Transcript Highlights:

• And within the rural development, I would like to see some economic development.
• One is spec development, is what I'll call it.
• We awarded funds for some single-family development there.
• economic development projects.
• Development Department.

Transcript Highlights:

• That does not mean that we are bullying the developer.
• That's what the plan developer wanted: tax restructuring.
• Fundamentally, this is absolutely a developer. The developer was there every step of the way.
• Alaska has never competed because development here is easy.
• Alaska that also worked for the developer.

Keywords: 905, all

Summary: The House met with a quorum, approved the journal, and received messages from the governor and Senate, including notice that the governor vetoed CSHB 16 and allowed HB 14 to become law without signature. The chamber then took up the conference committee report on HB 381, a major Alaska LNG-related bill that revises the project’s tax and regulatory structure. The conference report was explained as a compromise package that, among other things, changes required local contribution language, expands disclosure and notice requirements, adjusts foreign ownership reporting, extends the Phase 1 construction deadline, adds a $10 million workforce development/community impact fund, modifies project labor agreement provisions, and exempts the Alaska LNG project from the new pass-through entity tax while still requiring an informational tax return in 2027. The Speaker also announced the governor had issued a proclamation calling the legislature back into session on July 27, 2026, and said sine die would be moved after debate. Debate on HB 381 was sharply divided. Supporters argued the bill is necessary enabling legislation to improve the project’s financial viability, protect Alaska’s interests, and move the North Slope gas line toward final investment decision, while also adding transparency, foreign ownership safeguards, and labor and workforce provisions. Several members said the conference committee process was collaborative and that the bill reflects hard-fought compromise with the developer, AGDC, labor, and the administration. Opponents focused on the addition of the pass-through entity/S-corp income tax and related reporting requirements, arguing it is a separate tax policy issue that should have been considered in its own bill, creates uncertainty and litigation risk, could harm existing oil and gas and Cook Inlet production, and may discourage investment. Multiple members also criticized the process as rushed and insufficiently transparent, especially the limited opportunity for the minority and the absence of Department of Revenue testimony during conference. No final vote on the conference committee report is shown in the transcript excerpt. The debate continued with members alternating between support for the gas line project itself and opposition to the tax provisions and process used to advance HB 381.

Transcript Highlights:

• infrastructure capacity needed to serve new development.
• the developer would pay for the on-site improvements.
• be in place or concurrent with the impact of that development.
• A developer would come in and say, we're going to develop a small subdivision, it's going to add 500
• and promote commercial development, right?

Summary: The Intergovernmental Affairs Subcommittee met for its first meeting of the 2026 session and took up impact fees, with an opening overview from Eric Poole of the Florida Association of Counties. Poole explained that impact fees are one-time charges on new development used only for new infrastructure capacity, not existing deficiencies or maintenance, and must satisfy the dual rational nexus test. He traced their history in Florida and described how comprehensive plans, concurrency, and later mobility fees relate to local infrastructure funding. He argued that impact fees are restricted, tied to capital improvements, and are one tool for paying for growth. Panelists representing counties, cities, builders, and community developers largely agreed that growth creates real infrastructure costs but differed on how those costs should be allocated. County and city representatives said impact fees are a necessary, targeted way to fund roads, water, sewer, fire, schools, and parks without spreading costs across all taxpayers. They pointed to long periods without fee updates, rising construction costs, and examples of large increases justified by studies. Builder and developer representatives argued that fees are often unpredictable, can be doubled or tripled, and contribute to housing affordability problems; they also said the system can be inconsistent across jurisdictions and may encourage sprawl. Several witnesses emphasized that fees must be transparent, proportional, and tied to actual benefits, and some suggested a statewide framework or mobility-fee model with more consistency and peer review. Members asked about how long local governments can hold fee revenue, whether fees can generate profit, what they can be spent on, and whether they can pay for police stations, fire stations, or other public safety facilities. Witnesses said the funds must be used for capital projects and cannot be used for salaries or unrelated purchases, and that refunds may be required if money is not spent within the local ordinance’s timeframe. The discussion also covered examples of local fee increases, the use of impact fees versus direct construction or “pipelining” of infrastructure, and concerns about level-of-service changes and extraordinary-circumstance increases. No votes were taken; the meeting ended after the panel discussion and member questions, with the chair noting the conversation would continue.

Transcript Highlights:

• energy development, and this is... ...owners are engaged in oil development and energy development,
• And that makes sense for the development. And that makes sense where the development has occurred.
• We always develop talking points.
• We always develop talking points.
• there's a pilot project, letting developers know like If there's a pilot project, letting developers

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Energy Development and Transmission Committee met in interim session and approved the November 6 minutes. Chair Novak outlined the committee’s study agenda, including large energy users such as data centers, geothermal, landowner relations, wind and solar, and other energy topics across the state. The meeting was framed as informational only, with no bills or formal legislative action taken beyond the minutes approval. Testimony focused first on landowner relations. Oliver County Commissioner Dave Berger described the county’s energy history and local support for coal and related development. North Dakota Farmers Union President Matt Perdue emphasized proactive, face-to-face communication with landowners, respect for property rights, and the need for developers to be transparent about tradeoffs; he also discussed insurance and liability concerns tied to easements. Committee members asked about eminent domain, local versus state authority, and how communities can better understand the revenue and infrastructure implications of energy development. Department of Agriculture Deputy Commissioner Tom Bodine then described the department’s ombudsman programs for pipeline restoration and reclamation, wind restoration, and royalty oversight. He said the programs provide confidential, third-party assistance on reclamation and royalty disputes, but do not provide legal advice. Senators raised concerns about post-production deductions in royalty leases and whether the ombudsman can explain them; Bodine said the program can clarify statements and deductions but cannot resolve legal disputes. He also said the department has not received requests related to fiber lines. Representatives from Grid United and One Oak described their project development and landowner engagement practices. Grid United’s Brent Johnson discussed the North Plains Connector transmission project, its route selection process, voluntary acquisition approach, and efforts to avoid eminent domain by working closely with regulators, counties, townships, and landowners. One Oak’s Danette Welsh and Tom Giltner described the company’s midstream operations, extensive North Dakota footprint, and emphasis on direct landowner communication, consistent local regulation, careful construction practices, and post-construction reclamation. Members asked about setbacks, zoning consistency, invasive species prevention, outside advocacy groups, and eminent domain use; One Oak said it has not used eminent domain on its North Dakota projects, largely because most gathering lines are negotiated easements.

Transcript Highlights:

• 2 The Committee on Trade, Workforce, and Economic Development.
• The first is workforce development.
• But business and community development economic development finance the Texas Film Commission and the
• the Texas Economic Development Bank.
• And we like to say you can't have economic development without workforce development.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• > development certified community development certified community development financial<00:31:
• <01:05:46.039> and director of Community Development and director of Community Development
• partnership with many who develop partnership with many who develop housing<01:12:03.280> in<
• affordable home ownership development affordable home ownership development program<01:19:04.080
• acquisition Land Development acquisition Land Development Rehabilitation<01:19:18.560> and

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• My agency, the Department of Commerce, is also the economic development agency.
• We have data centers, renewable developers, transmission developers, utilities, and public advocacy organizations
• We have data centers, renewable developers, transmission developers, utilities, public advocacy organizations
• It's, as you mentioned, the development, the permit... Sometimes even less.
• So about a four-year time to develop in time frame to get your permits.

Summary: The Joint Committee on Energy Supply, Energy Conservation, and Energy Resilience opened by electing Senator Shoemake as chair and Representative Alex Ibarra as vice chair. Members then moved into a series of work sessions focused on data centers, transmission, and workforce needs tied to Washington’s clean energy and grid planning challenges. Kate Bruns and Glenn Blackman presented preliminary findings from the governor’s Data Center work group, created under Executive Order 25-05. They said the group met for six months, received more than 1,000 public comments, and included representatives from agencies, industry, tribes, labor, utilities, environmental groups, and research institutions. The presenters emphasized that data centers are expected to be the largest source of load growth over the next five to ten years, creating concerns about grid capacity, ratepayer impacts, forecasting, water use, backup generation, and compatibility with Washington’s energy and climate laws. They described nine recommendations, including protecting existing energy and climate policy, improving forecasting, seeking more clean power and transmission, and encouraging flexible data center operations. A proposed tax incentive change that would have expanded eligibility while tying the exemption to new clean electricity sources narrowly failed in the work group. Members asked about tribal consultation, cooling technologies, and local benefits from data centers; the presenters said tribal consultation was ongoing and a final report would follow. Keegan Moyer of West Tech then outlined a regional transmission study showing major strain on the Western grid from load growth, electrification, resiliency needs, and limited transmission capacity. He said the 10-year study identified about 12,000 line miles of needed projects across the West, with roughly $56 billion in estimated costs, including planned projects, reliability upgrades, and new interregional transfer projects. He stressed that many projects are upgrades within existing rights-of-way, but new corridors are still needed, and he previewed recommendations on permitting, equipment procurement, cost allocation, and project sponsorship. In response to questions, he discussed the difficulty of crossing jurisdictional “seams,” the role of federal coordination, landowner compensation, eminent domain as a last resort, and the limited role of public financing beyond a federal GRIP grant. Stephanie Scott of Commerce presented the transmission workforce study, which focuses on substation technicians, line workers, and line clearance tree trimmers. She said current workforce levels are far below what will be needed under a clean energy expansion scenario, and that active projects are essential because apprenticeship training depends on thousands of hours of hands-on work. She highlighted barriers such as high upfront CDL and pre-apprenticeship costs, the need for wraparound supports, and the importance of expanding access for women, people of color, and tribal communities. Members asked about tribal utility apprenticeship programs, utility-run training pipelines, and whether the study included funding sources; Scott said the report would include an inventory of apprenticeship programs and tribal considerations, but revenue ideas were outside the study scope. Finally, Brant Johnson of Grid United described the North Plains Connector as a case study in large transmission development. He said the project, a 420-mile, 3,000-megawatt HVDC line connecting Montana and North Dakota, has relied on early stakeholder engagement, route changes, tribal consultation, and coordinated federal and state permitting to reduce risk and shorten timelines. He said the project aims for permits by the end of 2026 and construction beginning in 2028, with an earliest commercial operation date of 2032. In response to questions, he discussed the challenges of crossing regional seams, interconnection queues, land acquisition and compensation, eminent domain, and financing, noting that the project is primarily privately financed with a $700 million federal grant covering a portion of costs.

Transcript Highlights:

• Commission with training development, the current finishing the current training development, because
• The Broadband Equity, Access, and Development, or BEAD, five-year action plan was developed by the Broadband
• , Access, and Development program.
• infrastructure development.
• infrastructure development.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee subcommittee heard three State Auditor’s Office performance audits: implementation of the Law Enforcement Training and Community Safety Act, Washington’s digital equity planning, and the Department of Commerce’s Digital Navigator Program. In the law enforcement training audit, the State Auditor found the Criminal Justice Training Commission had developed most required training content but had not developed all required topics, lacked a systematic project management approach, and had weak tools to ensure participation and compliance. Auditors said most officers had not completed the required 40 hours, patrol tactics training was a major bottleneck, and the Commission’s reporting did not clearly show statewide compliance. The Commission said it generally agreed with the recommendations and had begun implementing some changes. Committee members raised concerns about staffing, liability, incentives, and whether the law had enough enforcement “teeth.” In the digital equity audit, auditors said Washington lacked a comprehensive, unified statewide plan, a designated leader, and reliable funding for digital equity efforts. They said existing plans were fragmented, with the NTIA-approved plan the most complete but no longer fully funded after federal changes. The State Auditor recommended the legislature establish oversight authority and require a lead organization to coordinate and evaluate statewide digital equity efforts and develop a unified plan. The Department of Commerce and Office of Equity agreed with the need for clearer leadership and coordination, and a public witness described ongoing coalition and local planning work. Committee members asked about best practices from other states and whether the auditor could provide additional research on coordination models. In the Digital Navigator Program audit, the State Auditor concluded Commerce did not consistently follow core grant-management practices, including competitive award processes, vetting of grantees, clear contracts, performance monitoring, and reimbursement controls. Auditors said Commerce expanded grants without a new competition, lacked adequate documentation and reporting, and paid out millions without sufficient support; they also cited management decisions that overrode staff concerns. Commerce said it had already begun major contract-management reforms, created a new contracts and compliance structure, and was working on risk assessments, documentation standards, and staff training. Members pressed Commerce on accountability, possible recoupment of improper payments, ethics issues, and whether the agency had clear performance metrics for the program. No votes were taken, and the hearing ended after public testimony and committee discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• So they could have an RFP in order to let the private market bid and develop that, or they can develop
• that, or they know, bid and and develop that, or they can<00:08:15.200> develop<00:08:15.520>
• ,<00:20:58.880> a influence in framework development, a influence in framework development
• transit-oriented development transit-oriented development requirements<00:21:10.320> before
• And so, by setting clear development.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• We're here to talk about developing New Mexico's geothermal energy as economic development.
• While we develop and promote the longer-term development of advanced geothermal electricity, that final
• We also want to develop this further.
• A geothermal roadmap, kind of a cookbook, so to speak, will be developed to help geothermal developers
• To really give us these detailed answers, particularly in the realm of economic development and development

Transcript Highlights:

• labor to business to housing developers labor to business to housing developers to<00:08:34.200>
• <00:32:31.080> do element of the bill but developers do element of the bill but developers
• But the problem is that this type of development and affordable developments are not happening today.
• a park to be built in a development a park to be built in a development basically<00:57:52.200><
• that uh when it comes to development that uh when it comes to development they<00:58:50.359>

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee heard House File 1987, the Minnesota Starter Home Act, and first adopted the A1 author’s amendment, which made minor cleanup changes, removed sections two and three, adjusted ADU language, and tweaked density language. The bill authors described the measure as a bipartisan effort to address Minnesota’s housing shortage by allowing more starter homes, duplexes, townhomes, and accessory dwelling units, while also limiting some local zoning barriers and preserving city protections in certain sensitive areas. They emphasized that the state has a large housing gap, rising home prices, and that the bill is intended as one part of a broader housing package. Supportive testimony came from the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce, Housing First Minnesota, Habitat for Humanity, AARP Minnesota, and Americans for Prosperity. These witnesses argued that workforce and starter-home shortages are hurting families, employers, and economic growth; that restrictive zoning and lengthy approval processes raise costs; and that more middle housing and ADUs would expand options for older adults, caregivers, working families, and people seeking homeownership. Several supporters said the bill would reduce regulatory barriers, lower development costs, and help communities add needed housing supply. Opposition or cautionary testimony came from city and municipal representatives, including officials from Cambridge, Eagan, and Mankato, as well as the League of Minnesota Cities and related groups. They argued that local governments already are approving substantial housing growth and need flexibility to manage zoning, parking, infrastructure, stormwater, and community input. They warned the bill could weaken local control, remove practical standards, and create unintended impacts such as more rental conversion in some neighborhoods or development without adequate infrastructure. No final vote on the bill itself was shown in the transcript beyond adoption of the A1 amendment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Develop Finance and Policy Committee. Develop Finance and Policy Committee.
• And then you economic development.
• :10:12.320> labor economic development and labor economic development and labor conference<00:
• for the emerging developer fund program. for the emerging developer fund program.
• for the Asian Economic Development for the Asian Economic Development Association,<00:15:07.120>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• the Border Development Act to better capture what's in the Trade Ports Development Act. is how the public-private
• Thank you all so much for your commitment to developing the border.
• But I'm talking about more around tax and economic development.
• Developers, as you know, drive a lot of what goes on.
• Designated as development poles for well-being, Polos del Bienestar.

Transcript Highlights:

• This housing community is a collaborative partnership between Atlantic Development, a private developer
• But LI-Tech developments often cost far more than comparable market-rate developments.
• , but for market-rate developers too.
• or a low-income developer, right?
• So in terms... ...whether it's a market-rate developer or a low-income developer, right?

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The Committee on Director Nominations met to consider Ruby Dylan Williams for Director of the Arizona Department of Housing. Chair Jay Kaufman opened with remarks about the committee’s role in scrutinizing nominees’ commitment to faithfully executing state law. Williams, who has served in housing roles since 2020 and as interim director since March 2025, described her background in both public service and the private sector and said her priorities would be expanding housing supply, preserving housing stability, and improving technology-driven operations and transparency. Members questioned Williams extensively about department oversight, fraud prevention, auditor general findings, homelessness policy, budget priorities, and the cost of affordable housing programs. She said the department had strengthened internal controls, added verbal verification steps for wire transfers, increased site inspections and grantee monitoring, and was tracking 68 performance metrics. She also defended the use of LIHTC and other federal housing programs as key public-private tools, said the department was working on a real-time homelessness data system, and explained that if state funding were cut, staffing would likely be reduced before core programs. Several members pressed her on past fraud and audit findings and on whether the department had been sufficiently proactive in preventing them. Public testimony was overwhelmingly supportive. Developers and industry representatives praised Williams’ experience, her knowledge of housing finance, and her role in streamlining the qualified allocation plan and improving the department’s responsiveness. They argued that her leadership has helped attract investment and increase housing production in Arizona. After debate, the committee voted 3-2 to recommend Williams’ confirmation to the full Senate, with Senators Kavanagh and Shope voting no and Senators Bravo and Ortiz voting yes.

Transcript Highlights:

• That means investing in people to make sure that they're able to develop the skills and develop new skills
• That means investing in people to make sure that they're able to develop the skills and develop new skills
• That means investing in people to make sure that they're able to develop the skills and develop new skills
• <00:05:00.160> new develop the skills and develop new develop the skills and develop new skills
• development, a new housing development development, a new housing development and<00:08:37.919><

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• for development.
• you are looking to develop? you are looking to develop?
• knowing what developable parcels are. knowing what developable parcels are.
• The development process.
• <01:16:57.760> Um, development now. Um, development now.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:04:18.199> in as to what projects have uh developed in as to what projects have uh developed
• Why don't you develop them?
• the uh Community Association to develop the uh Community Association to develop commercial<00:30
• developer you know who that developer developer you know who that developer was<01:17:20.560>
• Development for you, right?

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint Ways and Means and Hawaiian Affairs committee heard a budget presentation from the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands on its biennium requests for critical projects, repairs and maintenance, and operations. DHHL described its role in administering the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust, noted the large beneficiary wait list, and said prior funding, including Act 279, has helped the department accelerate land development and reduce vacancies. Officials said they have about 47,219 applications involving 29,548 Native Hawaiians, roughly 28 projects underway, and that about $471 million of a $600 million appropriation has been encumbered, with the remaining lapse-fix funds expected to be resolved before the June 30, 2026 deadline. DHHL emphasized that its current request would support additional lot development and could help produce roughly 6,000 units from the existing project pipeline, with another phase of requests potentially adding about 2,000 more units. The department said it is prioritizing shovel-ready projects, accelerating lease awards and orientations, and using a mix of approaches including paper leases, rental-with-option-to-purchase, owner-builder, and loan programs. Officials also discussed a shift toward denser urban development, citing projects in West Oahu and Honolulu, and said the department is working to reduce its vacancy rate and move beneficiaries onto the land more quickly. Members questioned why Oahu, despite having the largest wait list, was receiving comparatively lower amounts, and DHHL responded that land availability and cost drive those decisions, with Oahu having limited developable land and very high acquisition costs. The department pointed to land acquisition on Kauai and other islands, and to urban high-rise projects that can yield far more units on small parcels. Members also raised long-term maintenance and wildfire risk, asking whether current acquisition and development choices account for future infrastructure costs; DHHL said maintenance is a growing concern, especially on large unused or isolated lands, and that it is pursuing Firewise planning, federal funds, and partnerships to reduce risk. The discussion also touched on mixed-use and community-led development, with DHHL explaining that it leases land to nonprofit homestead associations under general leases with milestones, business-plan requirements, and land-use restrictions to support local services and community goals.

Transcript Highlights:

• It could be a form of development.
• Is that correct, or near that development, touches that development?” “It is nearby.
• Is that correct, or near that development, touches that development?” “It is nearby.
• I get the point about development and inappropriate development, but I also get the part, and my friend
• Now, long-term, if this property's development, but to develop that $48 a year on a property tax, yes

Summary: The committee met to consider a series of temporary appropriation requests, reserve fund transfers, federal grant appropriations, and review items. Early items included a $32 million appropriation and matching reserve transfer for the Department of Education’s educational freedom account program, a $476,000 request for the State Crime Lab, and a $90,000 assessment coordination request from DFA. Members asked questions about the assessment contract costs, and the item was approved. The committee also approved a $1 ARPA return to the CDC and a Department of Human Services reallocation package that moved general revenue and positions among divisions to meet client needs. The most extensive discussion centered on a $32 million restricted reserve transfer for the educational freedom account program. Members questioned the growing number of participating students, the program’s long-term funding needs, and safeguards against improper purchases. Agency representatives said about 44,000 students were being funded, that reimbursements and marketplace purchases are reviewed, and that reporting and audit controls are in place, though not every instance of fraud can be prevented. The committee approved the transfer after discussion. Members also approved smaller cash and federal grant items, including funding for a teacher shortage data dashboard, All Kids Bike grants, crime lab outsourcing, veterans cemetery operations, and a podiatric medicine licensing investigation fund. The most contentious item was a $7 million federal Forest Legacy grant request for Central Arkansas Water and the Department of Agriculture to acquire land in the Maumelle watershed, including acreage in Perry County and Pulaski County. Members debated water quality, development pressure, property tax impacts, local support, and whether Perry County had been adequately consulted. Agency and company representatives argued the acquisition would protect drinking water, preserve forested watershed land, and support recreation, while some legislators emphasized the county’s tax and development concerns. Senator Davis moved to defer the item to the full Legislative Council and to request removal of the Perry County portion; that motion passed. The committee then reviewed the remaining items, including a Veterans Affairs pay plan request, and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• So that was the lens we took while developing the economic development recommendations at the LFC.
• Then that also is creating economic development.
• Economic development is looking at.
• We don't have that, and so we can't develop the economic development infrastructures, parks, benches,
• Development is embraced. We are implementing.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's IEDC. development. Um now, back under my development.
• In the private sector, he said, they count on developers in commercial development, business development
• In the private sector, he said, they count on developers in commercial development, business development
• /c> industrial development, or in housing industrial development, or in housing development,<01:40:09.040
• <02:23:54.800> development comprehensive economic development comprehensive economic development

Keywords: 916, all