Transcript Highlights:

• It maintains school board member authority to consult with the CFO on budget matters and access any budget
• They're going to be able to find information on the budget process.
• what's going on locally via the budgets.
• what's going on locally via the budgets.
• what's going on locally via the budgets.

Bills: S0036 , S0620 , S0796 , S0934 , S1080 , S1096 , S1366 , S1536 , S1548 , S1580 , S1588 , S1620 , S1756 , S7034 , S7044

Committee: Senate Rules

Summary: The committee first took up SB 354, the “Blue Ribbon Projects” bill, which creates a framework for large planned communities on at least 15,000 contiguous acres with 60% reserved area and a streamlined local review process. Senator McLean presented the bill and a strike-all amendment, and members raised concerns about local control, conservation enforceability, data centers, concurrency, multi-county projects, and whether reserve lands could later be converted. Audubon Florida and 1,000 Friends of Florida opposed the bill, arguing the conservation protections were not permanent enough and that the reserve areas could be changed later; small-county representatives also worried about tax-base impacts. Supporters argued the bill would better manage growth, preserve green space, and provide a more orderly alternative to sprawl. After debate, the committee voted to report the bill favorably. The committee then approved SB 620 on candidate qualifying, which requires candidates for federal, state, county, district, judiciary, school, and school board offices to disclose any non-U.S. citizenship. Amendments added disclosure about whether federal candidates intend to trade stock if elected and adjusted 2026 congressional qualifying procedures in the event of redistricting, including a new qualifying window and petition rules. The bill was reported favorably after brief support from a member of the public and discussion about candidate vetting. The committee also reported favorably CS/CS/CS/SB 1452, a Department of Financial Services bill with amendments addressing My Safe Florida Home notices, condo pilot eligibility, firefighter hiring, unclaimed property, and related financial-services provisions. Next, the committee approved CS/CS/SB 1620, a school board members’ bill of rights. A substitute amendment narrowed the bill to access to records, fiscal transparency, and nondisclosure agreements, while preserving board members’ rights to timely documents, budget information, and public comment, and setting deadlines for records requests. Superintendents and a school board member testified in support, saying the bill clarifies roles and prevents board members from being frozen out. The committee also passed CS/HB 245, which replaces the term “child pornography” with “child sexual abuse material”; one senator supported the terminology change but warned about preserving legal precedent and avoiding appellate issues. The committee then reported favorably SB 1548, an update to the Live Local affordable housing law expanding eligible sites and clarifying setbacks, airport proximity, and fair-housing protections. Finally, the committee took up the veterinary medicine bill creating veterinary professional associates. The bill allows trained master’s-level VPAs to perform limited veterinary services under a veterinarian’s supervision, and an amendment tightened the standard to immediate supervision on premises. Supporters said the measure would expand access to care, especially in rural areas with vet shortages, while opponents argued it added unnecessary regulation. After testimony from veterinary educators and others, the bill continued with support expressed by committee members, including praise for the direct-supervision amendment.

Transcript Highlights:

• I believe I've provided my one-page policy brief with references.
• Over on page 25, I'll discuss one of the first ways.
• Theoretically, we should be going to the next one, so we'll keep them brief.
• Over on page 20, Table 6 shows that school food authorities are budgeting more in federally reimbursed
• We are also tracking monthly expenditures to ensure we are on track with yearly budget projections.

Committee: House Legislative Health & Human Services Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• Some of these costs, I would argue, more appropriately belong on the state budget.
• Are there thoughts on that one?
• But on that note, I'm not asking you to make a budget projection.
• rates and based on profits and so on?
• overall budgets, I think that's step one to gaining some control. ...to gaining some control, and then

Summary: The Senate Committee on Energy, Utilities and Communications held an oversight hearing focused on electric rates, utility regulation, affordability, reliability, and wildfire-related costs. The chair framed the discussion around the challenge of transitioning to a cleaner grid while keeping bills affordable and the system reliable, and noted the hearing also served as the annual update from the CPUC and Public Advocates Office. Professor Severin Borenstein gave a primer on utility regulation, explaining the split between deregulated generation and regulated transmission/distribution, the basics of cost-of-service regulation, and the role of return on equity. He argued that high allowed returns can encourage capital-intensive spending and that many public policy costs now embedded in rates would be better funded through the state budget, while warning that price caps or performance-based regulation are not silver bullets. CPUC President-designate Alice Reynolds described the commission’s role as economic regulator of investor-owned utilities and said affordability is being addressed through rate case scrutiny, reasonableness reviews, and legislative direction. She said wildfire mitigation and insurance costs have been major drivers of rate increases, but some wildfire-related costs are time-limited and will roll off rates over time. She also highlighted progress on clean energy procurement, battery storage growth, and integrated resource planning to meet climate goals while maintaining reliability. Reynolds said the CPUC is reviewing utility spending, disallowing imprudent costs where appropriate, and litigating at FERC to challenge transmission costs. Members pressed both witnesses on several issues, including whether rates are being inflated by legislative mandates and balancing accounts, whether utility returns are too high, and whether the state should shift more public-policy costs off electric bills and into the General Fund. Senators also raised concerns about load growth from data centers and ports, gas-system stranded assets as electrification advances, and whether the CPUC is over-regulating or discouraging innovation. Reynolds said the CPUC is working with the Energy Commission, CAISO, and the Air Resources Board on a holistic planning process, and pointed to tools such as interconnection reforms and demand flexibility. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational, with several follow-up requests for reports and data.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, that's kind of work on the budget.
• the budget bill. balance is shown there on line 77 of 146 balance is shown there on line 77 of 146 million
• </c><00:08:44.159><c> the</c><00:08:44.320><c> budget</c> you concluded your work on the budget you concluded
• </c><00:14:03.040><c> the</c> actions that the house took on the actions that the house took on the budget
• <00:28:45.120><c> one</c> The last one on this page is um on one The last one on this page is um on one

Bills: SF0032 , SF0010 , SF0001 , HB0001

Committee: Senate Appropriations

Transcript Highlights:

• No, years ago, one of the things, several years ago, when we were trying to balance the budget, we had
• No, years ago, one of the things, several years ago, when we were trying to balance the budget, we had
• It's not really a budgetable amount to plan on. >> It's not really a budgetable amount to plan on. >>
• on on on this counties and then state on on on this salt<03:14:46.319><c> issue.
• So, that being said, uh the subcommittee on road salt's going to be in a brief recess.

Committee: House Public Works and Highways

Transcript Highlights:

• On the last budget, we have— Mr. Wooten? Yes.
• Oh, one other question I had—brief. Okay, well, this one is short.
• I guess my, I mean, one thing that just caught my attention is that if you look at the budget page on
• And those are budgeted, you said? They are. One is for a psychologist and one for an APRN. Okay.
• needs and on budget.

Committee: All JOINT BUDGET COMMITTEE

Transcript Highlights:

• We're a labor grassroots coalition working on state tax and budget issues.
• They decide on that levy based on their budget.
• on that one,<00:41:24.080><c> too.
• . budget. budget.
• It's not four imprint sure on this one.

Summary: House File 4845 was presented as a tax modernization and local aid bill that would adjust Minnesota income tax brackets for inflation, add a new top bracket of 10.85% for high earners, and increase local government aid and county program aid beginning in 2026. Representative Hollins said the bill would strengthen local government funding and require the Department of Revenue to recertify aid distributions. The chair noted the bill would be laid over for possible inclusion in the 2026 tax bill. Supporters, including St. Paul Mayor Melvin Carter? no, Mayor Kelly Her of St. Paul, AFSCME Local 34, and Rebuild Minnesota, argued that cities and counties need more stable revenue to cover rising costs, public safety, human services, and property tax pressure. They said the bill would help local governments meet unmet needs and reduce reliance on property taxes. Opponents from the Minnesota Business Partnership and Minnesota Chamber of Commerce argued the new top rate would hurt competitiveness, talent recruitment, and business investment, especially because many businesses pay through the individual income tax code. Some testifiers also opposed directing more aid to cities that they said restrict housing development, while others urged the committee to address unfunded mandates and fraud instead of raising taxes. During member discussion, Representative Joyce opposed creating another bracket and suggested using cannabis tax revenue instead. Representative Wiener said the state has a spending problem and cited fraud concerns, while Representative Roach questioned whether the bill truly helped greater Minnesota and noted the current LGA appropriation is just over $644 million. Representative Hollins responded that the proposal would mostly benefit greater Minnesota by shifting more of the tax burden to high earners in the metro area. No vote was taken; the bill was laid over for possible inclusion in the 2026 tax bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• Other comments on this?
• </c> one um any objection to this going on one um any objection to this going on consent<00:22:13.720
• We did take out the camping ones, which really hurt my feelings, but I want to camp on my own land.
• We're now on the final ought-to-pass as amended motion. Any more discussion on that?
• Any objection to this going on consent? All right, seeing none, we'll put it on consent.

Committee: House Housing

Transcript Highlights:

• This is an informational briefing, and we are being streamed live on YouTube.
• The purpose of today's informational briefing is for the committee to follow up on academic Creative
• is for the committee to follow briefing is for the committee to follow up<00:00:47.520><c> on</c><00
• </c> course you get one nice program going on course you get one nice program going on Mano<00:15:24.440
• So that's one of our requests that has been included in the last couple years and in this year's budget

Transcript Highlights:

• Staff, may we please have a briefing on 5609?
• That concludes my briefing.
• Full stop on that comment.
• I do my due diligence on each of these lots to be selective on the infill lots that I build on.
• deck on remote?

Bills: SB5609 , SB6284

Committee: Senate Environment, Energy & Technology

Keywords: cultural resources, land use, environmental policy, exemptions, state laws, artificial intelligence, consumer protection, regulation, data privacy, technological impacts

Transcript Highlights:

• Staff, may we please have a briefing on 5609?
• Full stop on that comment.
• Full stop on that comment.
• I do my due diligence on each of these lots to be selective on the infill lots that I build on.
• deck on remote?

Summary: The Senate Environment, Energy, and Technology Committee held public hearings on two bills. On SB 5609, concerning cultural resource reviews under SEPA, staff explained that the proposed substitute would require cultural resource review for certain categorical exemptions, including infill housing and some GMA-related projects, unless a local government has an approved data-sharing agreement, ordinance, or cultural resources management plan with tribal consultation. Senator Kauffman said the bill is intended to protect tribal cultural sites without stopping development. Supporters, including tribal representatives and some local officials, said early review and consultation can prevent irreversible damage and provide clarity; opponents from business, builders, and county planning groups argued it would add costs, delay housing and permitting, and shift too much authority to state-level review without clear timelines or standards. The committee took public testimony only and then closed the hearing on SB 5609. The committee then heard SB 6284 on high-risk artificial intelligence. Staff described requirements for deployers of high-risk AI systems to maintain risk management policies, conduct impact assessments, notify consumers when AI is used in consequential decisions, and report algorithmic discrimination to the Attorney General, along with disclosures for government agencies and an extension of the AI task force with a workplace subgroup. Senator Elias said the bill is intended to focus regulation on high-risk uses while preserving innovation. Testimony was mixed: consumer and student advocates supported the bill’s transparency and accountability measures, while industry, banking, insurance, hospital, and technology groups raised concerns about definitions, implementation, overlap with existing regulation, and possible effects on innovation or regulated sectors. The committee heard public testimony and then adjourned after closing the hearing on SB 6284.

Transcript Highlights:

• CONVERSATIONS ARE ONGOING WITH THE SENATE ON THE BUDGET AND ALLOCATIONS. REALLY PRODUCTIVE.
• ARE BACK ON THE BILL AS AMENDED. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC TESTIMONY ON THE BILL?
• EIGHTY ONE IS THE FEEDER ONE AND THIS IS THE ONE THAT EFFECTIVELY WOULD - ONE SECOND.
• LET'S GIVE A TAX BREAK ON THOSE. SO, YOU KNOW, TAX BREAK ON GUNS AND AMMO.
• OKAY REPRESENTATIVE BUSATTA WELCOME TO THE BUDGET COMMITTEE WHERE YOUR BILL IS THE LAST ON THE AGENDA

Transcript Highlights:

• Or what we could do is maybe budget $7 million and put it on the ballot and think about a year and a
• One of them? Come up? Okay.
• And just one other thing, just curiosity. Just before we move on.
• I will be very brief.
• A question on H. 812.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Election Laws

Summary: The House and Senate Election Laws committees held a hearing focused on campaign finance and several local election-related bills. Office of Campaign and Political Finance Director William Campbell testified in support of H. 848 and S. 515, saying the campaign finance law needs modernization and highlighting proposals for stronger Super PAC disclosure, more timely reporting, improved security for campaign participants, and other reforms. He said the bills would help update a 50-year-old system to reflect legal, economic, and cultural changes. A major portion of the hearing concerned H. 868/S. 507, which would require earlier and more frequent reporting by ballot question committees. Witnesses from Common Cause, the League of Women Voters, and others argued that ballot campaigns now involve tens of millions of dollars, much of it raised during periods with no real-time disclosure, and that moving these committees into the depository system would improve transparency without burdening grassroots signature-gathering. The committee also heard support for H. 811 and H. 812, which would allow municipalities to create citizen-funded election programs and require identifying information on political text messages, as well as S. 525/H. 875, which would bar political spending by foreign-influenced corporations. The committee also heard testimony on S. 2605, a Canton home rule petition to move town elections from April to November. Canton residents, a select board member, and a poll worker said the change would increase turnout, better align local elections with the November voting cycle, and give newly elected officials more time to prepare for town meeting. Senator Rausch also testified in support of S. 530, requiring presidential primary candidates to disclose recent tax returns. The hearing ended with no votes taken and the committee adjourning, with a note that the next hearing was tentatively scheduled for January 13.

Transcript Highlights:

• Don't go on too long.
• And so he had to hike out and found one of us on the farm, on the operation.
• keeping on.
• Discussion on the motion. Senator Shippy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'll keep this brief.
• They raise their kids on money they earn working on public lands.

Committee: Senate State Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• So on page two is our core operating budget. Excuse me.
• So on page two is our core budget for the year.
• Well, they have different core budgets. And so one of those core budgets...
• Well, they have different core budgets. And so one of those core budgets might be for food.
• And one of those core budgets might be for a hotel room, and one of those core budgets...

Summary: Attorney General Catherine Hanaway presented the Office of the Attorney General’s FY 2027 budget request and outlined her office’s priorities: reducing violent crime, targeting illegal and unregulated activities she described as a “vice squad” focus, protecting Missourians from fraud, and improving the office’s legal work. She highlighted major cases and enforcement efforts, including litigation over insulin pricing, Dollar General pricing practices, a criminal prosecution in Hermann, the Jackson County assessment dispute, and a new lawsuit involving Misha’s board policy. Committee members asked about cybercrime enforcement, cooperation with federal authorities, VLTs, ballot and referendum litigation, and the office’s approach to diversity-related legal issues. Hanaway said cybercrime and no-call enforcement rely heavily on multi-state and federal cooperation, and she emphasized that many cases begin with citizen reports. Members also questioned the cost and scope of ongoing election-related litigation, including redistricting and referendum cases, and Hanaway said her office is defending the laws and ballot processes as required. She estimated roughly $600,000 in staff time over about six months for the referendum/redistricting work combined. Several members raised concerns about the Misha lawsuit and whether similar statutory provisions elsewhere in state government could raise the same legal issues; Hanaway responded that the case involved a board rule, not a statute, and turned on whether the requirement functioned as a quota. The committee also discussed child sexual exploitation, human trafficking, Medicaid fraud, and the use of outside counsel and pro hac vice fees. Hanaway said the office is using non-GR funds where possible and is not requesting pay increases this year. The Missouri Office of Prosecution Services then presented its budget. Officials explained that MOPS trains and supports prosecutors statewide, including on DWIs, child sex cases, and new prosecutor training, and that its budget request matches the governor’s recommendation. Members asked about support for local prosecutors, the nine counties without elected prosecutors, and the new conviction integrity unit; staff said the unit’s positions were shifted between line items and that the office can help answer prosecutorial questions through its general counsel. The committee then moved to the Department of Public Safety budget. DPS reviewed funding for crime victims notification, law enforcement recruitment and retention, drug task forces, academy scholarships, Blue Star grants, local crime prevention, school safety, World Cup security, 988 trainings, wastewater testing in schools, and other programs. Members asked about the $59 million federal FIFA World Cup grant, school safety app funding, and wastewater testing participation; DPS said the World Cup funds require no state match, the app funding is being phased out, and schools opted into the testing program. The committee recessed before finishing the DPS book, with plans to return later.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's going to be on Senate Bill 6346. Let's start with the staff briefing from Tracy Taylor.
• budget, the capital budget, and finance.
• reducing the tax burden on... ...being spent on reducing the tax burden on lower- and middle-income
• Despite being one of the wealthier districts in our state, Lake Washington has had to make several budget
• My name is Emily Vanannick, on behalf of the Washington State Budget and Policy Center, in strong support

Summary: House Finance held a public hearing on Gross Substitute Senate Bill 6346, a proposal to impose a 9.9% tax beginning in 2028 on Washington taxable income over $1 million for individuals, with related rules for residents, nonresidents, pass-through entities, estimated payments, penalties, credits, and revenue distribution. Staff explained that the bill would also fund several tax changes, including an expanded Working Families Tax Credit, sales tax exemptions for grooming and hygiene products, higher small business B&O credits, an early end to the B&O surcharge on very large businesses, and repeal of most retail services sales tax changes from last session. The fiscal note projected about $2.53 billion in additional state revenue in FY 2029 and $3.21 billion in FY 2030, with local revenue losses and significant Department of Revenue implementation costs. The chair also announced concerns about apparent fraud and duplicate records in the public sign-in system and set testimony rules limiting questions and shortening testimony time as the hearing progressed. The prime sponsor, Senator Jamie Peterson, said the bill was intended to make Washington’s tax system less regressive and to raise revenue for schools, health care, higher education, and other public needs while reducing the burden on lower- and middle-income residents. Supporters from labor, education, health care, child care, housing, poverty-reduction, and social service organizations argued that the bill would help fund essential services, expand the Working Families Tax Credit, and improve fairness by asking the wealthiest households to contribute more. Several individual supporters, including business owners and workers, said they were willing to pay more and described the need for better-funded schools, health care, child care, and public defense. Opponents, including former Attorney General Rob McKenna, business groups, construction and real estate representatives, and taxpayer advocates, argued the measure would function as an unconstitutional income tax, would be unstable and likely expanded over time, and would harm small businesses organized as pass-through entities. They said the bill would reduce investment, discourage entrepreneurship, and could drive businesses and high earners out of Washington. Some local government representatives supported the public defense funding but asked for more dedicated revenue and protection against local revenue losses from the bill’s sales tax exemptions. No committee vote or final action was taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• When budgeting for when a UC or CSU budgets, is this going to impact their ability to budget?
• Madam Secretary, roll call please on the items to add on. File item number one, AB 664.
• I just need, in my opinion, more time to review this person, especially being on the budget committee
• , even removing some of the discretionary... ...to review this person, especially being on the budget
• I'm just going to hold off on this one, but I would really, really like to talk about this from the budget

Summary: The committee heard Assembly Bill 664, which would authorize Southwestern College in Chula Vista to develop a limited pilot of faculty-led bachelor’s degree programs tied to regional workforce needs, with collaboration requirements, an independent evaluation, and a sunset in 2035. The author and supporters argued the bill would address local access and affordability problems in South San Diego, where many students are place-bound and the region lacks a nearby public university offering bachelor’s degrees. Opponents from the CSU, UC, and AICCU said the measure would bypass the existing AB 927 consultation process and could set a precedent for duplication and expansion outside the current statewide framework. After debate, the committee passed AB 664 on a due-pass motion to Appropriations, with the roll showing eight ayes and one no, later updated to nine ayes and one no after the roll was held open. The committee then took up Assembly Bill 1241, which directs a study of a “pay-it-forward” higher education financing model in which students would attend without upfront tuition and repay costs later based on income. The author and Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond framed the bill as a response to rising college costs and student debt, arguing California should study innovative affordability models used elsewhere. Some members raised concerns about fiscal feasibility and whether the model had worked in other states, while others supported the study as a modest first step. AB 1241 passed to Appropriations on an eight-aye, two-no vote. Assembly Bill 713 would allow undocumented students at UC, CSU, and community colleges to access paid campus jobs, internships, and research positions. Supporters said the bill would improve equity, affordability, and student success, and that campus employment is a critical pathway for undocumented students who already pay tuition and fees. Opponents argued the bill conflicts with federal law and could expose campuses and the state to legal and funding risks; supporters responded that state entities are not bound by the federal prohibition in the way described and emphasized the need to protect students and expand opportunity. The committee also heard concerns about student privacy and data protection. The bill was moved to Appropriations, with the roll initially showing five ayes, three noes, and one not voting, and the roll held open for additional members. Finally, Assembly Bill 1171 was presented as a modernization of the existing part-time faculty health insurance program for community colleges, aimed at making coverage more consistent and predictable across districts. The author said the bill would not create a new entitlement but would strengthen participation in the current program to better reflect the realities of a workforce made up largely of part-time and multi-district faculty. The transcript ends as the presentation begins, before testimony, debate, or a vote on AB 1171.

Transcript Highlights:

• Good afternoon, and welcome to the Assembly Budget Subcommittee 5 on State Administration hearing today
• , is one.
• There's Assemblymember David Alvarez also has one on Mexico.
• Number one is we're going to have the public respond on this.
• I'll be very brief on this.

Summary: The hearing focused on the Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development (Go-Biz) and several related budget proposals. Director D.D. Myers described the California Jobs First economic blueprint, regional planning efforts across 13 regions, and the state’s strategy to target sectors such as ag tech, space, life sciences, semiconductors, and emerging technologies. She also discussed the California brand campaign, export promotion, film tax credits, and the California Civic Media Fund, emphasizing job creation, regional equity, and business attraction/retention. Members raised questions about support for journalism, arts and creative industries, AI’s impact on jobs, foreign direct investment, manufacturing, tariffs, and how the Jobs First framework is being implemented across regions. Go-Biz then presented trailer bill language to extend the encumbrance deadline for remaining Jobs First administrative funds and to codify the Office of Regional Economic Development Initiatives. The department said $95 million of the $100 million Jobs First appropriation had already been deployed to grants for counties and tribes, and members asked for more information on regional outcomes, including Orange County and the North State. Public comment supported Jobs First and the Small Business Development Centers’ role in helping businesses access capital and create jobs. The committee also heard a request for ongoing CalExport funding to replace uncertain federal STEP support; the LAO noted the Legislature may want to weigh whether to backfill federal reductions, while Go-Biz argued the state program is needed because federal support appears unlikely to continue and demand exceeds available funding. The committee next heard the film and television tax credit staffing request. Go-Biz asked for funding for three permanent positions to manage the expanded program, and the LAO recommended approval given the increased workload. The Film Commission reported a sharp rise in applications after AB 1138 and the program expansion, with productions taking place both inside and outside the Los Angeles 30-mile zone and activity spread across the state. Finally, Go-Biz presented a request for one permanent position and one graduate student assistant to support innovation and emerging technologies, including quantum and fusion. Members asked about the use of the state’s quantum funding, and staff explained it would support microgrants, state capacity-building, and workforce education. No formal votes were taken in the portions provided, and the chair indicated some items would be moved and heard later in the agenda.

Transcript Highlights:

• One, two, five, three. And that's the one of the time. One, two, three. That's right.
• It's just one. It's all right. It's all right. It's one count. We're going to have 13.
• I have the one that's on the field. I just say that one. Oh, that's good.
• I've got to do it on the brief that you get it. I got to run. I got to run insurance. Thank you.
• I will be brief, since I know that there's other committee meetings going on.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Committee on Capital Outlay met on April 22 and first approved the January 15, 2026 minutes. The committee then elected Representative Bacala as vice chair by acclamation after Senator Womack nominated him and no other nominations were offered. The main item of business was a request from the City of Donaldsonville for a waiver of the local match requirement for a capital outlay project, Project 50-M68-25-01, the Stormwater Resilience Project (planning and construction). Committee staff explained that under a 2025 law, municipalities under 9,500 population may receive a full or partial match waiver if they can show an inability to provide the match without mismanagement or misconduct. Staff said Donaldsonville, with a 2020 census population of 6,695, met the eligibility threshold and recommended approval. Mayor Leroy Sullivan testified that the city has a high poverty rate, has previously managed state-funded projects responsibly, and needs the waiver to address drainage and flooding issues in an area expected to see new development. Senator Lambert moved to approve the waiver, and the committee approved it without objection. With no further business, Representative McFarland moved to adjourn, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• on for a while.
• I’ll wait for your answer on that one.
• That's one thought.
• Now, of course, when you start talking about the impacts to a budget, one side's revenue, the other side's
• The other thing, too, is like what I spoke about and gave you a real brief discussion on the tax increment

Committees: Joint Transportation , Joint Joint Transportation Committee

Summary: The committee first heard an update on the Joint Transportation Committee study of transportation impacts if the Lower Snake River dams were removed. WSDOT and its consultant described the study as focused on transportation mitigation, not on whether dam removal should occur. They outlined geologic risk work on drawdown and erosion, identified vulnerable embankments and nearby roads, rail, and utilities, and explained a total logistics cost model used to compare base conditions and several future scenarios. Those scenarios included no-dam conditions with new unit-train terminals, short-line rail options, a combined “many solutions” scenario, and a future scenario still to be defined. Members asked about irrigation, impacts in Idaho and Oregon, port capacity, emissions, competition, EV trucks, and whether the model could test reduced grain volumes; staff said the model can estimate transportation changes and costs, but not broader farm-economics impacts. WSU’s independent review said the model had improved but still had limitations in spatial detail, routing accuracy, and testing, and that stakeholder engagement remained important though delayed by model development. No votes were taken. The committee then received an update on the alternative sidewalk funding study. Consultants said the study is in its early information-gathering phase, with a statewide survey of cities and counties, interviews, national research, and legal review of possible funding mechanisms. They described current sidewalk funding as fragmented, with grants, transportation benefit districts, levies, and some utility-tax allocations used in Washington, but no dedicated statewide source. They said the study is especially examining a possible sidewalk utility fee, while parcel taxes appear unlikely under Washington’s property-tax rules. Members asked whether any new mechanism would duplicate existing taxes, how a sidewalk fee would be collected, and whether development requirements for sidewalks count as dedicated funding; the consultants said the study is aimed at expanding local options rather than mandating adoption. Deliverables include a preliminary draft by mid-December, a “Sidewalks 101” document by year-end, and a final report by mid-June next year. The committee also heard a brief update on the ocean-going vessels at berth emissions study. Staff explained that the report is nearing completion and will be presented at the next JTC meeting. They highlighted federal Clean Air Act constraints, noting that Washington’s options are shaped by California’s waiver-based standards and that deviations from California’s vessel-at-berth rules could invite litigation. Staff said stakeholder outreach is underway and asked for any missing participants to be identified before the final report is issued. Finally, the committee began hearing from county representatives on local transportation challenges. The county engineers’ association emphasized ongoing collaboration with state agencies and local partners on issues such as fish passage barriers and infrastructure needs, but the presentation was cut off as the meeting moved on to the next item.