Transcript Highlights:

• Whether through the development of new industries or the preservation of cherished traditions.
• Beyond learning and accounting skills, these students are also developing. customer service, problem
• 106 by King relating to the maintenance of certain improvements associated with oil and gas. gas development
• validation and remediation process when Real water loss exceeds the threshold set by the Water Development
• included in TCEQ rule. 293 point 1 1 d 2 this bill ensures that local governments are engaged in development

Bills: HB29, HB 125, HB145, HB171, HB255, HB50, HB796, HB363, HB 116, HB491, HB589, HB1495, HB368, HB 1285, HB1905, HB1360, HB2002, HB917, HB2723, HB2067, HB 1238, HB2337, HB745, HB 1188, HB1606, HB2003, HB2147, HB2391, HB2355, HB2546, HB2495, HB2818, HB2249, HB1749, HB3109, HB3228, HB3240, HB1507, HB658, HB1748, HB1851, HB1922, HB2001, HB2798, HB 107, HCR29, SB5, SB262, HB 11, HJR72, HB 106, HB18, HB48, HB27, HB37, HB1481, HB581, HB1696, HB2216, HB 1035, HB1633, HB742, HB754, HB1689, HB1690, HB2669, HB391, HB517, HB 1024, HB1607, HB252, HB1716, HB1562, HB4116, HB1866, HB1741, HB2103, HB2637, HB2884, HB503, HB 1089, HB2986, HB972, HB502, HB29, HB 125, HB145, HB171, HB255, HB50, HB796, HB363, HB 116, HB491, HB589, HB1495, HB368, HB 1285, HB1905, HB1360, HB2002, HB917, HB2723, HB2067, HB 1238, HB2337, HB745, HB 1188, HB1606, HB2003, HB2147, HB2391, HB2355, HB2546, HB2495, HB2818, HB2249, HB1749, HB3109, HB3228, HB3240, HB1507, HB658, HB1748, HB1851, HB1922, HB2001, HB2798, HB 107, HCR29

Keywords: water audit, water loss, water loss mitigation plan, municipally owned utility, municipal utility, water conservation, Texas Water Development Board, TCEQ, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, water leakage, leak detection, billing data accuracy, utility validation, water audit validation, water scarcity, water management, infrastructure, public utility, conservation plan, administrative penalty

Transcript Highlights:

• SB1202 by King, relating to third-party review of property development documents.
• Additionally, it requires the development of a strategic plan for rehabilitation and reentry programs
• It requires TDCJ and WNDM to collaborate on developing evidence-based program criteria and maintaining
• And that is linking housing development to public school performance.
• To develop protocols for installing equipment on large connections that will allow curtailment during

Bills: SB2405, SB2406, SB2407, SB6, SB7, SB36, SB38, SB815, SB1856, SB379, SB1171, SB1121, SB1061, SB1036, SB1019, SB890, SB11, SB868, SB1188, SB1120, SB1254, SB2778, SB2543, SB2443, SB1333, SB1259, SB1401, SB1404, SB2139, SB2165, SB2237, SB2268, SB1202, SB1198, SB1212, SB1451, SB1470, SB1498, SB965, SB1547, SB1667, SB1818, SB1902, SB2129, SB2078, SB2069, SB1737, SB1589, SB1318, SB387, SB1150, SB1574, SB2127, SB3034, SB860, SB1278, SB263, SB370, SB663, SB924, SB1939, SB1937, SB1598, SB2798, SB2801, SB2580, SB2569, SB2514, SB2064, SB1940, SB1621, SB2601, SB1379, SB1376, SB1372, SB1353, SB2216, SB552, SB2405, SB2406, SB2407, SB2166, SB2148, SB535, SB777, SB827, SB1141, SB1330, SB1352, SB1664, SB1612, SB1862, SB1936, SB1453, SB1448, SB1398, SB2137, SB2111, SB53, SB226, SB1677, SB1723, SB1839, SB6, SB7, SB36, SB38, SB815, SB1856, SCR5, SCR32, SCR8, HCR88, HCR91, HCR129, HCR130, HCR131, HCR133, HCR137, HCR138, HCR139, HCR140, HCR143, HCR145, HCR147, HCR150, HCR152, HR6, HR105, HR112, HR124, HR146, HR151, HR158, HR221, HR222, HR237, HR469, HR543, HR571, HR605, HR702, HR703, HR704, HR705, HR706, HR707, HR708, HR709, HR710, HR713, HR714, HR715, HR716, HR717, HR718, HR719, HR720, HR721, HR722, HR723, HR724, HR725, HR726, HR727, HR728, HR729, HR730, HR731, HR732, HR733, HR734, HR735, HR736, HR737, HR738, HR739, HR740, HR741, HR742, HR743, HR744, HR745, HR746, HR747, HR748, HR749, HR750, HR751, HR752, HR782, HR787, HR789, HR796, HR798, HR799, HR800, HR801, HR802, HR804, HR807, HR812, HR813, HR814, HR817, HR819, HR820, HR821, HR822, HR824, HR827, HR828, HR830, HR831, HR832, HR833, HR837, HR839, HR840, HR841, HR842, HR843, HR844, HR847, HR849, HR850, HR851, HR852, HR853, HR854, HR855, HR856, HR858, HR859, HR861, HR865, HR871, HR873, HR874, HR875, HR876, HR880, HR881, HR884, HR886, HR887, HR890, HR892, HR894, HR895, HR898, HR900, HR901, HR903, HR904, HR905, HR908, HR910, HR912, HR913, HR915, HR916, HR917, HR918, HR919, HR920, HR921, HR922, HR923, HR924, HR925, HR926, HR927, HR928, HR930, HR931, HR932, HR936, HR937, HR938, HR939, HR940, HR941, HR942, HR943, HR946, HR947, HR948, HR949, HR952, HR953, HR954, HR955, HR956, HR960, HR964, HR965, HR967, HR968, HR969, HR970, HR972, HR973, HR974, HR975, HR976, HR977, HR978, HR979, HR980, HR981, HR982, HR983, HR984, HR985, HR987, HR988, HR989, HR990, HR991, HR992, HR993, HR994, HR995, HR996, HR997, HR998, HR999, HR1000, HR1002, HR1003, HR1004, HR1005, HR1006, HR1007, HR1008, HR1009, HR1010, HR1011, HR1012, HR1013, HR1014, HR1015, HR1016, HR1017, HR1018, HR1019, HR1020, HR1024, HR1025, HR1026, HR1027, HR1028, HR1029, HR1030, HR1032, HR1034, HR1035, HR1036, HR1038, HR1040, HR1041, HR1042, HR1043, HR1044, HR1046, HR1047, HR1048, HR1049, HR1050, HR1051, HR1052, HR1053, HR1055, HR1056, HR1057, HR1059, HR1064, HR1067, HR1068, HR1069, HR1070, HR1071, HR1073, HR1074, HR1075, HR1077, HR1078, HR1079, HR1080, HR1081, HR1083, HR1086, HR1087, HR1088, HR1089, HR1090, HR1091, HR1092, HR1093, HR1094, HR1095, HR1096, HR1098, HR1099, HR1100, HR1101, HR1103, HR1104, HR1105, HR1106, HR1109, HR1111, HR1112, HR1115, HR1116, HR1117, HR1118, HR1119, HR1121, HR1123, HR1125, HR1128, HR1130, HR1131, HR1132, HR1139, HR1140, HR1143, HR1144, HR1146, HR1147, HR1148, HR1149, HR1151, HR1153, HR1154, HR1155, HR1156, HR1157, HR1158, HR1159, HR1160, HR1161, HR1162, HR1163, HR1164, HR1165, HR1166, HR1167, HR1168, HR1169, HR1170, HR1171, HR1172, HR1173, HR1174, HR1175, HR1176, HR1177, HR1178, HR1179, HR1180, HR1181, HR1182, HR1183, HR1184, HR1185, HR1186, HR1187, HR1188, HR1189, HR1190, HR1191, HR1192, HR1193, HR1194, HR1195, HR1196, HR1197, HR1198, HR1199, HR1200, HR1201, HR1202, HR1203, HR1204, HR1205, HR1206, HR1207, HR1208, HR1209, HR1210, HR1211, HR1212, HR1213, HR1214, HR1215, HR1216, HR1217, HR1218, HR1219, HR1220, HR1221, HR1222, HR1223, HR1224, HR1225, HR1226, HR1227, HR1228, HR1229, HR1230, HR1231, HR1232, HR1233, HR1234, HR1235, HR1236, HR1237, HR1238, HR1241, HR1243, HR1244, HR1245, HR1246, HR1247, HR1248, HR1249, HR1252, HR1253, HR1255, HR1256, HR1257, HR1260, HR1261, HR1262, HR1263, HR1264, HR1266, HR1267, HR1268, HR1269, HR1270, HR1271, HR1272, HR1273, HR1274, HR1275, HR1278, HR1280, HR1281, HR1282, HR1283, HR1284, HR1285, HR1286, HR1287, HR1288, HR1289, HR1290, HR1291, HR1293, HR1294, HR1295, HR1299, HR1300, HR1301, HR1302, SCR49, HCR134, HCR136, HR18, HR247, HR428, HR494, HR538, HR540, HR786, HR791, HR803, HR805, HR808, HR809, HR811, HR816, HR825, HR826, HR836, HR838, HR845, HR846, HR862, HR869, HR870, HR878, HR879, HR896, HR899, HR902, HR911, HR914, HR933, HR934, HR935, HR951, HR958, HR959, HR986, HR1021, HR1022, HR1039, HR1054, HR1058, HR1061, HR1062, HR1065, HR1072, HR1107, HR1108, HR1110, HR1114, HR1120, HR1122, HR1129, HR1142, HR1145, HR1239, HR1242, HR1250, HR1251, HR1254, HR1258, HR1259, SCR21, HB3228, HB2802, HB45, HB1318, HB5560, HB2894, HB4344, HB4238, HB 130, HB2775, HB34, HB33, HB 12, HB148, HB4273, HB4850, HB2733, HB4783, HB4187, HB39, SB2155

Keywords: criminal justice, parole, medical supervision, rehabilitation programs, Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, offenders with medical impairments, Windham School District, Sabine River Authority, board of directors, term limits, removal grounds, government oversight, training requirements, Texas Sunset Advisory Commission, Lower Neches Valley Authority, Sunset Advisory Commission, public participation, complaints resolution, electric power

Transcript Highlights:

• colleague and friend, Ross Ford, Representative Ford, was voted by the chamber and the Economic Development
• We have Our chamber members, our economic development group is here.
• part of OCAST is the grant awarding board, Otrad, which is the science and technology research and development
• Members of the commerce and economic Development Committee, we will be meeting in 10 minutes.

Bills: HB3419, HB4153, HB3430, HB3791, HB3277, HB4119, HB4408, HB3905, HB3968, HB3835, HB3386, HB2650, HB3742, HB3588, HB3748, HB4303, HB4311, HB3028, HB4428, HB4429, HB4132, HB1889, HB3265, HB1739, HB4434, HB3313, HB3852, HB4263, HB3413, HB3414, HB3415, HB3416, HB3417, HB3418, HB3420, HB2116, HB2206, HB3625, HB2939, HB3721, HB1823, HB2425, HB4440, HJR1087, HB4003, HJR1077, HB1770, HB1675, HB3627, HB3891, HJR1067, HB3462, HJR1053, HJR1054, HJR1044, HB3472, HB1225, HJR1019, HB4145, HJR1081, HB1746, HJR1069, HJR1050, HB1638, HB3327, HJR1055, HB3127, HB4488, HB2955, HB3781, HB3783, HB3802, HB2471, HB2937, SCR16, HB2960, HB3466, HB3262, HB3269, HB3152, HB4140, HB4142, HB3148, HB3378

Keywords: corruption, nonpublic information, government accountability, criminal law, public office, driver license, reading proficiency, minors, education requirements, alternative testing, attendance, remedial reading, public school, oath of enrollment, court financial obligations, cost hearing, payment plan, community service, court compliance program, debt relief

Transcript Highlights:

• agreement in lieu of a proposed residential development if the proposed residential development complies
• agreement in lieu of a proposed residential development if the proposed residential development complies
• included in a planned unit development included in a planned unit development agreement?
• The city of Chaska, 97% of their housing developments in the 2010s were a planned development.
• Developer and the municipality.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• agreement in lieu of a proposed residential development if the proposed residential development complies
• Steen mentioned, planning developments are, in fact, an important tool for both cities and developers
• But again, it's the developers.
• City and the developer. The developer gets stuff in this process as well.
• The city of Nebraska: 97% of their housing developments in the 2010s were planned developments.

Transcript Highlights:

• Developers love this.
• Well, developers love this.
• Have in pre-development.
• The co-developer...
• Development Center.

Summary: The Senate Housing Committee heard presentations on a range of housing finance, permitting, and affordability tools. Chattanooga described its affordable housing PILOT program, which uses a per-unit property tax abatement tied to the rent loss from providing affordable units, with a 15-year term and annual compliance monitoring. Committee members asked about the program’s structure, whether it had been used elsewhere, and who was participating; the presenter said the first mixed-income project would bring 278 units with 42 affordable units and that the model was attracting private market-rate developers. Shoreline then described its MFTE and inclusionary zoning approach, emphasizing that longer tax exemption periods and station-area zoning changes had helped spur development, with most current pipeline projects concentrated near light rail stations. The committee also heard from the Municipal Research Services Center and the Department of Commerce on tax increment financing, proportional impact fees, and permit timelines. Commerce explained that TIF can fund public improvements such as roads, utilities, broadband, and some affordable housing or child care facilities, while proportional impact fee guidance is intended to help jurisdictions charge fees more closely aligned with actual project impacts. On permit timelines, Commerce presented its first annual report under recent law changes, using 2024 as a baseline year and noting that reported timelines were generally longer than statutory goals; members asked about outliers, paper versus electronic processing, and whether back-and-forth between applicants and staff was driving delays. Commerce said it would follow up with more data, including on CHIP funding and permit reform practices. Several local governments then shared permitting process improvements. Auburn reported relatively short review cycles and described its move to fully electronic permitting, internal performance standards, and a stock plan program that speeds review for repeated home designs. Bellevue described an AI permitting pilot with a local startup to help with pre-application questions, document triage, and plan review, aiming to reduce incomplete applications and revision cycles. Seattle presented a pilot for accessory dwelling unit co-development in which a mission-driven partner would help homeowners split lots, finance, build, and manage ADUs, with the homeowner eventually buying out the partner and retaining ownership; committee members asked about rent setting, management fees, and default risk, and staff said they would follow up. The committee also heard brief overviews of community land trusts and limited equity cooperatives as permanent affordability models, with presenters urging continued state and local funding support and policy recognition for these approaches.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we are capturing 25% to 35% of the total development cost, and those developers are having to get
• We have to fund those developments.
• We have to fund those developments.
• We have to fund those developments.
• So when you said this, how the development is... ...development is concerned.

Summary: The Committee on Community Affairs held its first meeting and heard presentations focused on affordable housing implementation under the Live Local Act. Florida Housing Finance Corporation described its role in administering rental and homeownership programs, including SAIL, SHIP, the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program, disaster recovery efforts, supportive housing, and the Live Local funding and tax incentives. Officials said the first year’s $150 million Live Local rental allocation was fully committed to 23 developments producing 3,171 units with mixed-income set-asides, and they outlined how projects were selected through competitive solicitations tied to statutory priorities such as mixed-use development, publicly owned land, foster youth, rural areas of opportunity, redevelopment, and housing near military installations. They also discussed the tax credit contribution program, the missing-middle property tax exemption, sales tax rebates, and the year-one ad valorem exemption for qualifying affordable projects. Members asked detailed questions about the data and program design, including the use of area median income figures, per-unit subsidy levels, county targeting, tenant relocation during redevelopment, and whether the programs were helping lower-income households. Florida Housing said it uses competitive scoring and data from the Schimberg Center and that redevelopment projects are supposed to include tenant relocation plans. The homeownership portion of the presentation covered the Hometown Heroes program, which provides down payment and closing cost assistance to first-time homebuyers, with exceptions for active-duty military and veterans. Staff said the program has assisted more than 21,000 families and leveraged over $6.5 billion in first mortgages, and members asked about repayment rates, credit scores, and whether participants were staying in homes long enough to show the program was serving intended buyers. The committee then heard from OPAGA on two required Live Local evaluations: affordable housing strategies in other states and affordable housing policies in Florida. OPAGA reported that Florida has a high share of cost-burdened households, with 1.5 million households cost burdened and 1.4 million severely cost burdened, and that Florida’s counties and municipalities reported more than $1.4 billion in affordable housing expenditures in fiscal year 2023-24. The report identified 13 innovative out-of-state programs, with three considered high-potential for Florida implementation, and summarized Florida local government practices such as SHIP-funded homeownership and rental assistance, expedited permitting, mixed-income zoning, rehabilitation programs, and interlocal cooperation. No votes were taken, and the meeting adjourned after the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• My company is Eminade Development. I'm a real estate developer.
• I am not anti-development. I am for thoughtful, reasonable, safe development.
• I am not anti-development. I am for thoughtful, reasonable, safe development.
• The developers...
• commercial development.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Summary: The committee met to monitor implementation of several housing-related bills from the 89th session, with the chair emphasizing Texas’s housing shortage and the need to review land-use laws. For House Bill 24, witnesses from the Texas Public Policy Foundation, Reason Foundation, a church-affordable housing project, Habitat for Humanity, developers, and housing advocates said the bill’s higher protest threshold and simpler council override had reduced procedural barriers to rezoning, helped projects move forward, and supported lower rents and more multifamily development. Public testimony largely praised HB 24 as working as intended, and the chair noted it had passed the committee 6-1, the House 83-56, and the Senate unanimously. The committee then heard testimony on Senate Bill 1567, which preempted certain municipal occupancy limits based on unrelated-adult restrictions. Supporters, including Texas Public Policy Foundation, Texas Realtors, Texans for Housing, and Texas A&M student leaders, said the law improved clarity, reduced arbitrary local limits, and helped students and property owners use existing housing more efficiently. Opponents from College Station and Bryan-College Station neighborhood groups argued the law has encouraged investor purchases, tear-downs, and “stealth dorms,” displaced working-class residents, and harmed family homeownership. The chair noted SB 1567 had passed the committee 5-1, the House 101-19, and the Senate 30-1. The committee also reviewed Senate Bill 15, which reduced minimum lot sizes in covered jurisdictions. Ed Pinto of AEI said the law had already led to thousands of new small lots and lower-cost starter homes, while recommending expansion to more counties and broader application to attached housing. Other witnesses from builders, Pew, and housing advocates said smaller lots can increase affordability, but some cities, such as College Station and Grand Prairie, were adding local standards that could blunt the bill’s effect. City representatives from El Paso described how they implemented the law by reducing lot sizes and widths, while urging broader applicability to more of the city. The chair said SB 15 had passed the committee 7-0, the House 86-43, and the Senate 24-7. Finally, the committee began hearing testimony on Senate Bill 840, a by-right multifamily redevelopment measure. City officials from Garland and Plano described how they had updated local standards to comply while preserving design and setback rules, and said the bill could help redevelop built-out commercial corridors and add housing without expanding city footprints. The transcript ended as the committee continued taking testimony on SB 840.

Transcript Highlights:

• Agency officials explained that they plan to work toward developing an economic development strategic
• This person will be tasked with developing and implementing a statewide economic development strategic
• development and competitiveness.
• state to develop a plan.
• An intentional statewide economic development plan that includes regional development plans that are

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee’s Initiative 900 subcommittee held a hybrid public hearing on two State Auditor performance audits. The first audit examined efforts to reduce non-emergency use of emergency systems through CARES programs. Auditors reported that Washington has 52 fire-agency-led CARES programs in 26 counties, but many communities without programs said they need one. Major barriers included unstable funding, difficulty hiring qualified staff, volunteer-based rural departments, and lack of statewide guidance. The audit also found that only about half of programs tracked both required performance measures, and it recommended that the legislature consider private insurance reimbursement options and convene a statewide work group to develop guidance, standards, and possible changes to the role of the Department of Health. Agency representatives and fire officials largely supported the findings and emphasized that short-term grants and one-year contracts make programs hard to sustain. Committee discussion focused heavily on financing, especially Medicaid reimbursement and accountable communities of health (ACHs). Auditors clarified that the 10% figure cited in the report referred to direct Medicaid reimbursement for treat-and-refer services, which some agencies do not pursue because the $115 rate is too low relative to the administrative effort. Several fire officials testified that their programs rely on grants and ACH support, but that funding is often year-to-year and uncertain. They also described the value of CARES programs in reducing emergency room use, jail detentions, and long ambulance wait times, while noting barriers to sharing patient records across systems. Members asked whether the new public safety sales tax authority could help, but fire district representatives said it is not a direct funding option for them. The second audit reviewed performance management in the Department of Commerce’s Office of Economic Development and Competitiveness. Auditors found that the division does not yet have a statewide economic development strategic plan and that performance management is inconsistent across its 16 programs. In a limited review, all six sampled programs had goals, but only half clearly identified performance measures and targets, and only three tracked outcomes and published results. The audit highlighted leading practices from other states, including strategic planning, regular progress reporting, aligning program goals with agency goals, and using performance-based contracts and grant monitoring. Recommendations urged Commerce to seek stakeholder input, assess internal and external conditions, set goals and measures, align programs with the strategy, and strengthen monitoring and evaluation. Commerce officials agreed with the audit and said the division is already working toward a strategic plan, with a new assistant director to be hired and a target of completing the work by mid-next year. Members pressed the department on how the plan would connect to workforce, higher education, housing, and other economic development systems, and asked Commerce to return to JLARC next year with progress updates. The meeting ended with instructions for submitting written public comments and notice of the next JLARC meeting schedule.

Transcript Highlights:

• develop how we are proposing to develop develop how we are proposing to develop we<00:47:52.559>
• c> OHA developments development plans with OHA developments development plans with OHA my<01:08:35.520
• and mixed development.
• The Department of Hawaiian Homelands develops homes, so developers, we develop and deliver residential
• homelands okay develops homes so developer<02:11:49.320> we<02:11:49.639> develop<02:11

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint hearing of the Water and Land, Hawaiian Affairs, and Housing committees on January 29, 2025 focused on SB 534, with the chairs outlining hearing procedures, public testimony limits, and plans to allow extended presentations from the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) and the Hawaii Community Development Authority (HCDA) before moving to other testifiers. The hearing was presented as a public, transparent discussion of OHA’s plans for Kakaʻako Makai, with committee members noting that decision-making would follow if time permitted. OHA testified in strong support of SB 534. The chair of OHA’s Board of Trustees said the bill was a novel proposal for the legislature and emphasized that OHA was bringing together a broad coalition of partners and stakeholders, including representatives from construction, hospitality, education, law enforcement, civil service, and schools, as well as longtime community advocates who have opposed development in Kakaʻako Makai. OHA’s presentation reviewed the history of the area, the creation and role of HCDA, prior master plans, the 2012 land conveyance to OHA, and the argument that OHA has not been able to realize the full economic value of the lands because desired entitlements were not secured. OHA linked the bill to its constitutional mission to improve conditions for Native Hawaiians and argued that the state’s housing crisis makes additional development, including residential use, especially important. A major theme of the testimony was housing. OHA argued that Hawaiʻi faces severe affordability pressures, out-migration, and workforce shortages, and said that residential development in Kakaʻako Makai would help address those needs while also supporting the value of the trust lands. The presentation described HCDA’s authority over zoning and development in Kakaʻako, the existing reserved housing requirements, and the need for a master plan that could move forward if SB 534 becomes law. No votes or final committee action were taken in the portion of the hearing provided; the discussion remained in the presentation and testimony phase.

Transcript Highlights:

• to develop a development with an HOA, should be private property rights.
• to develop a development with an HOA, should be private property rights.
• to develop a development with an HOA, should be private property rights.
• to develop a development with an HOA, should be private property rights.
• develop a development with an HOA, should be private property rights.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But the exciting part of the real estate development ...and real estate development.
• The word development gets a negative connotation, but there's a lot around development.
• The word development gets a negative connotation, but there's a lot around development.
• The word development gets a negative condentation, but there's a lot around development.
• , not a land developer.

Summary: The Senate Environment and Natural Resources Committee first took up the appointment of Joshua Kellum to the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC). Kellum described his background in diversified land, agricultural, materials, and real estate operations and said he views himself as a conservationist. Senators questioned him closely about his development background, the balance of perspectives on the commission, his vote supporting the black bear hunt, and the use of Fish and Wildlife Foundation funds for the “Yes on 2” campaign. Supporters argued he is primarily a land steward and conservation-minded landowner, while opponents said the commission is already dominated by developers and lacks scientific or conservation expertise. After debate, the committee voted to recommend Kellum’s confirmation, with Senator Smith voting no and the rest of the voting members in favor. The committee then received a presentation from FWC on implementation of recently enacted boating and vessel laws. Bill Holcomb outlined changes under SB 1388 (the Boater Freedom Act), including limits on vessel stops and boarding, a new Florida Freedom Boater Safety Inspection decal, and revised rules for Springs Protection Zones. He also reviewed SB 164 on derelict and at-risk vessels, including new enforcement tools, a long-term anchoring permit, and updated penalties; HB 289, Lucy’s Law, which strengthens boating safety penalties and education requirements; SB 830 on the disposition of migrant vessels; and HB 735 on water access facilities and boating infrastructure. Holcomb said FWC is in rulemaking, training officers, and updating forms and permitting systems to implement the laws. Members asked follow-up questions about derelict vessel cost recovery and whether penalties go back to the state, and about the Springs Protection Zone standard. Holcomb said the state can recover removal costs from responsible owners and that the new springs standard requires “significant harm” and that vessel activity be the predominant cause, with subject matter experts and partner agencies helping make those determinations. He said Silver Glen Springs remains a proposed zone but was paused pending the new criteria and rulemaking. The committee took no further action on the presentation and adjourned after completing the agenda.

Transcript Highlights:

• for development, ACFDs.
• developer in the United States.
• If you're in a MUD, the developer can take roughly 50% of those development costs.
• We have many developments within cities, but developing in a city is often not an option.
• I have spent 46 years in the development industry, primarily using the MUD development model.

Summary: The committee heard testimony first from the Texas General Land Office and School Land Board. GLO officials described the agency’s role in managing more than 13 million acres of state lands and mineral interests for the Permanent School Fund, overseeing the Alamo, coastal programs, veterans’ services, and federal disaster recovery. They said the agency has generated about $6 billion for the Permanent School Fund since Commissioner Buckingham took office, and that its disaster recovery portfolio is about $14 billion across multiple events, with more than 22,000 housing units rebuilt or reconstructed since Hurricane Harvey. Members asked about land purchases such as Brewster Ranch, rare earth mineral leasing, SpaceX-related beach access, and whether the lands are public access lands; GLO staff said the holdings are managed to maximize revenue for education, that most land is leased rather than open to public access, and that they are coordinating on coastal access and compliance. On the School Land Board, members sought clarification on the difference between GLO-managed lands and the Permanent School Fund Corporation’s investment role, and staff explained that GLO generates the revenue while the separate corporation invests it. No votes or formal actions were taken. The Board for Lease of University Lands then testified. University Lands officials explained that they steward 2.1 million acres of surface and mineral interests in West Texas for the Permanent University Fund, which supports UT and Texas A&M institutions. They said a 2025 lease sale produced about $50 million in bonus revenue from 28,000 acres, and described the Board for Lease’s role in approving lease forms, lease sales, and development agreements. Members asked about the size and use of the PUF, how distributions work through UTIMCO, whether PUF money can be used for athletics, and how the land is managed; the witness said the fund is a constitutional endowment, the land is largely leased rather than sold, and distributions are generally used for buildings, labs, and other permanent structures, with some institutions also using a portion for operations. No votes or formal actions were taken. The committee then took up municipal utility districts. Testimony from a law firm, the Texas Municipal League, Fort Bend County Commissioner Vincent Morales, and Johnson Development largely supported MUDs as a financing tool for infrastructure tied to growth. Witnesses said MUDs help fund water, sewer, drainage, roads, parks, and related infrastructure, allowing development to proceed without shifting costs to existing taxpayers and helping keep housing affordable. They emphasized that MUDs are created with disclosure to homebuyers, are subject to the Open Meetings Act and Public Information Act, and are overseen by TCEQ for bond issuance and related financial stress tests. Members questioned whether MUDs are taxing entities, whether they can be created inside city limits or ETJs, how much control cities and counties retain, and whether MUDs are becoming permanent local governments; witnesses acknowledged they levy taxes and debt, can exist within city limits with city consent, and often function as long-term local entities. The committee did not take any formal action during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, this is about getting at that when we develop and look into new developments that they include those
• and and look into new we develop and and look into new developments<00:05:10.760> that<00:05:
• development and sale of another 25 lots. development and sale of another 25 lots.
• developers to construct this housing. developers to construct this housing.
• to a planned unit housing developments to a planned unit development<00:37:27.000> process, development

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• As a developer, a frequent concern we hear from community members is how developments will fit into existing
• As a developer, a frequent concern we hear from community members is how developments will fit into existing
• Darcy Jamison, Vice President of Development with Beacon Communities Development.
• Darcy Jamison, Vice President of Development with Beacon Community's Development. But.
• Darcy Jamison, Vice President of Development with Beacon Communities Development.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Housing held a hybrid hearing on zoning, Chapter 40B, and related housing bills. Much of the testimony focused on the “Yes in My Backyard” bill (H. 1572/S. 962), which would expand by-right development of missing middle housing, reduce barriers such as minimum lot sizes and parking mandates, and support duplexes, triplexes, and other small-scale housing. Supporters included housing advocates, developers, local officials, and municipal leaders from places like Cambridge, Salem, and Braintree, who argued that state action is needed because local zoning often blocks needed housing and that the bill would help create more affordable, neighborhood-compatible homes. Several witnesses also backed a companion “Yes in God’s Backyard” bill (H. 2347), which would allow faith-based institutions to build housing on their property by right, with testimony emphasizing the potential for new units, added municipal tax revenue, and partnerships between religious organizations and housing developers. The committee also heard testimony on Senate Bill 1021 to modernize Chapter 40R incentives. Senator Pavel Payano and others said the program’s payments have not kept pace with inflation since 2004 and should be increased to better encourage smart-growth zoning near transit and town centers. Another major topic was H. 2298 on site plan review, which would codify and standardize the process in state law. Rep. Kristin Kassner and witnesses from MAPC and NAIOP said current site plan review practices vary widely across the state, creating confusion, delays, and litigation, while a uniform framework would give municipalities clearer tools to review by-right projects without undermining local oversight. The hearing also included testimony on Chapter 40B reform, including S. 1005 and H. 1537. One witness supported further review of 40B and stronger regional planning, while another backed a proposal to allow certain pre-2010 40B condominium owners to sell at market value under a framework that would recapture some of the subsidy benefits. Committee members asked several questions about local zoning changes, housing goals by county, and how the proposed bills would affect communities. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the chairs indicated that written testimony would be welcomed for technical details and additional comments.

Transcript Highlights:

• and single-family development.
• Development, and I think some of the developers that we have here, Jeff Curry, will talk to this.
• million up front as equity to develop the development, and then that investor...
• And to rental housing development and preservation, explain the difference from development.
• for new housing development.

Transcript Highlights:

• So as I noted, we developed this pro forma model, this real estate development model, to understand where
• development.
• development.
• What I can say is that the developers represented large multifamily development firms that currently
• Could you, do you hear that from a large number of developers, cities as well, or just developers?

Summary: The Senate Housing Committee heard a series of work-session presentations focused on transit-oriented development, commercial-to-residential redevelopment, building code implementation, housing market trends, and the Covenant Homeownership Program. The first presentation, from the Urban Institute, reviewed research on HB 1491 and TOD feasibility, arguing that Washington has made major progress but faces diverging conditions across transit areas. The presenter said rising construction costs, higher interest rates, and lower rents in some markets have made many projects less feasible, and recommended targeted infrastructure funding for lower-market communities, adjustments to MFTE and affordability requirements by local market conditions, more support for very low-income housing in high-market transit areas, minimum density standards near stations, expanded public land/joint development tools, and better tracking of TOD outcomes over time. Committee members asked about AMI calculations, immigration’s effect on construction labor, developer input, and whether a tracking mechanism had been removed from the bill. The Department of Commerce then outlined implementation of HB 1491 and demonstrated the new Washington Zoning Atlas, which is live and intended to help visualize zoning, overlays, and station-area conditions. Commerce said local governments will designate station areas, update zoning and MFTE policies, and handle anti-displacement measures, with Vancouver and Spokane first to implement and Puget Sound following later. Staff described a timeline for updated MFTE guidance, station-area implementation guidance, a TOD model ordinance, and later rulemaking on variances. The committee also heard from the Lieutenant Governor’s office on a report about converting commercial properties to housing, which found substantial potential for redevelopment on vacant or underused commercial land, especially near transit, but noted barriers such as ground-floor retail mandates, affordability requirements, infrastructure costs, private covenants, and slow implementation. The office urged by-right residential use on commercial land and faster rollout of new housing laws. The State Building Code Council updated the committee on its three-year code cycle and several legislatively directed actions, including minimum dwelling size, emergency shelters, and especially single-exit stairs and multiplex housing. Council staff said those code changes are nearing completion and will provide prescriptive solutions, while noting that elevator size and requirements were not changed and would require separate legislative direction if the committee wanted to revisit them. Members discussed the cost impacts of building and energy codes and the council said it is required to consider economic impacts and is increasingly looking at performance-based approaches. Later, the Washington Center for Real Estate Research presented its annual housing report, showing that higher mortgage rates have sharply reduced affordability, flattened house prices in many cities, and slowed single-family permitting and completions, while multifamily construction has recently cooled after a prior surge. Finally, the Washington State Housing Finance Commission reported strong first-year results for the Covenant Homeownership Program, which provides zero-interest down payment assistance to eligible first-time buyers with family ties to Washington before 1968; the program assisted 547 homebuyers in its first fiscal year, with more than $60 million loaned, and the agency said participation has continued to grow after income-limit changes enacted in 2025.

Transcript Highlights:

• And we forced the developer to do the sewage piping from that development to, you know, $10,000, you
• But to that small developer, that was a big deal, right?
• And we forced the developer to do the sewage piping from that development to, you know, $10,000, you
• But to that small developer, that was a big deal, right?
• of development rather than after.

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several housing-related proposals and policy ideas. One speaker urged changes to the welfare property tax exemption for affordable housing, arguing that annual income recertifications are outdated and burdensome, and proposing a one-time qualification at move-in, streamlined monitoring through TCAC or HCD, and continued exemption protection for projects that remain in compliance. The witness said rising insurance costs and administrative burdens are hurting cash flow and threatening the viability of affordable housing operations. A major portion of the meeting focused on social housing and the SB 555 study. HCD described its ongoing study process, including public engagement with residents, practitioners, and experts, and noted that California already has many building blocks for social housing, such as public land tools, long-term affordability mechanisms, community land trusts, and tenant protections. Community land trust and housing policy witnesses argued that social housing will require legislative action, expanded public subsidy, tax abatements, public land, and simplified financing, and they emphasized the need to reframe the concept for the “missing middle” and middle-class households to build broader political support. Committee members discussed stigma around “social housing,” the need for a rebrand, and the possibility of a pilot program, especially on excess public land. The committee also heard a proposal for a certified professional plan-check system modeled on Vancouver, Canada. The presenter said California’s permitting delays, inconsistent reviews, and staffing shortages add cost and uncertainty even for streamlined projects, and proposed allowing state-certified private professionals to perform plan checks and inspections under state oversight while local governments retain zoning and enforcement authority. Members discussed local control concerns, infrastructure costs, and the need to reduce delays and uncertainty in the entitlement process. Finally, the committee heard testimony supporting changes to HCD loan disbursement so funds can be used during construction rather than only after completion. Witnesses said this would reduce interest costs, improve feasibility, and could produce additional affordable homes with existing funding. The discussion also referenced AB 1053 as the vehicle for implementing that approach.

Transcript Highlights:

• including the Economic Development including the Economic Development Cabinet's<00:04:57.720>
• economic development grant side. economic development grant side.
• Once again, related to development approvals and the process and the lack of certainty for developers
• Once again, related to development Once again, related to development approvals<00:19:01.040>
• cost of the developer and homeowner. cost of the developer and homeowner.

Keywords: Upon adjournment of the concurrent meeting, the Senate State and Local Government committee will continue meeting, 958, all

Summary: The concurrent meeting began with roll calls for both the Senate Standing Committee on State and Local Government and the House Standing Committee on Local Government, establishing quorums. The committees then heard a Department for Local Government presentation on the Community Development Block Grant program, which serves smaller and more rural areas. Commissioner Matt Sawyers and Executive Director Mark Williams explained the 2026 HUD application as a public hearing, noting an estimated total of a little over $25 million, with proposed allocations for public facilities, community projects, economic development, public services/Recovery Kentucky, and housing. They also described proposed changes, including shifting some funding from economic development to housing, raising non-traditional application ceilings, extending the economic development application window, and giving the commissioner flexibility to reallocate funds if requests exceed the allotment. No legislators or members of the public asked questions, and both chambers approved the presentation and then adjourned the House portion. The Senate committee then took up Senate Bill 149 by Senator Elkins, which updates county treasurer statutes. The bill shortens the waiting period for appointing an acting treasurer from 30 days to 5 days and allows fiscal courts to appoint a temporary treasurer for up to 60 days during vacancies, illness, incapacity, or termination. Members discussed the need for continuity in county finances, and the bill received favorable expression 9-0. Next, the committee considered several housing-related bills from the housing task force. Senate Bill 224, by Senator Mills, creates vested property rights for development applications and narrows who may appeal certain local land-use decisions; the committee adopted a substitute, then approved the bill 8-1 after members raised concerns about standing language and possible impacts on local participation. Senate Bill 225 requires the housing and construction department to analyze the cost and housing-supply effects of proposed housing regulations; it passed 9-0 after a committee substitute. Senate Bill 233, by Senator Neal, removes annual financial reporting requirements for homeowners associations with 14 lots or fewer to reduce burdens on small developments; it passed 9-0. Finally, Senate Joint Resolution 75, as amended, directs the Public Service Commission to study affordability and water/wastewater utility regionalization, including possible consolidation of small districts; the amendment and the resolution both passed 9-0, with one member noting concerns about whether the matter should proceed as an administrative case rather than a study.

Transcript Highlights:

• fund affordable housing developments.
• to fund affordable housing developments.
• We are a market-rate housing developer.
• This is the reality developers face.
• As a developer, that sounds scary.

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.