Transcript Highlights:

• In the corporate income tax space, the bill adopts the current Internal Revenue Code for corporate income
• Regardless of their income or spending habits, they hit seniors on fixed incomes the hardest and burden
• Not only did my mom pass away, but my dad, as a household, went from dual income to single income and
• Yes, there are going to be limitations.
• Yes, there are going to be limitations.

Summary: The House opened with prayer, a moment of silence for fallen Oviedo Officer Jimmy Serrano-Torres, the Pledge of Allegiance, and recognition of Chief Joseph Tuminelli as law enforcement officer of the day. The Rules and Ethics Committee report setting the special order calendar was adopted, and the Speaker announced schedule changes for the following week, including canceling the floor session on Monday and starting Tuesday at 10:30 a.m. The main floor action centered on CS/HB 7033, the House tax package. Sponsor Rep. Duggan described broad tax changes, including reducing the state sales tax rate from 6% to 5.25%, exempting certain bullion sales, repealing the aviation fuel tax, delaying the natural gas fuel tax, changing corporate income tax treatment for charitable trusts, reducing the pari-mutuel tax on card rooms, and major changes to tourist development tax (TDT) use. The bill would redirect most TDT revenue toward property tax relief, dissolve tourist development councils, and include related property tax and local tax administration changes. Several amendments were debated: a Driscoll amendment to preserve local TDT flexibility failed; Duggan’s amendment giving local governments 25% discretion over TDT revenues was adopted; Eskamani’s combined-reporting amendment failed; and a Duggan amendment requiring audit certification of compliance with the TDT/property tax relief provisions was adopted. After debate, CS/HB 7033 passed 78-29. The House then took up CS/CS/HB 1221 on local option taxes, which was presented as a companion-style measure to give local governments more flexibility while redirecting TDT revenues toward property tax relief. Supporters argued the bill would provide immediate relief to property owners and restore accountability in local tax use, while opponents warned it would undermine tourism funding, infrastructure, and local services. An amendment allowing local governments to retain 25% of TDT revenues for general purposes was adopted, and the bill passed 62-45 after floor debate. The final item shown was the reading of CS/CS/HJR 1257, a proposed constitutional amendment related to property tax exemptions and assessment limits, but the transcript cuts off before debate or action on that measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• tax that is, in my estimation, 100% a small business income tax.
• The state income tax would disallow you to carry forward losses.
• The state income tax would disallow you to carry forward losses.
• I made some comments earlier about the proposed income tax.
• I made some comments earlier about the proposed income tax.

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: Senate and House Republican leaders held a joint media availability focused on affordability, budget concerns, and opposition to several Democratic tax proposals. John Braun and Drew Stokesbary said Washingtonians are still struggling with the cost of food, gas, housing, child care, and health care, and argued Democrats are not advancing bills that would ease those pressures. They criticized a draft income tax proposal they said would function as a small business tax, especially because it would disallow loss carryforwards and could discourage investment in housing and other capital-intensive sectors. They also objected to a proposed tire fee and a bill they said would prevent tire sellers from telling customers about the tax. The Republicans said they planned to raise budget and tax concerns in an upcoming meeting with Governor Ferguson, and Stokesbary said he had introduced a budget-savings bill to consolidate University of Washington investment management with the State Investment Board. They also discussed a bill to make it harder to qualify citizen initiatives, calling it anti-democratic, and said they want stronger oversight and legal reforms related to DCYF and state liability in child welfare cases. Braun and Stokesbary said they were open to discussing tort reform and a civil claims process, but emphasized the underlying problem is state failure in protecting children. On health care, they said they were still reviewing a bill to eliminate interest on medical debt and a separate 340B drug-pricing proposal, warning both could have unintended effects on hospitals, patients, and drug innovation. They also said they support the idea of protecting children online and in schools, but want any social media, AI chatbot, or cell phone-related bills written carefully to avoid First Amendment problems and unintended consequences. On public safety, they expressed concern about a bill restricting police retention of automatic license plate reader data, arguing law enforcement needs such tools to solve crimes. No votes were taken, and the event ended with the Republicans reiterating their opposition to tax increases and their focus on affordability.

Transcript Highlights:

• EVs to low-income drivers.
• Models are used for guidance, and they’re going to be limited.
• The income of my district is about 50. That’s a very serious problem.
• lower-income communities, almost and tired. aggressive and will increase over time.
• Air and water pollution in lower-income communities, near lower-income communities, almost entirely in

Summary: The hearing was a select committee discussion on the transportation costs and impacts of California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), with opening remarks from the co-chairs and members emphasizing affordability, climate goals, and the need to explain the program’s benefits to the public. The first panel from CARB and the California Energy Commission described how LCFS works as a market-based, declining carbon-intensity program that rewards lower-carbon fuels, supports zero-emission vehicle infrastructure, and is intended to reduce greenhouse gases and local air pollution. They argued the program has driven billions in private investment, increased alternative fuel use, and that LCFS credit prices are not the main driver of retail gasoline prices, which they said are dominated by crude oil, refining, and distribution costs. Members questioned the panel on the gap between the regulatory target and actual carbon-intensity performance, the role of credit banking, which fuels are generating the most credits, how the 2025 amendments affected the program, and whether LCFS credits are truly additional. CARB explained that banking helps cost-effectiveness and investment certainty, that ethanol, renewable diesel, and biodiesel currently provide the largest volumes while electricity is expected to grow, and that the updated targets were informed by the state’s 2045 carbon-neutrality goals and the 2030 scoping plan. The Energy Commission said its data show environmental programs add some cost to gasoline but do not drive price volatility, which is mainly tied to crude oil and refinery margins. The second panel, featuring academic and research experts, focused on program design, out-of-state credit generation, and broader economic effects. Speakers said LCFS is successful because it ties incentives to emissions benefit, uses life-cycle analysis, and allows flexible compliance that lowers costs compared with more direct regulation. They also said the program’s benefits generally outweigh costs, that it can reduce air pollution disparities and support equity, but that some issues—especially indirect land use change, additionality, and older program assumptions—need more research and may warrant future rulemaking. One researcher noted that while LCFS likely raises gasoline prices somewhat, the effect is uncertain by design and usually smaller than normal market fluctuations, and another warned that limiting credit generation too narrowly could create legal and efficiency problems.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's $15 million, I believe, for low-income energy assistance, or utility assistance, $3 million to
• That's $15 million, I believe, for low-income energy assistance, or utility assistance, $3 million to
• Then they turn around and enroll them in Marketplace, claiming that their income is $24,999.
• in limited government, local control, and allowing communities decide what's best for them.
• But I've seen far too many roads that have had their speed limits lowered for political reasons.

Summary: The committee first received a lengthy presentation from JLBC staff comparing the JLBC baseline budget with the executive proposal. Staff said the baseline shows about $577 million in available cash above statutory formulas, but that major items not included—especially tax conformity, ongoing health and school repair costs, and new federal Medicaid/SNAP administrative requirements—would significantly change the picture. The executive budget was described as about $1.1 billion larger than the JLBC baseline, driven by revenue and spending proposals including border security funding, tax conformity, higher sports betting taxes, elimination of a data center equipment exemption, short-term rental and water surcharges, SNAP administrative and error-rate costs, and several one-time items that staff argued appear ongoing. Members also discussed rising caseloads and supplementals in developmental disabilities, Medicaid/Access, and education, including concerns about declining enrollment, possible fraud in Access, and the SNAP error rate. The committee then heard and passed SB 1032, which appropriates $1.5 million from the General Fund in FY 2027 to fund the Independent Correctional Oversight Office. Testimony from the sponsor and advocates emphasized the need for independent oversight of the Department of Corrections, transparency, whistleblower reporting, and avoiding federal receivership. The bill was given a due pass recommendation on a 10-0 vote. Next, the committee considered several transportation appropriations. SB 1064, as amended, would appropriate $3 million to ADOT for improvements along West Route 66 in Flagstaff; the mayor and local planning officials testified that the corridor is congested and dangerous, with significant growth and crash history. The bill passed 7-3. SB 1059 would appropriate $9.2 million for an additional right-turn lane at SR 87 and SR 260 in Payson; supporters cited severe backups and safety concerns, and it passed 7-3. SB 1062 would appropriate $1 million for an additional left-turn lane at US 60 and Superstition Mountain Drive in Gold Canyon; supporters said the intersection is a major bottleneck and safety issue, and it passed 6-4. Finally, the committee began hearing SCR 1004, which would place on the ballot a prohibition on photo enforcement systems used by local authorities or state agencies for speeding and red-light violations. The sponsor and public testimony argued that automated enforcement is unpopular, unconstitutional, and prone to abuse, citing allegations of campaign money tied to ticket revenue and forged judicial signatures on citations. The transcript cuts off during public testimony, before any committee vote on SCR 1004 or the remaining bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• In order to facilitate the goal of hearing as much from the public within the limits of our time, we
• These incentives for low and moderate income drivers. Perfect. Thank you Assemblymember Kaloza.
• for income opportunities that they're not allowed to drive on the Uber platform because they're not
• So you talked about basically randomization, and also limiting who has access.
• Please limit. Your comment time to one minute. Thank you.

Committee: House Communications and Conveyance

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Please note that we limit testimony to two witnesses in support and two witnesses in opposition.
• All additional witnesses will be limited to stating their name, organization, if they represent one,
• I just hope that we don't do that on the backs of our low-income working families and our children.
• This is increasing parenting youth's income by 57% because young people, as the senator shared, have
• extremely low incomes at this age.

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Human Services met to hear several measures focused on children, foster youth, farmworker families, and disaster assistance. AJR 12, recognizing May 2025 as Head Start Month and urging Congress and the President to protect and increase Head Start funding, was presented by Assemblymember Hadwick on behalf of Assemblymember Arambula. Testimony emphasized Head Start’s role in early education, health, and family support, especially in rural and low-income communities. The resolution passed 6-0. The committee also heard SB 624, which would expand access to the California Foster Youth Tax Credit by requiring counties to mail notices and provide guidance to non-minor foster youth about filing taxes and claiming the credit. Supporters from John Burton Advocates for Youth and former foster youth described the credit as a meaningful poverty-reduction tool that helps with rent, transportation, and other basic needs. Members praised the bill, and it passed 7-0 as amended to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. SB 778 would broaden eligibility for the Migrant Child Care and Development Program by redefining migrant agricultural worker family and allowing self-certification of income eligibility. Support came from the Mexican American Opportunity Foundation, California Citrus Mutual, and First 5 California, with witnesses saying the changes would ease enrollment for farmworker families facing seasonal and verification challenges. The bill passed 7-0 to Appropriations. The committee also approved a consent calendar containing SB 444, SB 471, and SB 792, all on a 7-0 vote. Finally, SB 739 would authorize the Department of Social Services to check whether counties in disaster areas can provide timely CalFresh and Disaster CalFresh services, aimed at improving coordination when local systems are damaged or overwhelmed. Supporters said the bill would help protect access to food benefits after disasters, and members noted its importance in light of recent Los Angeles County emergencies. The bill passed 7-0 to Appropriations, and the meeting adjourned after all items were acted upon.

Transcript Highlights:

• There are tight income and asset limits within the bill as well.
• There's even a sensible 12-month graduated phase-out of income raises.
• We're limited.
• It sets limits on 7-HG levels. It requires testing and labeling standards.
• And then nothing's being regulated, no age limit, no labeling, no nothing.

Committee: Senate Health and Welfare

Keywords: 989, all

Transcript Highlights:

• You to our low-income energy assistance.
• Those are being deployed around the country for limited uses.
• Those are being deployed around the country for limited uses.
• Those are being deployed around the country for limited uses.
• </c> homes for extremely low-income renters. homes for extremely low-income renters.

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: The program focused first on Minnesota’s energy and affordability agenda, with Senator Nick Frentz discussing the state’s clean-energy leadership, rising electricity demand, and the Senate’s 100% clean energy framework. He said Minnesota’s clean energy growth supports jobs, lowers costs for ratepayers, and includes recent wins such as sustainable aviation fuel tax treatment in the supplemental budget. Frentz also said the Senate passed an energy omnibus bill that continues clean-energy permitting reforms, promotes conservation and demand response, and includes a nuclear study rather than lifting the nuclear moratorium. Frentz spent much of the interview defending data centers as both a challenge and an opportunity. He said large hyperscale projects can create major construction jobs and substantial local property-tax revenue, while a 2025 law requires data-center companies to contribute to low-income energy assistance and report water use. He pointed to the Google data center planned for Pine Island as an example, saying it is air-cooled, will pay $5 million a year, and will fund 1,600 MW of clean energy at its own expense, which he argued could save Xcel ratepayers money over time. He also said climate change is already driving higher costs through homeowners insurance and storm damage. The second segment highlighted Senator Zach Duckworth’s housing and banking bills. Duckworth said Senate File 4168 would make it easier to finance investment properties by giving buyers more flexibility to roll closing costs and lender fees into payments, while keeping strong protections in place for primary residences. He emphasized that the bill is not about predatory lending and is intended to expand options for informed investors. He also described Senate File 4652 as an anti-fraud, no-cost measure that lets bank customers name a trusted contact so banks can alert someone if suspicious activity is detected. Duckworth said both bills passed unanimously in both chambers, and he credited quick action and good working relationships across the aisle for their success. The program closed with a broader reflection on the end of session and the Senate’s political climate. It noted that 15 senators are retiring and two are leaving for higher office, and that final floor votes often split along party lines, including one bill passing 34-33. Several retiring senators used farewell speeches to urge civility, compromise, and putting people first, while the segment emphasized that despite partisan conflict, quiet bipartisan cooperation still produced much of the session’s enacted legislation.

Transcript Highlights:

• Since 1975, we have brought people home, supporting the needs of low- and moderate-income renters and
• We have limited resources often.
• We have limited resources often, so we are constantly having to prioritize.
• I know we have a two-minute time limit, so I'm just going to say ditto.
• Land use attorneys, and architects in the Bay Area, focused on building housing at all income levels.

Summary: The joint hearing focused on the Governor’s 2025 reorganization plan to split the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency into two new agencies: a Business and Consumer Services Agency and a California Housing and Homelessness Agency. Administration officials said the change would give each side more focused leadership, improve consumer protection and regulatory oversight, and better align housing and homelessness policy with the state’s broader housing goals. Leaders from the Department of Consumer Affairs, Cannabis Control, Alcoholic Beverage Control, and Financial Protection and Innovation all voiced support for the business-side reorganization, while housing officials emphasized that the new housing agency would help streamline funding, compliance, and coordination across programs. Members raised concerns about timing, budget impacts, office space, and whether the split would actually reduce bureaucracy. The administration said the plan would be included in the May Revision, was intended to be cost-neutral, and would not require fee increases for licensees or additional office space. On the housing side, officials said the new Housing Development and Finance Committee would work toward a single application and more coordinated award process for affordable housing funding, while preserving CalHFA’s statutory and financial independence. They also said the reorganization would improve compliance monitoring, data collection, and coordination with local governments, including Los Angeles homelessness programs. Public testimony was largely supportive. Industry groups representing beverage distributors, craft brewers, wine, mortgage lenders, and housing organizations backed the business-side split, and housing advocates such as Housing California, the California Housing Partnership, and the California Housing Consortium supported the housing agency concept and the proposed one-stop-shop approach. Several witnesses urged that tax credits, bonds, and other funding sources be better coordinated, and some said the plan should be paired with additional state investment and implementation resources. No formal vote was taken; the hearing was informational.

Transcript Highlights:

• In order to facilitate the goal of hearing as much from the public within the limits of our time, we
• Let us not be limited by a reliance on obsolete technology.
• These low-income households that can't afford home broadband are spread all across the state in every
• We limited it in the committee that I took in my own committee. I don't know.
• We limited it in the committee that I took in my own committee. I don't know.

Summary: The committee first heard AB 470, which would change California’s carrier-of-last-resort rules and allow a phased transition away from copper landlines in areas deemed well served by alternative phone options. The author and AT&T argued the bill would protect consumers, preserve 911 access, require public notice and CPUC review, and direct investment toward modern fiber and emergency communications. Supporters included a wide range of business, civic, tribal, and community groups, while opponents from TURN, rural counties, labor, digital equity organizations, and local governments warned the bill could let AT&T shed service obligations too quickly, weaken protections for rural and underserved households, and harm workers. After extensive member discussion about CPUC authority, rural carveouts, labor impacts, and reinvestment, AB 470 was passed do pass as amended to Appropriations, with one no vote and one not voting, and the roll left open. The committee then took up AB 1532, a committee omnibus bill extending funding and surcharge authority for the Deaf and Disabled Telecommunications Program and the TNC Access for All program, while also adding CPUC accountability provisions. Chair Boerner Horvath explained the bill would not raise consumer costs and would require the CPUC to appear at hearings when requested and adopt rules for commissioner attendance. There was no opposition testimony, and the bill was moved do pass and re-refer to Utilities and Energy, though the roll was left open because it had not yet reached the threshold for immediate transmission. Finally, the committee heard AB 353, the Affordable Home Internet Act of 2025, which would establish an affordability floor for home broadband for low-income Californians after the expiration of the federal Affordable Connectivity Program. Supporters said broadband costs remain too high and that families, students, and vulnerable communities need a state solution now; opponents from the wireless industry and rural county representatives argued the bill would amount to an artificial price mandate and could complicate existing rural broadband buildouts. Members generally supported the goal but raised concerns about impacts on small ISPs and rural areas, and the bill was moved forward with a motion and second while discussion continued about possible exemptions and amendments.

Transcript Highlights:

• Housing is not time-limited.
• This allows for income in rent.
• That's my with limited resources.
• </c> without exhausting limited resources. without exhausting limited resources.
• This being limited circumstances.

Committee: Senate Housing and Homelessness Prevention

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• You know, not a— Population or income, employment or construction.
• Personal income is a measure of all income to Washingtonians.
• So this is not only salary, Personal income is a measure of all income to Washingtonians, so this is
• not only salary and wages, but investment income, rental income, that sort of thing.
• It's worth noting here that, obviously, with limited time and limited space on the slides themselves,

Summary: The committee first received a presentation from Dr. Reich on the Economic and Revenue Forecast Council (ERFC), including how the council’s joint executive-legislative forecasting process works, the main state revenue sources, and recent economic conditions. He said Washington’s economy is slowing, with weak employment growth, softer taxable sales, and uncertainty from tariffs, federal spending, and the federal shutdown. He also noted that the September forecast was reduced, mainly because of lower sales tax and real estate excise tax collections, and that the state still expects modest growth rather than a recession. Members asked about whether Washington tends to lag national downturns and how forecast information should affect budgeting; Dr. Reich said the forecast is a revenue tool, not a budgeting decision, and that spending choices remain with elected officials. The Department of Revenue then presented on Washington’s sales and use tax structure and the implementation of Senate Bill 5814, which expands retail sales tax to several services effective October 1, 2025. Steve Ewing explained how sales and use tax are sourced, how reseller permits and the multiple points of use exemption work, and how the new law applies to live presentations, temporary staffing, investigations and security services, IT services, custom website development, advertising services, and custom software. He said DOR held listening sessions, issued interim guidance, and set up a centralized landing page and outreach efforts to help taxpayers understand the changes. He also described a six-month grace period for certain pre-existing contracts through March 31, 2026, but said penalties and interest still apply under the statute. Committee members raised concerns about how businesses and individuals will know when a service is taxable, who is responsible for collecting and remitting tax, and how sourcing will work for services delivered across multiple locations or online. DOR staff walked through examples involving accounting services, live lectures, virtual events, advertising campaigns, and search engine marketing, including the use of reasonable allocation and pool codes when exact sourcing data is unavailable. Members also questioned the administrative burden on small businesses and professionals newly subject to tax, and whether additional legislative fixes or relief from penalties and interest may be needed. No votes or formal actions were taken in the work session.

Transcript Highlights:

• For a married couple earning the median income of $138,000, infant child care takes up 16% of their income
• income.
• To make up the income that I’m losing, I work most weekends.
• So as it is now under the family fee schedule, the fees are limited to 1% of a family's monthly income
• And there's no fee assessment for families whose incomes are below 75% of the state median income.

Summary: The California State Assembly Select Committee on Child Care Costs held its first hearing to examine the state of child care access, affordability, and provider compensation. Chair Cecilia Aguiar-Curry and other members described child care as essential infrastructure for working families and the economy, noting that costs are unaffordable for many households and that providers are underpaid. Early testimony came from a San Francisco parent, Quinn Chung, who described the difficulty of finding safe care and the financial and career sacrifices caused by lack of child care, and from Tuolumne County provider Anita Viscini, who detailed her monthly costs, low margins, and the need to work weekends and teach CPR classes to make ends meet. Assemblymembers also emphasized the crisis in rural communities and the need for a long-term strategy. The first policy panel featured Jennifer Troia of the California Department of Social Services, Laura Pryor of the California Budget and Policy Center, and Alexa Frankenberg of Child Care Providers United. Troia said the state has nearly doubled child care funding in five years, expanded subsidy slots, and reached a new tentative three-year agreement with providers that includes cost-of-living adjustments, stabilization payments, and continued work on an alternative rate methodology and single rate structure. Pryor argued that despite funding gains, child care remains too expensive, only a fraction of eligible children receive subsidies, and provider wages remain far below comparable jobs, worsening racial and gender inequities. Frankenberg said the tentative agreement is progress but not enough, calling for a true cost-of-care system, fair wages, paid time off, better support for emergency and nontraditional care, and stronger integration of family child care into the mixed-delivery system. Members asked about why the crisis persists, how the alternative methodology will work, how family fees and sliding-scale help are being used, and why middle-income families still struggle. The panel said the problem reflects long-term underinvestment, a broken market, and a system that still leaves many families without access. The committee also heard an economic panel from Ashley Hoffman of the California Chamber of Commerce and Sarah Bone of the Public Policy Institute of California. Hoffman described employer child care benefits and public-private partnership models in other states, including shared-cost programs and local chamber efforts. Bone said child care costs reduce family financial security and labor force participation, especially for mothers of young children, and estimated that if mothers of young children worked at the same rate as mothers of older children, more than 80,000 additional women could be in the workforce each year. In the final panel, parent and provider advocates, including Jennifer Greppie and Black Californians United for Early Care and Education co-founder Keisha Doyle, argued for fully funding child care, ending waiting lists, protecting culturally affirming care, and addressing racial inequities and private equity’s role in the sector.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> understand that we do have a time limit. understand that we do have a time limit.
• Is it an actual income?
• Is it an actual income?
• Is it an actual income?
• So, income returns or some some income.

Bills: HB1739 , HB1741 , HB2606 , HB2362 , HB2608 , HB2294 , HB2431 , HB2375 , HB2582 , HB2585 , HB2231 , HB1601 , HB2424 , HB1956

Committee: House Water & Land

Keywords: transit-oriented development, zoning, land use, urban planning, density, local governance, housing, inclusionary zoning, inclusionary mandate, affordable housing, below-market-rate housing, inclusionary housing, development exaction, impact fee, housing affordability impact fee, needs assessment study, financial feasibility, rough proportionality, essential nexus, county ordinance

Summary: The committee on Water and Land met on February 19, 2026, and the chair opened by emphasizing strict time limits and that all bills would be deferred if the agenda was not completed before the noon session. The first major measure discussed was HB 1739 HD1, which would preempt county land-use authority in transit-oriented development areas. The Department of Planning supported the bill, saying it could promote state-funded TOD and infrastructure, while the city and county’s position was raised in questioning. Unite Here Local 5 opposed the bill, arguing it would strip counties of self-determination, disrupt state-county policy collaboration, and remove a check on unrestrained development. Committee members pressed the supporters on whether the bill was really about higher density and whether it would override local zoning and sustainability concerns. The committee then heard testimony on HB 1741 HD1, a housing bill described by supporters as reducing inclusionary housing mandates and increasing supply. Grassroots Institute of Hawaii argued affordability mandates reduce overall housing production and raise market-rate prices, while a Zoom testifier said the bill would improve housing stability, health, and community outcomes for working families, kupuna, and young residents. Members asked about the bill’s needs assessment and who would conduct it, with a witness saying the counties would likely contract it out but that the bill did not clearly specify the reviewer. HB 2668 HD1, dealing with water heating systems, drew testimony from the Hawaii State Energy Office and industry representatives. Supporters generally backed adding heat pumps to the law, but one solar-water-heater industry witness asked for amendments to remove or extend the current 15-year statutory life limit for solar water heaters and to update outdated standards and variance rules. A Kauaʻi Climate Action Coalition witness opposed the existing solar-only structure, arguing heat pump water heaters are cheaper, align with climate goals, and should be allowed without a variance. The Energy Office said the current law already allows variances in some cases, suggested adding high-efficiency heat pump water heaters to the exemption, and said the 15-year figure may be too short, with 18 years mentioned as a possible alternative. The committee also briefly moved through several other bills, including HB 2606 HD1 on off-site construction and HB 2362 HD1 on housing, with no notable testimony or action recorded in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• And they were not hired by any low-income families.
• This is not about helping low-income families in Idaho.
• This is not about helping low-income families in Idaho.
• So if you're not in low-income housing, you have a regular suburban house, income housing.
• Should we increase or decrease the income tax or whatever?

Keywords: 989, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So if the household income is less than 70% of county median household income, property is exempt from
• And then if household income is less than 60% of county median household income, the exemptions that
• The household income has to be below 75% of county median household income.
• gross income and then has a number of adjustments, so certain types of income are added back in.
• household income goes to income thresholds.

Summary: The committee held a public hearing on several tax and retirement bills, beginning with Senate Bill 6073, which would move eligible Department of Natural Resources wildland and aviation firefighters from PERS into LEOFF 2 prospectively. Committee staff described the higher retirement age and benefit differences between the systems and noted a small implementation cost and a modest actuarial rate increase. DNR, the Washington Public Employees Association, and a committee member all raised support or questions, with DNR acknowledging additional review with the LEOFF board was still needed. The hearing then turned to Senate Bill 6113, a Department of Revenue request bill making technical and administrative changes to the tax code, including clarifications tied to last session’s ESSB 5814 service-tax changes, a six-month transition period for reclassified businesses, and a section affecting advertising-related exclusions. DOR said the bill was revenue neutral and intended to codify guidance and improve certainty, while school districts, arts groups, broadcasters, newspapers, and business groups testified both in support of the technical fixes and in opposition to provisions they said would continue or worsen unintended consequences from last year’s tax law. Senators also questioned how some definitions would apply, especially to school and higher-education-related services. Senate Bill 6116 would restore the vapor-products tax structure by moving nicotine-containing vapor products back under the per-milliliter vapor tax instead of the 95% other tobacco products tax, and would restore distributions to the Andy Hill Cancer Research account and Foundational Public Health Services account. Public health agencies, cancer research representatives, and some retailers supported the bill as a fix to funding disruptions, while tobacco-control groups opposed lowering the tax and argued it would weaken public health policy. The committee also heard that the current law creates a double-tax issue on pre-existing inventory because products held when the definition changed became subject to a new tax classification. Finally, Senate Bill 6129 proposed a broader nicotine-tax overhaul, including a 90% tax on nicotine products, a 10% tax on flavored nicotine products, higher cigarette taxes, and new revenue distributions and tribal compact provisions. Supporters, including public health organizations, pediatricians, and civil rights advocates, said higher taxes would reduce youth use and restore funding for cancer research and public health; opponents, including retailers, tobacco and vapor businesses, broadcasters, and some harm-reduction advocates, argued the bill was regressive, would fuel illicit markets, and would harm small businesses and adult consumers using lower-risk products. The committee then began a briefing on Senate Bill 6162, a property tax reform bill that would expand senior and disability property tax relief, adjust state property tax rates, and change property tax billing statements, but the hearing on that bill was not completed in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> the property uh exemption for low income the property uh exemption for low income housing<00:48:
• </c> for um an exclusion from uh gross income for um an exclusion from uh gross income for<01:21:07.360
• <01:31:09.159><c> tax</c><01:31:09.960><c> for</c><01:31:10.880><c> uh</c> income tax for uh income tax
• <01:48:47.239><c> is</c><01:48:47.400><c> at</c> income is at income is at 14,000<01:48:49.760><c> um
• </c> state that has an an income state that has an an income tax<01:49:46.000><c> other</c><01:49:46.280

Committee: Senate Taxes

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The proposed substitute changes the list of requirements that local governments can apply to low-income
• houses as a condition for program participation to include requirements relating to income qualification
• It allows counties and cities to impose reasonable capacity limits based on residential density limits
• The next amendment... ...residential density limits and fire codes.
• It specifies that the bill does not limit or restrict the enforcement of criminal offenses under the

Summary: The Housing Committee considered two bills in executive session. House Bill 2266, the “step housing” bill, was presented with a proposed substitute that set different siting rules for transitional housing, permanent supportive housing, emergency shelters, and emergency housing; allowed some local standards and certifications; required local code updates within two years or the next comprehensive plan update; and grandfathered existing facilities. Members debated several amendments, adopting amendments to allow form-based codes, clarify timing and definitions, and preempt conflicting local requirements, while rejecting amendments that would have added school/daycare setbacks, expanded operational requirements, or changed local program conditions. The committee then approved the substitute bill on a 10-7 vote and reported it out with a do pass recommendation. House Bill 2489 would bar local governments from adopting or enforcing laws that criminalize or penalize life-sustaining activities on public property unless adequate alternative shelter space is available. The proposed substitute narrowed and clarified the bill, including exceptions for imminent harm, emergency access, disability access, and certain criminal laws; it also allowed regional shelter agreements and broadened the definition of adequate alternative shelter space. Members adopted an amendment allowing portable mats, beds, or other sleeping spaces in drop-in overnight shelters, including those in religious buildings, while rejecting or withdrawing other amendments, including one on park facilities and one on weapons. After debate over public safety, shelter availability, and local control, the committee passed the substitute bill on a 9-8 vote and reported it out with a do pass recommendation. The chair then announced the committee would not meet the following day.

Transcript Highlights:

• Any individual residing in Idaho with earned income who files taxes and is not eligible for Medicaid,
• Not only did this increase accuracy, but it also reduced the number of income-related exceptions that
• Not only did this increase accuracy, but it also reduced the number of income-related exceptions that
• There isn't any limitation in code as to what that amount is? No, there is no limitation.
• of short-term limited-duration plans to no more than three months.

Committee: Senate Commerce and Human Resources

Keywords: 989, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Retired peace officers in California by exempting law enforcement pensions from state income tax.
• This bill, Assembly Bill 918, provides a targeted income tax exemption for pay earned by California's
• We have Member Nguyen, item file item number four, AB 984, personal income tax deductions.
• But for many low-income families, that is simply not enough.
• and middle-income homeowners.

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Revenue and Taxation met and announced that, under its suspense-file rules, every bill on the agenda would be referred to suspense because each had a fiscal impact. The chair also reminded attendees to submit position letters in advance for inclusion in the bill analysis. A quorum was established and the committee then heard six bills, all of which drew support testimony and no opposition testimony in the room. AB 814 would exempt law enforcement pensions from state income tax to encourage retired peace officers to remain in California and support recruitment and retention. AB 918 would create a targeted income tax exemption for pay earned by local first responders deployed under mutual aid during declared emergencies, with supporters saying it would help sustain disaster response and reward extraordinary service. Both bills were backed by police and public safety organizations and were referred to suspense. AB 976 would create a nonrefundable tax credit for small retailers in disadvantaged communities to help pay for security equipment in response to retail theft and violence; members discussed whether the bill should be broader and how it related to Proposition 36 and crime policy. AB 984 would allow state tax deductions for contributions to CalABLE accounts, with testimony from CalABLE representatives and families describing the program as an essential savings tool for people with disabilities. AB 1282 would create a deduction for out-of-pocket medical expenses up to $5,000 through 2030, and AB 838 would raise California’s renter’s tax credit from $60/$120 to $2,000 for eligible filers. Each of these bills was also referred to the suspense file, and the committee then adjourned.