House Bill 2014. The budget chairman explained the Senate substitute made limited changes, including removing funding for the capital commission and a D.C. promotional event, restoring $600,000 for an agriculture fee fund, and adding $14 million for tobacco settlement shortfalls. He also noted major funding for MoDOT, disaster relief, and rural health care. The House adopted the Senate substitute 135-14 and finally passed the bill 137-13. Members next debated and passed House Bill 2559, the Raines Act, which would require more legislative review of rules with fiscal impacts; supporters framed it as reining in bureaucracy, while opponents said it would add delay and another layer of government. It passed 103-44. The House also passed House Bill 2710 on school accountability and A-F report cards for schools and districts after extensive debate over transparency, local control, and whether the bill would unfairly label schools; it passed 96-53. Other bills passed included HB 2404/2172 on repurposing unused school buildings (91-54), HB 1797 on alternative CPA licensure pathways (142-0), HB 1786 increasing Highway Patrol vehicle revolving fund spending authority (139-4), HB 2105 on water/sewer billing transparency for tenants (129-9), HB 2397 giving water district boards flexibility on dissolution thresholds and ballot language (130-15), HB 2108 conveying land to address a Jefferson City viaduct/emergency access issue (143-1), HB 2818 allowing St. Joseph to annex an airport it has owned since 1942 (137-8), and HB 1980 expanding peer review protections to emergency medical professionals, which was introduced and discussed near the end of the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• We've seen with Lane County, Lane County is planning to build a building.
• Lane County is planning to build a building that the equipment inside will be provided by private industry
• We in Linn County partook to build a $40 million intermodal facility over the last 10 years.
• We in Linn County partook to build a $40 million intermodal facility over the last 10 years.
• Fifteen years ago, Marion County had a problem with their building, the courthouse building just north

Summary: The task force met to focus on funding systems and incentive structures for a proposed regional waste infrastructure effort, including how a future WIPA framework might support solid waste planning in the Willamette Valley. Staff and members heard presentations from DEQ on the Clean Water State Revolving Fund, from Business Oregon on the Special Public Works Fund, and from Oregon State Treasury on state bonding capacity and the bond issuance process. Presenters explained how their programs are structured, how projects are scored or approved, what kinds of public entities and projects are eligible, and how interagency coordination and co-funding can work. DEQ emphasized that its revolving loan fund is driven by water-quality benefits and public-health criteria, while Business Oregon described a broader infrastructure loan program for public entities with no scoring system, and Treasury outlined the state’s debt-capacity process and the differences between general obligation and lottery bonds. Members used the presentations to discuss whether similar funding tools could support solid waste infrastructure, especially for transfer stations, regional hubs, and related facilities that may need to be built before Coffin Butte reaches the end of its lifespan. Several questions centered on whether public-private partnerships could qualify, whether equipment inside facilities could be financed, how repayment would work, and whether planning costs could be covered. DEQ and Business Oregon both said they could potentially collaborate on scoring or co-funding, but noted eligibility limits and the need for public ownership in many cases. Treasury said bond capacity is limited and competitive, especially for lottery bonds, and that project authorization generally runs on a two-year cycle, though unused authority can sometimes be reauthorized. In task force discussion, members debated whether the group should pursue a dedicated funding lane for the seven-county region rather than having local governments compete with other statewide needs. Some members stressed the importance of criteria to avoid stranded assets and to ensure funding is available when projects are ready, while others raised concerns about how cities and counties would generate revenue to repay debt during construction and early operations. The group also discussed flow control, system fees, and the need for regional collaboration among counties, cities, and haulers to create enough waste volume to support new infrastructure. Staff noted that pre-session filing materials for the legislature are due September 11, and the chair said the August meeting will focus on organizational structure and identifying partners. During public comment, Representative Kevin Mannix submitted written testimony supporting the WIPA concept and urging the task force to endorse it. Commissioner Bubba King of Yamhill County urged the task force to compare alternatives objectively and warned against adding bureaucracy before evaluating existing infrastructure and costs. Commissioners Kevin Cameron and Roger Nyquist of Marion and Linn counties described regional hub-and-spoke concepts, transfer stations, and intermodal options, emphasizing the need for planning, strategic siting, and collaboration with haulers and local governments.

Transcript Highlights:

• That model estimates that to offset the increase in emissions, the county would need to build 68 miles
• That model estimates that to offset the increase in emissions, the county would need to build 68 miles
• That model estimates that to offset the increase in emissions, the county would need to build 68 miles
• That model estimates that to offset the increase in emissions, the county would need to build 68 miles
• That model estimates that to offset the increase in emissions, the county would need to build 68 miles

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up House File 748, a bill revising Minnesota’s transportation greenhouse gas and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) impact assessment requirements for trunk highway projects. The chair first moved and adopted the A2 author’s amendment and then the A3 amendment, which was described as adding implementation time and project exemptions when federal dollars are available. The bill author explained that the measure responds to concerns from stakeholders that the current law can force costly mitigation, delay or stop safety and capacity projects, and create uncertainty because key implementation details are still being developed by a technical advisory committee. Testimony was split. County and city engineers, county commissioners, the Minnesota Transportation Alliance, and the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities generally supported the bill, arguing that the current requirements can add 20% to 40% or more to project costs, are difficult to administer, and could jeopardize critical safety improvements, congestion relief, and federal funding. They cited examples such as Scott County and Trunk Highway 65, and said VMT mitigation is especially hard to quantify and fund. Opponents, including Move Minnesota and Sierra Club, argued that safety and climate goals are not in conflict, that reducing driving can save lives and reduce pollution, and that the bill would weaken an important tool for cutting transportation emissions. Members also asked about how GHG and VMT are measured, whether the required assessment was ready, and who would be responsible for mitigation assets and costs. After discussion, the committee held a roll call vote. The bill, as amended, passed 8-7 and was moved to the General Register.

Transcript Highlights:

• , actually all it does is make these smaller-footprint buildings impossible to build.
• these buildings are safe.
• Residents in that building.
• these types of buildings.
• And Idaho side as well, if and how they want to build these types of buildings.

Committee: Senate Local Government and Taxation

Keywords: 989, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The next bill up is House Bill 2273, reducing embodied carbon emissions of buildings and building materials
• Building Code to establish a performance-based code compliance pathway for low-rise residential buildings
• Building Code as amended by Washington, and it requires the State Building Code Council to adopt rules
• This would specify that the county legislative authority of a county planning under the Growth Management
• This would specify that the county legislative authority of a county planning under the Growth Management

Summary: The committee met in executive session on a series of local government and building-related bills, with HB 2267 and HB 2388 removed from consideration and HB 1529 later pulled due to a technical issue. Staff briefed measures on scissor stairs in the building code (HB 2228), embodied carbon emissions in buildings (HB 2273), performance-based code pathways for low-rise residential buildings (HB 2381), permit review processes (HB 2418), county extreme heat response plans (HB 2183), fire protection districts (HB 2224), crash prevention zones (HB 2174), and city use of county road resources (HB 1529). The discussion focused on code modernization, housing production, permitting timelines, climate and emergency preparedness, fire district financing, and traffic safety. HB 2228 was advanced as Substitute HB 3079.2 after members supported creating a technical advisory group to recommend code changes allowing scissors stairs, with language clarifying fire-resistance separation; it passed 7-0. HB 2273, which would direct the State Building Code Council and Commerce to adopt embodied-carbon reduction rules and reporting, was reported out 4-3 after supporters emphasized emissions reductions and opponents said industry was not yet ready. HB 2381 advanced as amended Substitute HB 3125.1 after the committee adopted an amendment making the appendix optional and another clarifying performance-based compliance options; it passed 4-3. HB 2418 advanced as amended Substitute HB 3143.1 after the committee removed vesting provisions, clarified completeness standards, and allowed applicants to waive deadlines or refunds; it passed 7-0. HB 2183, requiring county extreme heat response plans, was amended to reference L&I rules, address grid reliability, remove some subsidy language, and shift plan adoption to county legislative authorities; it passed 4-3. HB 2224, concerning fire protection districts and levy adjustments, was advanced as amended Substitute HB 3142.1 after stakeholder-driven changes; it passed 6-1. HB 2174 was advanced as amended Substitute HB 3144.1, changing the concept from accident risk zones to crash prevention zones and setting a $73 penalty structure; it passed 6-1. The committee adjourned after reporting the bills out with due pass recommendations.

Transcript Highlights:

• The GMA establishes a wide array of planning duties for the 28 counties and cities within those counties
• , so cities and counties.
• build that.
• building.
• health agency in King County.

Summary: The committee heard Senate Bill 6026, which would require cities and counties planning under the Growth Management Act with populations of 30,000 or more to allow residential uses in commercial and mixed-use zones and bar local governments from requiring ground-floor commercial or retail as a condition of housing approval, with exemptions for certain sensitive areas and a carve-out for transit-oriented development station areas. The prime sponsor, Senator Alvarado, and supporters from the governor’s office, Commerce, housing advocates, developers, and major employers argued the bill would unlock underused land, reduce costs, and help address the state’s housing shortage. Opponents and local government representatives from small towns, counties, and cities said the bill could harm commercial corridors, small businesses, tax base stability, and local planning flexibility, and asked for narrower exemptions or additional carve-outs. No vote was taken on SB 6026 during the hearing. The committee then held executive action on Senate Bill 5937 and Senate Bill 5938. SB 5937, dealing with smart access systems and tenant privacy, was amended to clarify that keypad-only entry is not covered, require written privacy policies within five days of installation, and add operational purposes to allowable data collection; the committee adopted the amendment and advanced the bill with a due pass recommendation. SB 5938, which changes the foreclosure prevention fee and directs a Commerce study on a state homeowner assistance fund, was also amended to extend the study deadline and related expiration date; the committee adopted the amendment and moved the bill forward with a due pass recommendation. The committee then heard Senate Bill 6018, which would expand and modernize the Washington State Housing Finance Commission’s authority, including allowing direct mortgage lending to borrowers, extending bond counsel selection cycles, removing advance notice requirements for bond issuance, and repealing an outdated housing finance plan/program. The sponsor and the commission said the bill would improve efficiency and create new financing tools for affordable housing, while banking groups said they supported the goal but wanted clearer limits to ensure the commission would not enter first-mortgage lending for homebuyers. The sponsor and commission said they would work on clarifying language. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 6027 and Senate Bill 6028. SB 6027 would expand the use of local housing sales taxes and the Affordable Housing for All account to support operations, maintenance, rehabilitation, and preservation of existing affordable housing, update REET exemption timing, and align the definition of emergency housing with the Growth Management Act; local governments, housing providers, and advocates strongly supported the bill as a way to preserve existing housing amid rising costs and federal funding uncertainty. SB 6028 would create a revolving loan fund administered by the Housing Finance Commission to finance mixed-income affordable homeownership projects with long-term affordability covenants; the sponsor said it would help builders who have entitled sites but face high capital costs, and the hearing began with staff briefing and sponsor testimony, with questions from members starting as the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• , Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz County, and San Benito County.
• County and Santa Cruz County as well.
• or Rossi in Tulare County, to build a housing project.
• , Goshen and Tulare County, Lamont and Kern County, and Patterson in Stanislaus County, adding to threats
• , Goshen and Tulare County, Lamont and Kern County, and Patterson in Stanislaus County, adding to threats

Summary: The committee held an outcomes review hearing on AB 457 and related farmworker and rural housing policy, with members and witnesses discussing whether recent streamlining laws are actually increasing production. Chair Haney, Assembly Members Soria and Pellerin, and others described the purpose of AB 457 and its predecessor bills AB 1783 and AB 3035: to make farmworker housing easier to build through ministerial approval and other reforms. Witnesses emphasized that farmworkers face severe overcrowding, high rents, long commutes, and limited access to housing in both rural and coastal agricultural regions. The first panel focused on practical barriers and local models. Napa County described its county-owned farmworker centers, which provide nightly lodging, meals, and services, funded by lodger fees, a grower assessment, and state support. Testimony stressed that these centers function as navigation hubs rather than permanent housing, and that stable, inflation-adjusted operating funding, language access, transportation, and local set-asides are critical. United Farm Workers urged that local farmworkers be prioritized over H-2A workers and warned against displacing long-term resident workers. Several witnesses said the biggest barriers remain infrastructure, land costs, local opposition, and insufficient subsidy rather than approval streamlining alone. The second and third panels addressed AB 457’s implementation and broader state funding issues. Santa Clara County said the bill could help on a county-owned Gilroy site, but financing remains the main obstacle. Self-Help Enterprises said AB 457’s expanded geography and project-size rules may help future sites, but rural projects still struggle with water, sewer, and environmental review costs, and with the state’s Super NOFA process, which tends to favor deeper-income projects that do not match farmworker household incomes. HCD reported that CERNA and other programs have increased farmworker housing production in recent years, but witnesses argued that rural regions still receive too little funding, that infrastructure dollars are too fragmented, and that more rural-specific set-asides, local funding incentives, and predictable allocations are needed. No votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:02:34.040><c> including</c> buildings including buildings including uh<00:02:35.480><c> buildings
• Funds were used to cover the cost of acquiring the land and building in Perry County.
• Graves County all the way over to Johnson and Floyd County.
• County.
• </c> Floyd County. Floyd County.

Keywords: The live stream ended prematurely due to a network issue. A full recording will be uploaded as soon as possible, 958, all

Summary: The committee first discussed and approved a new airport-related project involving two 60-by-80 corporate hangars. Members asked about how the project would generate revenue, and staff explained that hangar rent and fuel sales would help repay the costs, with more than half of the funding coming from the FAA. The project was approved by roll call vote. The committee then approved two large capital pool projects: a $1,715,120 roof replacement and skylight project for the Libraries and Archives building in Frankfort, and a $2,105,400 exterior renovation project for several state buildings, including Health and Family Services, the Kentucky History Center, and the State Office Building. After that, the Kentucky Infrastructure Authority presented one loan increase and five grant reallocations. The loan increase was for Springfield’s wastewater treatment plant project, rising by $262,300 to just over $2.88 million because bids came in higher than estimated. Members asked about the delay between approval and bidding, and staff explained the design, environmental review, and state approval process can take one to two years. The committee approved the six action items, and then received informational updates on additional water projects that required no action. The Cabinet for Economic Development next presented one forgivable loan and 11 KPDI/KPDI EDF grant projects. The loan was a $1 million forgivable loan for the Perry County Economic Development Board to acquire the Coalfields Industrial Building, with repayment forgivable if a project creates at least 75 jobs. The grant projects included site-readiness and industrial development work in Pendleton, Elizabethtown/Hardin, McCreary, Floyd, Marion, Fleming, Graves, Eddyville/Lyon, Caldwell, Mercer, and Johnson counties. Members asked how local match percentages are set and were told they are based on county population and updated every two years; staff also explained that beneficiaries usually provide the match and are reimbursed after submitting costs. The committee approved the action items. Finally, the Office of Financial Management presented two new debt issues and three SFCC debt issues. The new debt items were a Kentucky Housing Corporation bond authorization of up to $600 million for single-family mortgage revenue bonds, including a $100 million initial transaction, and a $5.5 million multifamily conduit bond for 98 apartments in Lexington. Informational items covered University of Kentucky refunding bonds and Turnpike Authority refunding bonds, both of which produced savings. The three SFCC debt issues for Campbell, Edmonson, and Perry counties were then approved by roll call vote. The meeting ended with brief discussion of the upcoming calendar and scheduling before adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• , Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz County, and San Benito County.
• County and Santa Cruz County as well.
• Consuelo Hernandez, Deputy County Executive for the County of Santa Clara.
• or Rossi in Tulare County, to build a housing project.
• , Goshen and Tulare County, Lamont and Kern County, and Patterson in Stanislaus County, adding to threats

Committee: House Housing and Community Development

Keywords: 988, house, all