Transcript Highlights:

• might feel about that, HB 207 brings up concerns about the role of the scientific and evidence-based decision-making
• It's done through a public process, so everybody knows what's going on and why they are making this decision
• So yes, Texas may be making very different economic development decisions and taking on their...
• So yes, Texas may be making very different economic development decisions and taking on their own provisions
• may or may not have been stated are clarified for the purpose of people to be able to make decisions

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And I want to make one note.
• No, we got to make sure our kids can read. We got to make sure that they can critically think.
• I mean, I'm not the one who gets to make that sort of policy decision.
• Wind decision Court's decision you just said with the offshore windmills with U.S.
• This court decision was focused on the U.S. Wind decision. And that came in May.

Keywords: 1064, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator Avila, you've described a scenario where we have to make tough decisions next year.
• We make, obviously, very, very tough decisions that sometimes are just not popular, but they're decisions
• I'm concerned about local decision-making.
• And this is why we have elected officials to make those decisions that we elected them for.
• Chairman, because in order to... ...make those decisions, the decisions would have to be made.

Summary: The Committee on Appropriations took up SJR 2-F, a proposed constitutional amendment to reduce property taxes by lowering assessment caps on non-homestead property, expanding homestead exemptions over time, and allowing local governments to increase exemptions further. The sponsor argued the measure would provide broad property tax relief while requiring revenues to be directed to core services such as public safety, education, infrastructure, and natural resource projects, with a trust fund intended to help local governments transition. Senators raised concerns about the lack of a fiscal score, the effect on counties, cities, school districts, and special districts, and whether the proposal would shift costs to fees or other taxes. Several amendments were debated. Senator Polsky’s amendment to explicitly authorize user fees and non-ad valorem assessments to offset lost property tax revenue failed. Senator Avila’s amendment broadening permissible uses of ad valorem revenue to include county constitutional officers and other expenditures approved by local governing bodies was adopted after debate over whether the bill would otherwise underfund essential functions. Senator Smith’s sunset amendment, which would have made the constitutional changes expire after five years, failed. Senator Smith’s amendment to allow tourism development tax revenue to support public safety and education also failed. Senator Graal’s amendment removing the constitutional trust fund language was adopted, with supporters arguing the Constitution should not promise an unfunded account. Additional late-file amendments were considered. Senator Berman’s proposal to change the ballot title to more neutrally describe the measure as affecting property taxes and local community service reductions failed. Senator Trumbull’s amendment removing school board ad valorem taxes from the proposal was adopted, preserving school taxes. Senator Smith’s amendment narrowing the non-homestead assessment cap reduction to small businesses only failed. The committee then returned to the bill as amended and continued questioning the sponsor about eligibility, fiscal impacts, and whether the proposal could lead to local governments offsetting lost revenue through special assessments or other charges.

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill enhances financial control for districts that authorize school districts to determine make make
• It's just making sure those districts have any control over.
• bill removes the statewide mandate for middle school and high school start times and returns the decision-making
• As I stated before, we support the science behind these decisions.
• well informed decisions that best serve our schools in conclusion, however, to make this bill even stronger

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We make that happen.'
• When it comes to voting on proposals affecting corporate decision-making, institutional investors account
• It makes sense.
• It makes sense.
• That means making individual strategic decisions about which markets to serve and how to protect their

Bills: SB312, SB945, SB946, SB1367, SB1861, SB2044, SB2337, SB2403, SB2819, SJR54

Keywords: public school funding, education, budget allocation, financial transparency, state law, local control, fiduciary responsibility, public retirement systems, investment management, proxy voting, financial factors, insurance, political shareholder proposals, fossil fuels, greenhouse gas emissions, environmental regulation, discrimination, credit extension, social credit, value-based standards

Summary: The committee heard Senate Bill 945, 946, 2044, 2819, 2403, 2337, and 312, with all bills left pending after testimony. SB 945 would restrict insurance companies from denying or limiting coverage based on oil and gas activity or ESG-related goals, and supporters argued it would protect Texas energy producers from politically motivated shareholder activism and insurance discrimination. SB 946 would bar creditors from using social credit, ESG, DEI, or religious/political affiliation as a basis for denying or limiting credit; witnesses said it would prevent viewpoint-based financial discrimination and protect access to capital for Texas businesses. SB 2337 would require proxy advisory firms to disclose when recommendations are based on non-financial factors or when they give conflicting advice to different clients; supporters said the measure would increase transparency and curb ESG-driven influence over shareholder voting. SB 312 would direct public retirement systems to focus on financial returns rather than social or political objectives, with the author saying the bill responds to activist pressure on pensions and would reinforce fiduciary duty. The committee also took up election and ethics measures. SB 2044 would strengthen electioneering restrictions for publicly funded education institutions and personnel, prohibiting use of official resources to promote political agendas; testimony focused on alleged school district electioneering in bond and tax elections. SB 2819 would prohibit county elections administrators from holding certain officer positions appointed by elected officials, addressing potential conflicts of interest. SB 2403, the Texas Ethics Commission sunset bill, would restructure complaint handling with a three-tier violation system, risk-based complaint prioritization, longer response times, bipartisan preliminary review panels, and expanded hearing options; members discussed amendments aimed at dismissing minor complaints, clarifying categories, and adjusting lobbying and penalty provisions, but the amendments were withdrawn during committee consideration. Across the ESG and finance bills, invited witnesses from the American Energy Institute, Heartland Impact, Consumers Research, ADF Action, Texas Civil Justice League, and related groups generally supported the measures, arguing that banks, insurers, proxy advisors, and asset managers have used ESG or reputational-risk standards to discriminate against energy, agriculture, firearms, and religious organizations. No opposition testimony was presented in the excerpt, and the committee closed public testimony on each bill and left them pending.

Transcript Highlights:

• But would you say that engineers, by and large, make big decisions based on data?
• A bureaucrat who is unelected making the decision to...
• Therefore, it's the elected school board members who make these decisions.
• Trust us to make responsible decisions. Otherwise, we'd be voted out.
• As a taxpayer, I really want local decision-making done at the local level.

Bills: HB26, HB73, SB 14, HB46

Keywords: HB26, law enforcement contracts, sheriff, constable, county commissioners court, commissioners court, private security, special law enforcement district, property owners association, POA, municipal utility district, school district, junior college district, local government, contract policing, supplemental police services, large counties, population over 3.3 million, Texas Local Government Code, Harris County

Transcript Highlights:

• They want to make sure employers are protected and make sure wages are failed. I understand.
• that they make to join a union or with regard to the decisions that they make to join a union or to
• Like, that makes sense.
• Why every year do we have to think about making a decision if we choose not to take dues out or we choose
• They can make those decisions.

Keywords: 965, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Labor and Industrial Relations met for its final meeting of the 2026 session and took up SB 312 by Senator Talbot, a bill concerning labor organizations, employee dues and fees, withdrawal from unions, annual notice requirements, and related reporting and notification provisions. The committee first adopted a technical amendment set, then debated a larger amendment set that shifted the cease-withholding request to the employer, required electronic confirmation, placed certain administrative costs on the labor organization, and added language about employer notification and authorization procedures. Members discussed whether the bill was needed, whether employees already have the ability to opt out, and whether the amendments would create confusion or unnecessary bureaucracy. Supporters said the bill protects employee choice and ensures dues stoppage happens at the nearest payroll period; opponents argued the added language was unclear and burdensome. The committee also adopted a separate technical amendment adding mass transit employees to the list of exemptions. Testimony came from the bill author and several stakeholders. Senator Talbot said the bill is meant to ensure workers know they do not have to join a union, can revoke dues authorizations, and can stop deductions without waiting for a fixed annual window. Representative Eccles defended the amendments as employee protections and a way to shift administrative costs away from taxpayers. Jim Patterson of LABI supported the amendments, saying they protect public employers and taxpayers from administrative costs. After the amendments were adopted on a roll call vote, union representatives Matt Wood of the Louisiana AFL-CIO, Peter Robbins-Brown of the AFL-CIO, and Larry Carter of the Louisiana Federation of Teachers and School Employees testified in opposition to the amended bill, saying they had worked in good faith on a simpler opt-in/opt-out framework and objected to the new cost and bureaucracy provisions. Several members also spoke in favor of the bill as a matter of freedom of choice and employee control over paycheck deductions. At the end of debate, Representative Wilder moved to report SB 312 with amendments. The motion passed on a roll call vote, and the bill was reported from committee with amendments. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Again, we're making it optional.
• informed decisions concerning their health care.
• informed decisions concerning their health care.
• It's just the protection there doesn't necessarily make sense.
• Noble for making the trip down.

Summary: The committee heard and advanced several bills. SB 624, by Senator Yarborough, would allow batterers intervention programs to offer optional supplemental faith-based activities, with no participant required to take part; supporters said it would expand provider options amid a shortage of certified programs, while opponents raised concerns about government speech and mixing religion with court-ordered programming. After debate, the bill was reported favorably 7-2. The committee also considered CS/SB 834, which repeals a 2022 restriction preventing licensed insurance agents from marketing or selling health care sharing ministries; supporters framed it as restoring choice and free speech, while opponents warned about consumer confusion, commissions, and lack of insurance protections. It was reported favorably 8-2. The committee next approved CS/SB 502, via a strike-all amendment, to give Florida concurrent jurisdiction over certain juvenile offenses on military installations so juveniles can be handled in state juvenile court rather than federal court; the amendment and bill both passed unanimously. CS/SB 52 also passed unanimously after testimony from church leaders and security personnel supporting an exemption from Class D/G licensing for unpaid armed security volunteers at places of worship. Supporters said the bill would clarify legal gray areas and help churches afford security, while members noted the broader concern that houses of worship need armed protection at all. Finally, the committee reported favorably SB 840, which revises last year’s emergency/local planning law by narrowing its application after storms from 100 miles to 50 miles of the storm track and exempting certain water, flood, and state/federal planning matters; local government representatives supported the clarification, and the bill passed 9-0. CS/SB 758, as amended, updated the membership of the Justice Administration Commission to better reflect the entities it oversees, and it also passed 9-0. The meeting ended with a recorded affirmative vote from Senator DeSigley on SB 624.

Transcript Highlights:

• Anything like that that can help in your decision making, we're happy to take part in. Thank you.
• We have to communicate so we can make informed decisions.
• this tough decision.
• And maybe some make sense and some don't make sense. But Mr.
• I'm making a salvo.

Summary: The Budget Committee met with a quorum and took up several bills. HB 677, relating to state-covered fertility preservation for employees undergoing cancer treatment, was introduced as coverage for egg and sperm preservation for up to three years, with an estimated fiscal impact of about $813,000. After brief questions and no public testimony or amendments, the bill passed unanimously and was reported favorably. The committee then considered CS/HB 59, which would reform Florida’s wrongful incarceration compensation process by extending the filing deadline from 90 days to two years, removing the clean-hands requirement, and allowing exonerees to choose between the state compensation process and a civil lawsuit; it was supported by the City of Flagler Beach and passed unanimously. CS/HB 1313, which recreates the Resilient Florida Trust Fund in the Department of Environmental Protection before its scheduled termination in 2025, also passed unanimously after supportive testimony from advocacy groups. The committee received a lengthy presentation from the Department of Management Services on the State Group Insurance Program and the recent Revenue Estimating Conference. The presentation covered enrollment, revenues and expenditures, rising medical and pharmacy costs, emergency room utilization, GLP-1 drug spending, and options for tighter formulary and utilization management. Members asked about ER cost growth, GLP-1 coverage and copays, PBM oversight and potential conflicts, avoidable ER visits, cancer screening claims, dental and vision costs, specialty drug biosimilars, and possible savings from more restrictive pharmacy models. DMS said it would follow up on several questions and noted ongoing work on cancer coordination, preventive screening, biomarker testing, and a proposed member-facing benefits platform. The committee also heard extensive testimony on HB 301, which would raise sovereign immunity caps from $200,000 per person and $300,000 per incident to $1 million and $3 million, align limitations periods with private claims, and allow government entities to settle above the caps without a claims bill. Local governments, school-related entities, and county and city associations opposed the bill, warning of major fiscal impacts, higher insurance costs, and pressure on services; several speakers urged smaller increases or a tiered approach. Proponents, including families affected by catastrophic injury or death, argued the current caps are too low and the claims bill process is inefficient and unfair. After debate, the bill passed on a recorded vote, with some members voting no, and was reported favorably.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator Avila, you've described a scenario where we have to make tough decisions next year.
• We make, obviously, very, very tough decisions that sometimes are just not popular, but they're decisions
• I'm concerned about local decision-making.
• And this is why we have elected officials to make those decisions that we elected them for.
• Because in order to make those decisions, the decisions would have to be made.

Summary: The Committee on Appropriations took up SJR 2-F, the proposed constitutional amendment on property tax relief, which would reduce assessment growth on non-homestead property, expand homestead exemptions, create a new exemption for new homesteaders, and direct counties, cities, and school districts to use property tax revenues for specified core services. Senator Avila presented the measure as the governor’s plan to provide historic relief and argued that local governments should tighten budgets and prioritize core functions. Senators raised concerns about the lack of fiscal scoring, the breadth and ambiguity of the permitted uses, the effect on special districts and local services, and whether the proposal would shift costs to fees or other taxes. The committee adopted several amendments, including Avila’s amendment clarifying that ad valorem revenues could be used for county and municipal operations and administration and other expenditures not prohibited by law, and Trumbull’s amendment removing school board ad valorem taxes from the proposal. Other amendments failed, including proposals to allow user fees and non-ad valorem assessments, add a sunset, redirect tourism development taxes, narrow the small-business provision, and change the ballot title to reference local service reductions. Grall’s amendment removing the constitutional trust fund requirement was adopted, while the committee also rejected Berman’s title-change amendment and Smith’s sunset and tourism-tax amendments. The committee then returned to the bill as amended for questions, including extended debate over whether the proposal would affect noncitizen residents, the impact on local government finances, and whether local governments would respond with higher fees or special assessments. The meeting ended with the bill still under discussion after the final round of questions, with Avila saying he would continue working with the governor’s office on the language before the next vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, how intense they want to make that policy.
• the decision that there's no phone, then it's unheard, the onus is unheard or him to make sure that
• Can you think of any other, how, how else could, uh, the legislature influence the decision making, uh
• , so it might impede their, um, decisions.
• And then you have, so they're not making full decisions and the research says that they're more susceptible

Bills: HB6, HB27, HB123, HB210, HB213, HB222

Keywords: hemp, consumable hemp products, hemp-derived cannabinoids, CBD, cannabidiol, CBG, cannabigerol, Texas hemp law, hemp regulation, cannabinoid products, delta-9 THC, intoxicating hemp, hemp gummies, hemp vape, retail registration, product registration, QR code labeling, child-resistant packaging, youth access, minor sales

Transcript Highlights:

• here and the the budgets that we make here and the decisions<00:24:12.120> that<00:24:12.279>
• tax decisions that we make on these tax decisions that we make on these tax credits<00:24:13.880
• We don't make decisions in building buildings like cities do or developments like cities do, or get the
• And like I said, every city, every county, every school district does make different decisions, and some
• And like I said, every city, every county, every school district does make different decisions, and some

Bills: HF2254, HF2302, HF2502, HF2315, HF2475, HF2086

Keywords: HF2254, Minnesota child credit, baby bonus, child tax credit, income tax, individual income tax, tax relief, newborn, birth credit, family tax credit, tax refund, advance payment, Department of Revenue, taxable year, parenting, families with children, child credit, state regulations, families, taxation

Transcript Highlights:

• But members, we need better science so that we can make sound decisions in dealing with a topic of such
• So that we can make sure that we get the science in place before the important decisions are made on
• have sort of the regulatory protection to make those hard decisions that they need to.
• certain that we’re not making these decisions based on a limited perspective.
• certain 420 that we're not making these decisions based on.

Bills: HB24, HB27

Keywords: groundwater, conservation, water permits, sustainability, resource management

Summary: The committee met to hear House Bills 27 and 24 on groundwater issues in East Texas, with members and witnesses focusing on a proposed large-volume groundwater export project and the need for more science before major permitting decisions are made. HB 27, which was within the special session call, would direct the Texas Water Development Board to conduct a hydrogeologic study of the aquifers in the affected area and temporarily pause new export permits while the study is underway. HB 24, a separate bill that would limit certain production and export permits to 5% of modeled available groundwater, was laid out but the chair said it would not be moved out of committee. Testimony on HB 27 was largely supportive, though some witnesses were neutral. Supporters, including representatives from a water supply corporation, the Trinity River Authority, Environmental Defense Fund, and the Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association, said the region lacks enough hydrologic data, that the proposed pumping could affect private wells, surface water, and local economies, and that the state needs better information on sustainable yield and groundwater-surface water interaction. Several witnesses emphasized that groundwater conservation districts need clearer tools and better data, while also noting concerns about property rights and the rule of capture. Committee members discussed the scale of the proposed project, the absence of a groundwater conservation district in Houston County, and the possibility that the study should examine desired future conditions and maximum sustainable pumping rather than only modeled available groundwater. The committee adopted the committee substitute for HB 27 and voted it out favorably to the full House with a recommendation that it do pass, be printed, and be sent to the Committee on Calendars. The roll call was unanimous, 11 ayes and 0 nays. After the vote, members briefly reflected on the complexity of the issue and the need to continue working on broader groundwater policy in the interim and next session. HB 24 was discussed later in the meeting, but no final action on that bill was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• It is more important than ever that policymakers make careful decisions and give careful consideration
• uh<00:48:58.520> long-term to make decisions that have uh long-term to make decisions
• We need to face the cold hard facts and make tough decisions today, and families can’t afford for us
• tough decisions today facts and make tough decisions today andot<00:58:42.000> of<00:58:42.119
• we make the decisions around money spent we make the decisions around spending<01:24:16.679> and

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And secondly, a law that may be viewed as restricting the liberty interests of a parent to make decisions
• you know, with regard to making decisions about things like schooling, medical care. ...by the Constitution
• , you know, with regard to making decisions about things like schooling, medical care, religious training
• you know, with regard to making decisions about things like schooling, medical care. by the Constitution
• , you know, with regard to making decisions about things like schooling, medical care, religious training

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The Rules Committee met to consider several bills for constitutional and proper-form review. House Bill 2171, which would bar certain hostile governments and associated persons from owning or possessing Arizona real property and create enforcement penalties, was found to raise possible conflict with federal foreign-relations law, but was still recommended as constitutional and in proper form by a 5-2 vote. House Bill 2446, dealing with English proficiency requirements for commercial truckers and out-of-service orders, was also recommended 5-2, with staff noting a needed floor amendment to carve out the federal border commercial zone to avoid Supremacy Clause concerns. House Bill 2331, which would require electric utilities to obtain 85% of electricity from “reliable” sources by 2030 and assign enforcement to the Corporation Commission, drew concerns about the Commission’s exclusive constitutional authority over utility regulation and rate-making, but was likewise recommended 5-2. The committee then considered House Bill 2589, which would make it a felony to allow minors to attend or view drag shows. Staff said the bill raised First Amendment and parental-rights concerns and could face strict scrutiny, and recommended an amendment to narrow it; the sponsor’s office was reportedly working on changes. Despite objections from members who called it overly broad and unconstitutional, the bill was recommended 5-2. House Bill 2592, concerning state agency use of artificial intelligence and legislative ratification of temporary rules, was flagged for legislative entrenchment issues because it attempted to bind future legislatures and set a simple-majority ratification requirement, but it too was recommended in proper form with a suggested amendment to remove the problematic mechanism. At the end of the meeting, the committee took up a large mass motion covering many additional bills, memorials, resolutions, and one concurrent memorial, all of which staff said were constitutional and in proper form. During that discussion, staff specifically noted House Bill 2976, relating to justice court administration, as needing amendment to avoid tension with the Arizona Supreme Court’s constitutional authority over court administration. The mass motion passed 7-0 with one member absent, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Again, that's going to be up to the responsibility of the local officials to make the best decision on
• It is our county commissioners, our city council people, who are going to be making this decision.
• How could we not let the residents, and the residents' duly elected officials, make the decision for
• How could we not let the residents, and the residents' duly elected officials, make the decision for
• And we're just saying, and make a decision when we know nothing about it. Nothing.

Summary: The Senate opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and several guest and staff introductions. The chamber then took up returning messages from the House and acted on multiple bills, with votes recorded on each. Senate Bill 628 on transportation facility designations was concurred in as amended and passed 31-4 after discussion about naming roads for deceased individuals and an exception for President Trump. The House amendment to the Live Local affordable housing package, CS/CS/HB 1389, was also concurred in and passed 35-0; Senator Claudio explained it as the fourth iteration of the Live Local Act, including new provisions allowing certain affordable housing on qualifying religious property, extending some timelines, and removing accessory dwelling unit language. CS/CS/HB 1451 on utility services was concurred in and passed 30-6 after questions about phasing out surcharges and reporting requirements. The chamber also substituted CS/CS/HB 1279 for SB 7038 and adopted an education amendment package before passing the bill 36-1, while several other measures were temporarily postponed. The Senate then considered CS/CS/SB 484 on data centers and concurred in the House amendment 383-957, passing the bill 31-6. Senator Avila said the amendment strengthened ratepayer protections, required a PSC tariff filing, and directed an OPAGA study on large-scale data centers. Several senators pressed concerns about the removal of the Senate’s nondisclosure agreement prohibition, the possibility of delayed public awareness of data center projects, and whether costs could be shifted to other ratepayers; Avila responded that the amendment preserved local land-use authority and that ratepayer costs could not be borne by the general body of ratepayers. Debate reflected a split between senators who supported the bill as a needed regulatory framework and those who objected to the transparency changes and the loss of the Senate’s original NDA language. Later, the Senate took up land use and development regulations, substituting CS/CS/CS/HB 399 for SB 208. An amendment by Senator Jones to remove language affecting a Fontainebleau Hotel water park project in Miami Beach failed 17-20 after debate over local control and preemption. Senator McLean’s amendments then added a sunset date and other changes, and Senator Claudio’s amendment preserved Miami-Dade’s urban development boundary supermajority protections and related planning provisions. The chamber then began extended debate on Senator Martin’s amendment creating a process for property owners to challenge rural boundary designations and seek compensation or removal from the designation without going to court; supporters framed it as a property-rights and due-process measure, while opponents argued it would undermine local planning, impose costs on taxpayers, and weaken voter-approved rural boundaries in Orange and Seminole counties. The transcript ends amid that debate, with no final vote shown on the rural boundary amendment in the excerpt provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, it might help in the decision-making, but I think we're stuck with that process unless somebody has
• We are reconvening our Committee on Water and Land for decision-making.
• Okay, moving on for our decision-making for previous bills.
• The community then becomes a really important part of the decision-making process because of Sunshine
• important part of the decision-making important part of the decision-making process<02:16:32.760

Bills: SB3253, SB2401, SB3169, SB17, SB3014, SB3032, SB1432, SB2002, SB2972, SB3247

Keywords: conservation, endangered species, wildlife preservation, native birds, biodiversity, sanctuary, nonprofit, DLNR, agricultural district, land use, chapter 195D, chapter 205, chapter 42F, state funding, public purpose, habitat restoration, predator-free sanctuary, ecosystem restoration, Zealandia, wildlife refuge

Summary: The Committee on Water and Land heard testimony on SB 5253 SD2 relating to conservation and SB 2401 relating to regional shoreline mitigation district, with the chair emphasizing short testimony limits and the need to finish before session. On SB 5253, DLNR said it stood on its written testimony and answered questions about the bill’s proposed nonprofit endangered species sanctuary. Members asked whether existing entities or agreements, such as land trusts, private landowners, and DLNR safe harbor agreements, could accomplish similar conservation goals without creating a new entity. DLNR said similar work already exists, but it was not aware of a comparable sanctuary model in the state. A member also questioned language suggesting for-profit businesses in the sanctuary, and DLNR said the intent appeared to be sales of outreach or similar materials, though it agreed that such activities could be handled by a nonprofit. The bulk of the hearing focused on SB 2401, which would create a regional shoreline adaptation/mitigation framework. The Department of the Attorney General said it had concerns about inconsistent use of the terms “mitigation” and “adaptation,” warning of possible title-subject issues. DLNR said it was neutral on the terminology and more concerned with the substance, and noted that the bill would not waive permits; any plan would still require environmental review and applicable state and county permits. DLNR also supported OHA’s recommendation to consider impacts on Native Hawaiian traditional and customary practices during regional planning, and said the bill’s language on temporary shoreline protection measures could help address the gap between emergency permits and longer-term planning while avoiding a hardening-only approach. The Office of Planning supported the regional planning concept but noted it is not a regulatory agency and would need to work with DLNR and the Land Board. OHA supported the bill’s planning-based approach but recommended amendments to require assessment of impacts on Native Hawaiian traditional and customary practices during plan development and to clarify that environmental review would still apply at the project level. Testifiers from the Ka‘anapali Steering Committee strongly supported the bill, saying it would provide a regional framework for ongoing erosion problems while preserving full regulatory authority and normal permitting, and they proposed amendments to standardize terminology, create a limited pathway for temporary shoreline protection, and address ownership and maintenance responsibilities. Members discussed the meaning of “mitigation” versus “adaptation,” the scope of shoreline hardening, and whether the bill would help the legislature take a broader, more holistic view of shoreline decisions. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• But I think when you're making budgetary decisions, it's sometimes like you have a time clock, right?
• But I think when you're making budgetary decisions, it's sometimes like you have a time clock, right?
• issues<01:42:31.600> of and make decisions on uh issues of and make decisions on uh issues
• You have to make decisions. You have to be the doctor.
• You have to make decisions. You have it. You have to make decisions.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• What is the decision for you all?
• So I'm going to leave that decision up to you.
• Yeah, so we're working on a proposed decision.
• What is at issue here is companies make investment decisions about where the... how much they're going
• And I will make it very clear, the company has said they still make money at the end of the day, even

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, make sure that we are informing the public so that they can make an informed decision and vote yay
• I don't believe that's enough information for the average voter to make an informed decision.
• So in the interest of transparency and informed decision making, I urge the committee to pass SB 414,
• Well, the fact that the information was not disclosed to voters, I think, makes the, the decision-making
• decision making process less than ideal.