Transcript Highlights:

• would be put into that special fund would be put into that special fund thank<00:03:45.879> you
• I’d like to see a dedicated fund.
• Under the criteria for special funds, they should be self-sustaining, and this special fund does not
• general fund...
• We'll ask for those funds later.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Committee on Economic Development and Tourism and on Water and Land heard testimony on HB 504, a measure relating to environmental stewardship and funding for natural resource protection and restoration. Supporters included multiple state agencies and advocacy groups, such as DLNR, HTA, Hawaiʻi Ocean Legislative Task Force, Resources Legacy Fund, the Hawaiʻi Climate Action Coalition, and others, who said the bill would create dedicated funding for environmental, climate, and cultural resource needs and help address wildfire, flood, coastal storm, and tourism-related impacts. Several witnesses emphasized that Hawaiʻi’s environmental funding gap is large and that visitor contributions should be directed to stewardship and restoration. Some supporters also urged that the measure be applied equitably across all visitor accommodations and related uses, including cruise ship cabins and state rooms, while a few suggested amendments to broaden coverage or create a working group for implementation. Opposition and concerns focused largely on the bill’s tax structure and legal/administrative issues. The Department of Budget and Finance and the Tax Foundation questioned the reimbursable general obligation bond special fund in part two, suggesting it be converted to a regular special fund or deleted. The Attorney General’s office said part two may violate the single-subject rule in the state constitution and recommended deleting it. The Department of Taxation said the proposed points-and-miles language would be difficult to audit and enforce, and Expedia and others said the proposed tax treatment of loyalty points and certain payment forms would be operationally difficult. Industry witnesses also warned the bill could raise costs in a high-tax destination and asked for more marketing support if the tax is increased. The committee also heard concerns that a new tax on cruise ship cabins could raise federal preemption issues. The chair noted the testimony count as 23 in support, 179 in opposition, and one with comments. No vote was taken in the portion provided, and the hearing ended with questions from senators and agency responses about possible amendments, enforcement, and constitutional concerns.

Transcript Highlights:

• In the Department of Commerce, I'm recommending total economic development funding of $170 million.
• This maintains the department's recurring base funding for various economic development programs like
• those revenues into the general revenue fund.
• fund.
• These funds are currently a temporary supplemental allocation of funds for the State Apartment Incentive

Summary: The Transportation and Economic Development Budget Subcommittee met to consider its recommended fiscal year 2025-2026 budget and a conforming committee bill. Chair Shove presented an $18.5 billion TED budget, describing it as about 8.5% below the prior year’s TED budget and emphasizing recurring savings, reductions to vacant positions over 90 days old, and a focus on core agency needs. He highlighted funding for economic development, Visit Florida, Space Florida, affordable housing programs, military affairs, libraries, cultural and historic preservation grants, emergency management, and a $14.1 billion transportation work program. The committee then took up PCB TED 2501, which changes documentary stamp tax distributions by redirecting certain revenues to general revenue. The bill would reinstate the general revenue service charge on the supplemental housing-related dock stamp revenue, eliminating a recurring $150 million source for the State Housing Trust Fund, and would also redirect about $466 million from the State Transportation Trust Fund to general revenue. Chair Shove said the measure has no net zero fiscal impact on state revenues and does not alter the longstanding standard dock stamp funding for affordable housing or eliminate FDOT programs, arguing the bill preserves flexibility for future legislatures. Public testimony was split. Representatives from the Florida Transportation Builders Association and the Florida Public Transportation Association warned that the transportation trust fund reduction would significantly affect FDOT’s five-year work program, especially the Strategic Intermodal System, and could reduce planned capacity improvements and transit funding. Several members also raised concerns about the housing-related changes, arguing the bill undercuts commitments made through the Live Local framework and could weaken affordable housing efforts. In closing, Chair Shove defended the bill as a necessary tightening of recurring spending and said existing affordable housing and transportation programs would still be funded through other appropriations. The committee approved PCB TED 2501 on a 10-2 vote and reported it favorably before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• Pre-design work had been started with some existing funds and then was paused, and this new funding would
• preservation needs much of this funding preservation needs much of this funding would<00:04:43.680
• > enable paused and this new funding would enable paused and this new funding would enable the
• funds weren't there.
• And so once you've obligated the funds in FIS, then you're really guaranteed to get those funds.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• As you know, the PERA fund, which is our largest fund, gives you a breakdown of our funding ratio over
• With the money coming in, that fund will never be fully funded.
• They both have a title: funded ratio for the PERA fund.
• and severance tax permanent fund, which is how we're funded.
• people bring funds.

Transcript Highlights:

• in funding.
• in funding.
• This program has been funded by a mix of General Fund and greenhouse gas reduction funds since about
• They fund land acquisitions, habitat restoration, developed public access trails and recreation areas
• “Yeah, with bond funding, once the funding is transferred into another fund, it's considered spent by

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee heard the administration’s spending plan for Proposition 4’s climate smart agriculture and biodiversity chapters, along with related trailer bill language. CDFA outlined proposed funding for existing programs such as SWEEP, Healthy Soils, Urban Agriculture, and invasive species work, plus new or phased-in programs including year-round and mobile farmers’ markets, tribal food sovereignty, and regional farm equipment sharing. The Department of Conservation described funding for the California Farmland Conservancy Program and Working Lands and Riparian Corridors Program, while the Department of Finance and LAO discussed pending allocations and generally found the overall approach reasonable, though LAO suggested the Legislature may want more statutory guidance and reporting, especially for new programs. Members focused on implementation details, equity, and accountability. Questions covered how programs would serve vulnerable and disadvantaged communities, whether new solicitations would be reopened for previously oversubscribed grants, how outcomes are tracked, and how to structure guidance for new programs such as farm equipment sharing. The chair emphasized that the Legislature wants clearer direction on program design and noted that AB 2313 should guide implementation of the regional farm equipment sharing allocation. The committee also discussed the administration’s request to directly appropriate bond funds to departments and to exempt bond program guidelines from the Administrative Procedures Act; LAO supported the APA exemption with possible legislative guardrails for public notice and comment. The committee then heard on the farm-to-school proposal, with CDFA requesting $24.9 million General Fund for incubator grants, technical assistance, and network support. CDFA said the program has reached nearly half of California schoolchildren and has shown strong demand and positive evaluation results. LAO supported the core program but recommended rejecting the $3 million technical assistance component as too broad and suggested the Legislature consider using Proposition 98 for some of the funding. Members debated that point, with some expressing concern about using General Fund dollars for a new discretionary request during a tight budget year. The biodiversity and nature-based solutions chapter included funding for the Wildlife Conservation Board, state conservancies, and tribal nature-based solutions. WCB described major recent investments and proposed projects tied to 30 by 30, habitat restoration, tribal partnerships, and public access. Members raised concerns about long-term stewardship, the size of the WCB allocation, and whether the Legislature should receive more detail on how funds will be distributed. The committee also heard requests for Bolsa Chica wetlands maintenance and Rincon Island decommissioning funding from the State Lands Commission, with members questioning long-term liability, remediation costs, and the role of private oil operators. No votes were taken, and the hearing ended with public comment from stakeholders largely supporting the APA exemption, farm-to-school funding, biodiversity investments, and related conservation programs.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's a developing human being.
• If we can teach how frogs develop, we can teach how a human being is developed.
• Is there, do we know where the funding would be for this? Would it be general fund funding?
• The same way that is funded, this should be funded the same way from my understanding.
• to one-time funding.

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• allocation of funds. allocation of funds.
• areas that you are developing? areas that you are developing?
• development. at the development of residential lots at the development of residential lots and<00:55
• within the programs that they develop. within the programs that they develop.
• , and based on where that development, and based on where that development<01:02:45.600> is, development

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The transfer fee can fund local affordable housing trust funds.
• The trust needs to have local matching funds for developers to leverage outside funding like the low-income
• local funds to trigger the state income assistance that can come to a developer to ensure low-income
• Racehorse Development Fund.
• The funds would support the preservation of existing affordable units and the development of new ones

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Revenue held a public hearing on a series of bills focused largely on local-option real estate transfer fees and housing funding tools for communities facing severe affordability pressures. Testimony strongly favored bills for Somerville, Concord, Martha’s Vineyard, Nantucket, Chatham, and a statewide local-option transfer fee, with speakers arguing that high-end real estate transactions should help fund affordable housing, anti-displacement efforts, workforce housing, and related capital improvements. Elected officials and local housing leaders described rising rents and home prices, investor activity, shrinking year-round housing stock, and difficulty recruiting or retaining teachers, police, health care workers, and other essential employees. Several witnesses emphasized that the proposals would be optional for municipalities, could include exemptions for first-time homebuyers or seniors, and would direct revenue into local affordable housing trust funds or housing banks. Committee members asked questions about who would pay the fee and whether it could make housing less affordable, and supporters responded that the fees would be targeted at higher-value transactions and designed with local flexibility. For Somerville, the delegation and Mayor Katjana Ballantyne backed both a local home rule petition and statewide enabling legislation, saying the city has already used zoning reform, inclusionary zoning, and local housing funds but still needs a new revenue source to address displacement and investor-driven purchases. For Concord, Representative Carmine Gentile and Concord housing advocates supported a home rule petition and the statewide bill, arguing that a modest fee on sales above $1 million could generate predictable revenue for affordable housing production and preservation. One committee exchange focused on whether the fee would affect most Concord sales and whether it would be passed on to buyers; supporters said the policy was intended to shift costs toward higher-value properties and help leverage other funding sources. The committee also heard testimony on House 4105, which would redirect a casino-related revenue stream to the Healthy Incentives Program. Farmers, advocates, and residents said the current funding was originally intended to support horse racing but has not met that goal, and that the money would be better used to support Massachusetts farmers and food-insecure residents through HIP. In a separate bill, Senator Becca Rausch testified in support of Senate 268, which would create a state-level hostile learning environment complaint process for higher education institutions and potentially strip tax exemptions from colleges or universities found to have such environments; she cited anti-Semitic and transphobic incidents on campuses and argued that existing federal protections should be mirrored in state law. The hearing also included testimony on college tuition debt reduction legislation from Senator Michael Moore, who said the bill would allow a deduction for tuition and fees paid to Massachusetts public colleges and universities to ease student debt and support the state’s workforce. A major portion of the hearing focused on Martha’s Vineyard and Nantucket housing bank proposals. Hospital, school, housing, planning, and municipal officials from Martha’s Vineyard said the island’s year-round housing shortage is harming health care, schools, and the local workforce, and urged approval of a housing bank funded by a local-option transfer fee. Nantucket witnesses made similar arguments, pointing to a very high median home price, a large seasonal housing stock, and the need for a dedicated revenue stream to preserve and create year-round housing. Supporters repeatedly cited the long-running success of the islands’ land banks as evidence that transfer fees can work without harming real estate markets. Senator Julian Cyr and Representative Thomas Moakley Luddy also backed the Cape and Islands transfer-fee bills, saying the region needs bold action and a sustainable local funding source to address its housing crisis.

Transcript Highlights:

• As a developer, we'll look at utility prior to development. Thank you.
• With federal funding Research and future developments to enhance the areas for dredging materials.
• This legislation, particularly through the creation of the Quabbin Host Community Development Trust Fund
• Community Development Trust Fund and the study on providing Quabbin water to the surrounding communities
• I support the creation of a Quabbin host community development trust funded annually by the MWRA and

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing covered a broad set of environmental and water-related bills, with much of the testimony focused on blue economy and circular economy proposals, drought management, drinking water safety, flood resilience, and water infrastructure funding. Supporters of bills such as H. 987 and H. 988 described grant programs for blue economy workforce development, research, small businesses, and public education about a circular economy. Other speakers backed measures on coastal erosion research, recreational boating dredging, cranberry water-right transfers, sand mining oversight, and a voucher program for home water filtration in PFAS-impacted communities. Several elected officials and advocates also urged passage of bills to require private well testing, improve school drinking water safety, and address sand mining pollution and PFAS contamination. Water supply and drought issues drew extensive testimony. Senator Eldridge and others supported legislation to let the state, through DEP and the drought management task force, impose regional water-use restrictions during droughts and make the task force permanent in statute. Advocates from watershed groups, farms, and environmental organizations said the current town-by-town approach is inconsistent and ineffective, and they described drought impacts on rivers, farms, private wells, and wildfire risk. A related bill on private wells was supported as a way to help homeowners test and remediate contaminated wells, especially in rural areas without public water. The committee also heard testimony on a bill to allow the Lynnfield Water District to join the MWRA, with local officials saying the move would help address PFAS and other contamination and improve supply reliability. Another major panel supported a water infrastructure funding bill, arguing that aging drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater systems need major new investment, including support for PFAS treatment, sewer rate relief, biosolids research, and regional interconnections. Members asked about costs, funding sources, and the relationship to existing revolving loan funds; witnesses said the bill would need to be paired with future bond funding and new revenue ideas. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the chairs repeatedly invited written testimony and noted the large number of speakers.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you. ...all ag technology research and development, ecosystem, workforce development, and projects
• That gets us into our second funding pathway for a startup seed fund, whereas the R&D is for research
• Development. And so I think to Dr.
• We're able to provide the match funding necessary for them to utilize that funding to the best of their
• They're almost like a funded drain because they are.

Summary: The committee met in Fargo and approved the minutes from the March 31 meeting before hearing a series of informational presentations focused on North Dakota agriculture, water, and research. NDSU President David Cook opened with remarks about NDSU’s land-grant mission, emphasizing statewide service through research, teaching, and extension, and highlighting examples such as the Lilac Agriculture startup and the university’s role in applying research to real-world problems. He said he intends to spend time listening across the state to better understand local needs. The committee then received a detailed presentation on a state irrigation and drainage study from Tom Bodine on behalf of Agriculture Commissioner Doug Goehring. The study projected significant potential for expanded irrigation acreage, especially in counties such as McLean, Williams, Sargent, Burleigh, Mountrail, McKenzie, McIntosh, Dunn, and Bottineau, and estimated major economic gains from irrigation, including higher farm returns and support for value-added agriculture. Members discussed water permits, surface water versus aquifers, infrastructure, drought resilience, and the role of legal drains in improving productivity and generating economic activity. The presenters also noted that the full report is available online. Dr. Greg Lardy followed with NDSU’s required interim report, outlining the university’s agricultural research and extension system, including the State Board of Agricultural Research and Education, seven research-extension centers, and the economic importance of agriculture to the state. He highlighted recent research impacts such as new crop varieties, potato breeding successes, virtual fencing, AI-assisted weed control, weather-network tools, and 4-H programming. He also described NDSU’s budget priorities: restoring the governor’s proposed 10% cuts, additional operating support, and deferred maintenance funding. Committee members asked about the new agricultural field lab, storage sheds, and NDSU’s partnership with Grand Farm. The committee also heard from the North Dakota Water Resources Research Institute and a professor presenting water-related research, including data center cooling, water reuse, smart irrigation, and a feasibility study on co-locating data centers with greenhouse and aquaculture production. Members asked about water use, ownership, and whether the concepts were operational or still speculative. Finally, North Dakota AgTech presented its NSF-funded innovation engine work, describing startup commercialization, on-farm trials, workforce development, and partnerships with NDSU, UND, tribal colleges, and other land-grant institutions. No formal votes were taken beyond approval of the prior meeting minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Under the current structure, funding may be passed from state government to developers just to have the
• for pre-development activities.
• The developer would win because the infrastructure financing would not be on the back of the developer
• One of Habitat's biggest costs are development fees.
• Using the framework for development impact fee disclosure and transparency developed in AB 1820 (Schiavo

Summary: The committee heard a series of housing, local government, and governance bills, with most of the discussion focused on housing production, permitting, and local accountability. SB 1003, by Senator Grayson, would create an Infrastructure Partnership Financing Program to help local jurisdictions and developers jointly fund infill housing infrastructure; it drew support from housing advocates and senior housing groups, while Senator Seyarto questioned whether the state would actually fund another program. The bill was moved on a 3-1 vote and remained on call. SB 1014 would require local jurisdictions to provide good-faith estimates of on-site and off-site improvements within 30 business days of a preliminary application and limit later surprise requirements; Habitat for Humanity, SPUR, and other housing groups supported it, while the City of San Mateo and local government associations raised concerns about accuracy and timing. It passed 4-2 and remained on call. SB 1036, which would require credit under the Mitigation Fee Act for prior site uses when redeveloping a site, passed unanimously to the Senate floor. SB 1145 would streamline CEQA and federal reuse review for qualifying projects at the former Concord Naval Weapons Station; it drew broad labor and local support, but housing and legal advocates sought stronger affordability and enforceability provisions. The bill passed 6-0 to the Committee on Environmental Quality. The committee also considered SB 908, which would streamline permits for energy-code-compliant residential window replacements and limit local design restrictions and HOA barriers. Supporters said the bill would let homeowners and affordable housing providers reduce energy costs, while opponents argued it could override local design standards; it passed 3-1 and remained on call. SB 1172, the Local Tax Savings Act, would add guardrails and transparency to local tax-sharing and consultant agreements; it was supported by the City of Shafter and the League of California Cities and passed 4-0 to Revenue and Taxation, remaining on call. SB 1283 would expand ministerial approval for EV charging stations to include canopies and on-site energy storage systems and require local ordinance updates by 2027; EV industry groups supported it, while cities and counties warned about safety, liability, and local review. Members discussed battery storage safety and litigation concerns, and the bill passed 4-0 to Judiciary, remaining on call. The committee also heard SB 1379, which would separate the Riverside County Sheriff-Coroner offices and create an independent medical examiner in response to in-custody death concerns. Supporters cited high death rates, settlements, and the need for independent investigations, while the sheriff’s association and county representatives argued the change would be costly, duplicate services, and override local control. The bill passed 4-1 to Public Safety and remained on call. Finally, SB 1414 would create an independent redistricting commission for San Bernardino County; supporters said it would improve transparency and remove conflicts of interest, while the county opposed the estimated $2 million cost and noted its existing advisory commission. Members generally supported independent redistricting, and the bill was discussed but no final vote was recorded in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• And Senate File 1808 is proposing funding from the Workforce Development Fund, so they've received funding
• from both Workforce Development Fund and general fund.
• :39.280> both<01:27:39.719> Workforce<01:27:40.199> Development funding from both
• Workforce Development funding from both Workforce Development Fund<01:27:41.000> and<01:27:41.199
• the Workforce Development Fund, and that is also what is being proposed in this bill.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And then page three are the non-general fund changes.
• And so the funds in that account will transfer into the general fund starting in fiscal 25.
• received their grant and to continue using those recaptured funds.
• Homes, with total development costs of nearly $1.9 billion.
• If you have the opportunity to do so, please Include additional funding priorities.

Transcript Highlights:

• Second is the DCA fund operations funding, a ceiling increase of $595,915 for the PUC to fund the operations
• >> Separate<00:44:29.200> fund. >> Separate fund. >> Separate fund.
• There is already an established creative industries development special fund.
• We're asking if revenues, or a portion of the deposit, could go into the development special fund, as
• We already have the funds; we just need increase for the stadium development of 49.5.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Funding is also important.
• Research Support Fund.
• , additional funding, and old funding.
• program. funding.
• That is a huge opportunity for TWU and Texas to leverage state funding with federal funding.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So what is the nature of the economic development, local economic development efforts in this area?
• So what is the nature of the economic development, local economic development efforts in this area?
• This funding is critical because it's needed to augment funding that has either sunset or gone away due
• So we have to spend the funds.
• I know we fund a number of them through our programs at the Small Business Development Centers.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And the second main effect is to shift $50 million of SIRP funding that was going to be funded by the
• with the private developers.
• We're aware that the original funding for iBank to fund that line was removed as part of a General Fund
• And third, exploring alternative funding sources for costs of programs currently funded by ratepayers
• Really glad to see more funding for DSGS. We're supportive of Prop. 4 funding.

Summary: The hearing was an informational budget session on energy agency proposals, with no votes taken. Early discussion focused on Proposition 4 climate bond implementation, including funding for demand-side grid support, offshore wind development, and transmission financing. The Department of Finance said the budget includes allocations for demand-side grid support and offshore wind, but not yet for the $325 million transmission financing piece pending a required study. The Legislative Analyst’s Office urged the Legislature to consider whether to wait on offshore wind funding, whether to keep shifting funds into demand-side grid support, and how to direct future transmission financing. Members also raised concerns about local technical assistance for offshore wind, Salton Sea priorities, and the need for more information before final decisions. The California Energy Commission and CPUC then reviewed the broader energy package. The CEC highlighted the demand-side grid support program’s growth, distributed energy backup assets, long-duration storage, hydrogen grants, and the SIRP clean energy reliability program. CPUC testimony emphasized affordability, wildfire mitigation costs, rooftop solar cost shifts, and efforts to reduce rates while maintaining reliability and clean energy goals. Members questioned CPUC staffing, delays in proceedings, coordination with the CEC and CAISO, and the impact of rate increases on customers. The agencies also discussed the AB 3264 transmission financing study, with CPUC saying work on the study had already begun and was on track for the July 1 deadline. Several trailer bill and implementation items were also discussed. The committee reviewed a proposal to extend the Deaf and Disabled Telecommunications Program surcharge, with members split over whether it should be handled in budget trailer bill language or policy legislation; the administration said the surcharge supports a critical program serving about three-quarters of a million Californians. The committee also heard a CPUC data-sharing proposal to allow nondisclosure agreements for transmission and reliability data, which members generally supported as a technical fix. DWR explained a proposal to clarify language for the Electricity Supply Strategic Reliability Reserve so it can potentially sell three gas-fired units it owns, and the CEC presented a federal transmission grant proposal tied to grid-enhancing technologies and ratepayer cost recovery. Finally, the committee discussed California Lifeline and possible broadband pilot reforms in light of uncertainty around federal Universal Service Fund support, with CPUC saying it is exploring a statewide standalone broadband option for eligible customers.

Transcript Highlights:

• , the opioid settlement restrictions, and the Workforce Development and Apprenticeship Trust Fund.
• Trust Fund and the Medicaid Trust Fund.
• This has been a full week of economic development, discussing the venture capital funds we have for the
• So it is done differently in different places, but generally, sovereign wealth funds are developed as
• Health Trust Fund, and the Severance Experiment Fund. fund.

Transcript Highlights:

• to municipal property taxes, relating to the Alaska Gasline Development Corporation and funds of the
• The Alaska Gasline Development Corporation's funds are reorganized.
• Alaska LNG project bond fund.
• ; relating to municipal property taxes; relating to the Alaska Gasline Development Corporation and funds
• , relating to municipal property taxes, relating to the Alaska Gas Line Development Corporation and funds

Summary: The House convened with a quorum, opened with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, and approved the journal and the prayer for the record. The clerk read gubernatorial messages calling the legislature into a third special session and describing the call around House Bill 381, a major natural gas project bill addressing property taxes, municipal taxes, AGDC, reporting requirements, contract approval, an alternative volumetric tax, municipal impact grants, and related provisions. Messages from the Senate reported passage of a Senate-amended version of HB 381 and transmission of Senate Concurrent Resolution 203 to suspend certain rules related to the bill. The House introduced HCR 301 and HCR 302. HCR 301, which suspends rules on carryover of bills into a special session, passed 40-0. The House then took up the Senate amendments to HB 381. The Majority Leader outlined the Senate changes, including new school funding provisions, reorganization and oversight of AGDC funds, a public project dashboard, stricter bond approval requirements, a heating fuel assistance fund, changes to the alternative volumetric tax structure and distribution of revenues, a permanent rather than sunsetted tax break, new deadlines tied to final investment decision and construction, and a new graduated income tax on certain pass-through entities. He urged members to vote no on concurrence, and the House rejected concurrence 12-28. Because the House did not concur, the Speaker appointed a conference committee on HB 381 consisting of Representative Schrage, the Majority Leader, Representative Edgmon, and Representative Ruffridge. HCR 302, authorizing the House and Senate to recess for more than three days, passed 40-0 after members stated the recess was intended to allow conference negotiations to continue and that the body would return on a time certain. The House also received two governor-request bills, HB 3001 and HB 3002, both referred to the Finance Committee. The House then excused several members for specified absences and adjourned until July 1 at 10:30 a.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• fund?
• Like, what is the funding mechanism?
• trying to access these funds with really small budgets.
• The Nature for All Fund could create a consistent statewide funding stream of $100 million annually without
• Existing funding sources are falling short.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee hearing covered several bills related to environmental, natural resources, and maritime issues. Representative Markey testified in support of H. 1000, which would create a commission to study financing wastewater infrastructure, especially in southeastern Massachusetts and the South Shore, citing combined sewer overflows and impacts on aquaculture. Members agreed the core challenge is finding long-term financing for wastewater solutions. The committee also heard testimony on H. 902 to establish an Office of Outdoor Recreation, with supporters describing its role in expanding access, supporting underrepresented communities, and helping grow the outdoor economy. Related testimony also supported H. 986, which would codify the Division of Ecological Restoration and the Office of Fishing and Boating Access within the Department of Fish and Game, with witnesses emphasizing habitat restoration, flood reduction, public access, and boating/fishing opportunities. A major portion of the hearing focused on H. 901/S. 597, “An Act Providing Nature for All,” which would dedicate existing sporting goods sales tax revenue to a new conservation fund. Supporters from Mass Audubon, Environmental League of Massachusetts, Appalachian Mountain Club, Trust for Public Land, Massachusetts Rivers Alliance, and conservation groups argued the bill would provide a sustainable revenue stream for land conservation, parks, trails, wetlands, water protection, and climate resilience, while also advancing environmental justice and outdoor recreation. They said the state needs roughly $300 million more per year to meet land conservation goals and that the bill could generate about $100 million annually without raising taxes. Committee members asked about balancing conservation with housing and development, and witnesses said the goals are compatible and that the bill includes safeguards. Witnesses also noted similar funding models in other states. The hearing also included H. 1053, a bill to create a Merrimack River Collaborative. Regional planning and watershed advocates said the river faces bacterial contamination, heavy metals, combined sewer overflows, and other pollution, and that a formal collaborative would help coordinate municipalities, state agencies, and nonprofits across the watershed and possibly across state lines. Another bill, H. 4109, would relocate harbor lines in New Bedford Harbor to allow reconstruction of deteriorating bulkheads at a waterfront industrial site; the New Bedford Port Authority, engineers, and the property owner said the change is needed for permitting and would support port modernization and jobs. Finally, the committee heard extensive testimony on S. 641 regarding marine pilotage in New Bedford. Supporters argued the bill would remove a District 3 pilotage restriction and improve port flexibility and offshore wind operations, while opponents warned it would undermine the state’s compulsory pilotage system, weaken safety, and allow ship owners to shop for pilots. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing.