Transcript Highlights:

• Well, in our hearing, in our first hearing, we sort of had a love fest with the CEC in terms of their
• They're out there with the community at the public participation hearings, hearing the concerns, and
• That process is an ongoing common process that is our ordinary work that we do in assessing all the six
• That process is an ongoing common process that is our ordinary work that we do in assessing all the six
• That process is an ongoing common process that is our ordinary work that we do in assessing all the six

Summary: The committee first heard Issue 1 on trailer bill language to redirect funding for emergency demand-response programs. The Department of Finance proposed using about $26.9 million in General Fund originally set aside for the Distributed Energy Backup Assets program to bolster the Demand-Side Grid Support Program for summer 2026, and using about $70 million in CalCHAP interest to support ratepayer-funded demand response in summers 2027 and 2028. The CEC and CPUC said they are working on a transition from DSGS to ELRP or a successor program, while the LAO noted the General Fund money would otherwise revert to savings. Members pressed the administration on whether demand response remains important, whether DSGS has been successful, and whether the state should keep funding it through the CEC rather than shifting to a ratepayer-funded CPUC program. The CEC and CPUC said the programs are not directly comparable, emphasized different cost structures and enrollment metrics, and said a CPUC rulemaking is underway with a proposed decision expected in Q3 2026. No vote was taken in the transcript. The committee then took up Issue 2, a budget proposal tied to SB 254 and the new transmission accelerator. GoBiz and the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank described a five-year, roughly $26 million request to staff and administer the accelerator and manage Proposition 4 and AB 1207 funds for transmission financing. Members asked about state liability, ownership of financed lines, FERC revenue requirements, and whether the program would help underserved regions and offshore wind development. Staff explained that the accelerator would only consider projects already identified through CAISO’s competitive transmission planning process, and that state financing would be a small portion of large projects intended to lower overall costs to ratepayers. The LAO said it had no specific concerns but urged the Legislature to ensure the final language matches its intent. The committee also heard Issue 3 on petroleum market oversight. The CEC and its Division of Petroleum Market Oversight requested additional positions and funding to implement ABX2-1 and continue work on supply stabilization, refinery monitoring, and transportation fuels analysis. Members questioned why the work was funded through the Energy Resources Programs Account, whether existing staff from the paused price-gouging work could be reassigned, and whether the program had produced evidence of price gouging or improved supply conditions. CEC and Finance said the new positions are needed because the workload has expanded, while some existing staff remain on related analysis and reporting duties. The discussion ended without a vote in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Chair hears none. The bill is left pending.
• The chair hears none. The bill is left pending.
• The chair hears none. The bill is left pending.
• Thank y'all, uh, for, for hearing it.
• Chair, hears none. The substitute is adopted.

Transcript Highlights:

• Testimony for this hearing will be in person.
• That process can take several months.
• Thank you for hearing our earlier bill.
• Well, the housing hearing committee was last week, so we are still in the process of working on amendments
• Well, the housing hearing, hearing committee was last week.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The committee heard eight bills, with testimony largely focused on local government authority, housing, and public service operations. AB 1658 would make permanent higher change-order thresholds for Santa Clara and Los Angeles counties on large construction projects; county representatives said the existing temporary authority has saved time and money, and the bill passed 6-0. AB 2263 would authorize the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority to develop employee-preference affordable housing on its properties; supporters said it would help retain workers facing extreme housing costs, and it also passed 6-0 as amended. AB 2134, the Family Friendly City Councils Act, would protect city council members taking parental leave from losing their seats or having absences counted against them. Assembly Member Addis’s designee and Sunnyvale Council Member Alyssa Cisneros described the bill as a response to public pressure and privacy concerns faced by elected parents; members spoke in strong support, and the bill passed 6-0 as amended. AB 2188 would raise Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District’s contracting authority to $250,000 per contract; supporters said it would reduce delays and administrative costs, while questions centered on oversight and bidding safeguards. After committee amendments, it passed 6-0. AB 1768 would authorize Los Angeles and Contra Costa counties to ask voters to approve a temporary transactions-and-use tax for health care and related services in response to federal funding cuts. Supporters, including community clinics, Planned Parenthood, labor groups, and county representatives, said it would let voters decide whether to backfill major health care losses; opponents argued it would worsen affordability and tax burdens. The committee discussion highlighted concerns about equity and local control, and the bill was placed on call after a 5-2 roll call. AB 2033 would let general law cities use job order contracting for repair and maintenance projects; supporters said it would speed routine work, while AFSCME and some members raised workforce displacement and staffing concerns. It passed 8-0 as amended. AB 2415 would let the City of Folsom shift some housing obligations away from its historic district to other transit-oriented sites, with supporters saying it preserves historic character while still meeting housing goals. It passed 10-0. AB 2741, heard at the end of the meeting, would give cities a grace period to cure housing element issues involving overlay zones after a court ruling found some HCD-certified overlays noncompliant. Cities and local government groups supported the bill as a fairness measure for jurisdictions that relied on state guidance, while housing advocates and legal aid groups opposed it, arguing it would weaken enforcement and allow noncompliant housing plans to persist.

Transcript Highlights:

• then if they're appealed, there's the hearing process?
• have an internal appeals process. have an internal appeals process.
• Go through that process, hear from the utilities, everybody else, the manufacturers of equipment, so
• ,<00:49:34.400> hear<00:49:34.640> from<00:49:34.800> the through that process
• , hear from the through that process, hear from the utilities,<00:49:35.440> everybody<00:49:35.760

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:04:26.479> today Minnesota you're going to hear today Minnesota you're going to hear today
• <00:26:14.159> articles body to do a separate hearing articles body to do a separate hearing
• on that um and that's the process on that um and that's the process<00:31:48.399> as<00:31:48.519
• <00:31:58.840> by because that's a different process by because that's a different process
• all support and then let that process all support and then let that process that<00:32:34.799>

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: House File 3030 was taken up for discussion and amended with the A1 author’s amendment before moving forward. The bill was presented as an Iron Range package with three parts: a 26-week unemployment insurance extension for workers laid off by Cleveland-Cliffs, and two mining-related provisions dealing with safe storage of reactive mine waste and a site-specific sulfite standard. The authors said the bill was intended both to help laid-off workers immediately and to support the long-term future of mining jobs in the region. Testimony was overwhelmingly supportive of the unemployment extension and the broader goal of preserving Iron Range jobs and communities. Representatives of affected workers, union leaders, a county commissioner, a tribal elder, and RAMS all described the layoffs as potentially long-term and warned of broader economic harm to families, local businesses, schools, and the region if mining jobs continue to decline. Several testifiers emphasized that mining is central to the Iron Range economy and argued that the bill would give workers time and hope while also helping keep people in the region. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency testified that it generally supported the bill’s intent but raised concerns about the environmental rulemaking language in Article 2, Section 2. MPCA said the provision would amount to a new major rulemaking, would require significant time and resources, and should be reviewed by the Environment, Natural Resources, Finance and Policy Committee. During member questions, one legislator said there was strong support for the UI extension in Article 1 but expressed concern about the environmental issues in Article 2 and asked why those provisions were not being reviewed by the environment committee. The meeting ended with public testimony closed and member questions beginning; no final vote was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, uh, this is a the house hearing.
• pathologists and hearing care providers. pathologists and hearing care providers.
• ,<00:55:49.359> an into statute that in this process, an into statute that in this process
• process? process?
• there's a full process laid rules and there's a full process laid out.<01:17:03.360> I<01:17:03.600

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• processes.
• Our wage claim process is broken.
• Our wage claim process is broken.
• We used the Labor Commissioner process, and it took three years to get a hearing.
• Unfortunately, this is not the only bill in this space that we're hearing today or on other hearing days

Summary: The committee heard several bills, beginning with AB 1521, the Judiciary Committee’s civil law omnibus measure. The bill makes a number of minor, mostly clarifying changes, including repealing obsolete Government Code provisions, allowing juvenile courts to hear petitions to establish records of birth, death, or marriage, requiring notice of probate petitions to the Department of Child Support Services, and correcting typos in existing law. It had no opposition and was moved on a do-pass basis to Appropriations, though it was later placed on call pending additional votes. Members then heard AB 57, which would reserve at least 10% of California’s Home Purchase Assistance Program funds for descendants of formerly enslaved people. The author and supporters framed it as a reparative, race-neutral-by-lineage effort to address historic housing discrimination and the racial wealth gap, while opponents argued it was an unconstitutional racial proxy and should instead be based on individual injury. The bill drew strong support and opposition testimony, was amended, and was approved on a do-pass as amended vote to Appropriations, then placed on call. AB 495, the Family Preparedness Plan Act, was heard next. The bill would expand and standardize caregiving and guardianship tools for families facing immigration-related separation, including broader use of caregiver authorization affidavits, recognition of non-relative extended family caregivers, and a new short-term guardianship process that preserves parental rights. Supporters said it would reduce trauma and help children remain with trusted caregivers; there was no opposition testimony. The committee approved it on a do-pass to Human Services vote and placed it on call. The committee also heard AB 392, which would address non-consensual sharing of sexually explicit media by requiring uploader consent certifications, faster takedown procedures, and civil remedies against uploaders and hosting sites. A survivor testified in support, and members discussed implementation details and possible amendments; the bill was moved on a do-pass as amended basis to Appropriations and placed on call. AB 692, which would prohibit employer “stay-or-pay” debt agreements that require workers to repay training or other costs if they leave or are terminated, also advanced despite opposition from business and industry groups concerned about impacts on signing bonuses and voluntary training programs. It was sent to Appropriations on a do-pass as amended vote and placed on call, along with AB 1234, a wage-claim enforcement bill aimed at reducing Labor Commissioner delays and adding consequences for employers who fail to participate in the process. The committee also heard AB 394, which expands protections for transit workers and allows transit agencies to seek restraining orders against violent riders; it received broad support, some concern about system-wide bans, and was discussed with amendments that preserved judicial discretion.

Transcript Highlights:

• I hear your frustration.
• No, bid processes. Bidding processes for private companies, so...
• of where other bid processes have that requirement that in the middle. of a bid process, they give you
• I want to make the connection between the public information act process and the procurement process.
• . processes and their management.

Bills: HB 111, HB1545, HB2145, HB2467, HB2520, HB4136, HB4181, HB4214, HB4218, HB4219, HB4359, HB4437, HB4822, HB111

Keywords: Texas Public Information Act, open records, public records, government transparency, confidentiality, attorney-client privilege, governmental body, Chapter 552, public information law, nonprofit association, quasi-governmental entity, economic development, trade secrets, proprietary information, commercial financial information, Alamo restoration, local workforce board, TDCJ contract facility, civil commitment facility, water supply corporation

Transcript Highlights:

• We keep hearing that it's overly burdensome. The process is overly burdensome.
• about our process.
• And we routinely hear about our process.
• The process is it's overly burdensome. The process is overly<00:31:38.640> burdensome.
• Seeing none, we'll close the hearing on 523 and in just a moment open the hearing on 446.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So, what we're planning on doing is this hearing and the Kerrville hearing, and then coming back from
• We'll divide those bills up based on the hearings, and each side will actually have their own hearing
• I'm hearing from a lot of people that wanted to be invited to this hearing.
• process.
• Did I hear that wrong or right?

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We look forward to hearing from you.
• I hear numerous times about applications and cities who are waiting to hear, and somebody, maybe there's
• A two-year entitlement process can double financing costs compared to a one-year process.
• and lending process.
• A more predictable entitlement process and lending process in an unpredictable environment, right?

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Housing Finance and Affordability held its first hearing of 2025 to examine California’s housing finance system, with opening remarks emphasizing the state’s severe housing shortage, high costs, and the need for practical recommendations to the Legislature and Governor. Co-chairs described the committee as an educational and problem-solving forum focused on financing housing production, first-time homeownership, mixed-income developments, and affordability across the income spectrum. Witnesses from state agencies and the development sector were invited to explain how housing is financed and where the system is breaking down. Panelists from the California Housing Partnership, the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency, the Tax Credit Allocation Committee/State Treasurer’s Office, CalHFA, and Related outlined the “capital stack” used to finance affordable housing, stressing that projects typically rely on multiple public and private sources, including federal and state low-income housing tax credits, tax-exempt bonds, state subsidies, local funds, and rental income. Speakers noted that affordable housing rents generally cannot support full project costs without public subsidy, and that recent federal changes—especially the expansion of the 4% and 9% tax credit programs and the reduction of the bond financing threshold for 4% credits—should allow California to finance substantially more units. CalHFA also described its homeownership programs, including My Home, Dream For All, and disaster-related mortgage assistance, as well as its multifamily lending and bond issuance programs. Several witnesses and committee members emphasized that the system remains too complex, too slow, and underfunded. They pointed to the need for more state funding, a housing bond, a permanent funding source, and better coordination among agencies, while also citing recent streamlining efforts such as AB 434’s SuperNOFA, AB 519’s one-stop-shop working group, and the planned California Housing and Homeless Agency reorganization. Members raised concerns about equity, access, missing-middle housing, gender and racial disparities, and whether current programs adequately serve extremely low-income households and those at risk of homelessness. No formal votes or actions were taken during the hearing; the discussion ended with committee members and witnesses agreeing that both funding and administrative reform are needed to increase production and improve affordability.

Transcript Highlights:

• they do that process. they do that process.
• <00:14:26.959> we process on top of the new process we process on top of the new process we
• When you say process, what is the process? You get the order, right?
• There's no other process. There is no other process.
• There is no other process.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Hearing none, we'll now open public testimony.
• Hearing none. Thank you, Ms. McIver.
• Here in a few moments, we'll hear from Joel Rogers. So.
• Essentially, this tries to modernize some of the processes that we use in our administrative processes
• It modernizes some of the processes that we use in our administrative processes, and it allows us to—we

Summary: The committee first adopted its rules, which were distributed in the same form as the prior session’s rules. Members then took up several bills, beginning with SB 711, an HOA/condominium association bill that would extend and conform property-owner protections to condominium associations; the bill’s author and a Community Associations Institute representative testified in support, and the bill was left pending. SB 942 would allow child support and certain prenatal/postnatal medical expenses to be calculated from the date of conception rather than birth; it drew supportive testimony from the Texas Public Policy Foundation and the Attorney General’s Child Support Division, and was also left pending after testimony. SB 1448, an estates and probate cleanup bill, would require transfer of original wills by qualified delivery, add notice and electronic-order requirements for statutory probate courts, and make other clarifications; it received supportive testimony from the Texas Real Estate and Probate Institute and was left pending. The committee also heard SB 1403, the Attorney General’s Title IV-D child support modernization bill, which updates notice, review, remote-hearing, and administrative-process provisions and clarifies several enforcement and evidence rules; the AG’s office testified that it would improve efficiency, and the bill remained pending. SB 1404 would allow courts to require an email address in final SAPCR orders when other contact information is nondisclosed and clarify service and judgment requirements; the Attorney General’s office described it as a good-government measure, and it was left pending. SB 1559 would require transfer of protective orders into divorce or custody cases to avoid conflicting orders; family-law practitioners and a family court judge testified that it would resolve longstanding conflicts identified by multiple courts of appeals, and the bill remained pending. Finally, the committee considered SB 746, a guardianship bill that would address conflicts of interest in guardianship proceedings, allow guardian ad litem appointment earlier in the process, and require timely court action on annual guardianship reports and accounts; a committee substitute would remove some provisions and extend a reporting deadline from 20 to 30 days. TREP supported the bill, and one practitioner suggested requiring courts to state reasons when rejecting annual accounts. SB 1536 would require dementia and Alzheimer’s training for certain family guardians, with a committee substitute narrowing the scope and reducing the training time from three hours to one; the Alzheimer’s Association supported the measure and the substitute, and the bill was left pending. No bills were voted out of committee during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Hearing none, let me substitute Senate Bill 504. Adopted.
• A better process already exists.
• The MOUs have their own interconnection processes. that are akin to the interconnection processes in
• Hearing none, we're going to open up public testimony.
• Hearing none, we're going to open up public testimony.

Bills: SB213, SB378, SB610, SB681, SB918, SB1172, SB1252, SB1343, SCR8

Keywords: SB 213, Texas insurance, Insurance Code, Chapter 551, Chapter 541, bundling, tying arrangement, cross-selling, homeowners insurance, residential property insurance, auto insurance, personal automobile insurance, consumer protection, unfair trade practice, deceptive insurance practice, property and casualty insurer, Lloyd's plan, county mutual, reciprocal exchange, farm mutual

Transcript Highlights:

• you go on and the process from there on is rather smooth.
• And the appeal process could be lengthy. ...cover the cost during or pending appeal and the appeal process
• Can you hear me okay? Yes, welcome. Lovely. Thank you so much.
• Sounds like this whole hearing is really above the insurance company.
• So with that, I'd entertain a motion to close today's hearing. Dr.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee held a hearing on several health care access and insurance-related bills, with most testimony focused on H.1136 to improve the prior authorization process. The Massachusetts Medical Society, Massachusetts Health and Hospital Association, Health Care for All, the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, physicians, and hospital representatives all supported the bill, arguing that prior authorization delays care, increases administrative burden, contributes to clinician burnout, and can worsen patient outcomes. Witnesses described examples involving delayed cancer treatment, diabetes care, COPD medication, shingles pain treatment, and hospital discharge delays. They said the bill would preserve prior authorization but add guardrails such as longer validity periods, continuity-of-care protections, faster responses for urgent care, clearer lists of services requiring authorization, and more transparency and standardization. The committee also heard testimony on H.1142/S.783 regarding equitable reimbursement for certified registered nurse anesthetists (CRNAs), with Senator Lovely and CRNA advocates supporting parity with physician anesthesiologists. They said CRNAs provide the same services at the same standard of care, but private insurers sometimes reimburse them at lower rates than physicians, which they argued is inconsistent with federal and state policy and harms access. Senator Keenan testified in support of a bill addressing claim denials and appeals, saying insurers should provide clearer explanations, time to resubmit claims, and timely appeal responses. Dr. Lorraine Schratz supported H.1126 to align state patient disclosure requirements with federal No Surprises Act rules, and Dr. Michael Trimbley supported H.1120 to recognize direct primary care as not being insurance and to encourage primary care participation. The committee also heard testimony on H.1140/S.801 to remove barriers to patient care by updating insurance statutes to reflect nurse practitioners’ full practice authority, and on H.1168/S.A.18 to eliminate the PCP referral requirement for specialty gynecological care. Witnesses on those bills described delays and denials affecting autism diagnosis, nutrition coverage, and endometriosis care, and said the proposals would reduce unnecessary barriers and improve timely access. After testimony and a few member questions, the chair closed the hearing; no votes were taken during the session.

Transcript Highlights:

• Did you hear that, Deputy Secretary?
• Could we hear the motion first?
• Process. Thank you, Secretary. Yes, Mr. Chair, I just wanted to note that May 7th is the. Process.
• We expect to hear back from you.
• Maybe we'll hear she is. Apparently, there's a conflict with the May 7th date. we'll hear she is.

Transcript Highlights:

• We started this budget process in January.
• We've had a number of hearings.
• This is not a normal budget process.
• process, is the same.
• This is a new grievance process on top of existing complaint and due processes that we have.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And there are significant appeals processes, regulatory processes, and complaint processes.
• An appeals process of one day, you know, an expedited appeal process, if you think it's going to be harm
• I mean, it's usually a reasonable process.
• Used in the actuarial process to set rates.
• Chair hears none and the substitute is adopted.

Bills: HB712, HB722, HB946, HB1687, HB1809, HB1899, HB2528, HB2583, HB2741, HB2750, HB3021, HB3150, HB3265, HB3658, HB3812, HB3960, HB4392, HB4432

Keywords: prostate cancer, health benefit plans, insurance coverage, cost sharing, preventive health care, auto insurance, total loss evaluation, disclosure, insurance materials, vehicle appraisal, HB 946, Texas Insurance Code, automobile insurance claims, oral release, written release, settlement agreement, claim release, property damage, bodily injury, psychological injury

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:10:40.839> Senator process Senator process Senator aler<00:10:42.839> thank<00:10:43.000
• not hearing not hearing from<00:29:13.039> the<00:29:13.240> school<00:29:13.519><
• <01:26:16.960> so voice in uh that challenge process so voice in uh that challenge process
• 209 208 if not this closes the hearing 209 208 if not this closes the hearing on<01:36:10.280>
• parents and follow the whole process parents and follow the whole process that's<02:10:12.159>

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We're gonna hear 2 bills this morning real quick and HB 23, we'll hear probably after the break.
• Combined bill or can we hear all the bills at the same hearing, all the mud bills, because one addresses
• there's no process.
• Chairman, the, uh, the, the process that, that Mr.
• That's done by the county in their platte approval process and in their plan approval process, and it's

Bills: HB23

Keywords: property tax exemption, ad valorem tax, Texas Tax Code, nonprofit corporation, charitable organization, educational nonprofit, scientific nonprofit, agriculture support, youth programs, community education, county population threshold, large county, local government revenue, leasehold interest, possessory interest, county property tax, nonprofit-owned property