Transcript Highlights:

• Three of them are covering the cost for.
• </c><01:00:33.800><c> by</c> CAT assessment is actually covered by CAT assessment is actually covered
• Um did not want They wanted an independent entity to make that recommendation.
• Um did not want They wanted an independent entity to make that recommendation.
• All of these private entities skim a little bit off the Medicaid funding, right?

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The commission on the costing of special education met to review several documents and updates, including draft materials on residential placements, an LBA dispute resolution report, prior minutes, rate-setting rules, and a letter involving Senator Hassan. The minutes from March 16 were approved by motion, second, and one abstention. Members also received an update that the LBA special education performance audit is still pending; the report is expected to be very large, NHED and the Board of Education must review and comment before release, and it likely will not be available until late summer or early fall. The separate EFA audit was also noted as still unreleased, and members said they may return later to issues involving EFA costing and differentiated aid. A major focus was HB 1099, which would create a committee to study the cost and liability of providing educational services to students placed in residential facilities. The chair explained that the House version had passed unanimously and the bill was headed to a committee of conference. Members discussed a proposed amendment to add the phrase “including but not limited to” so the study would cover not only court-ordered or treatment-related placements but also other residential placements, including those tied to school district decisions. Some members said this was a substantial expansion, while others said it would simply give the committee broader latitude. Jason Stock of the Winnisquam Regional School Board described how the issue arose during budget work at Winnisquam, where the district was trying to determine who should pay for educational services for students living at Spaulding Youth Center in Northfield. He said the district had 10 students attending Winnisquam, including three foster students and seven students connected to Spaulding, and that Spaulding-specific invoicing for 2024-2025 totaled $141,417.05 for eight students. Members also discussed rising private placement tuition costs and the difficulty of determining residency and fiscal responsibility for students placed in residential settings. Department counsel explained that under RSA 193:27 and 193:28, children placed in a home for children may attend the local district school, and that special education cost responsibility depends on whether the student is identified as disabled and on the nature of the placement. Spaulding representatives had not yet presented by the end of the excerpt, and the committee was still working through the residency and funding questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I have to say and add that it covers from the northern part of Grand Canyon all the way into the
• Gowan and Senator Grant, or Representative Grantham, was for to cover every fire district in the state
• So he did a great job covering the bill itself.
• Chairman, Senator Hatathlie, we issue loans and grants throughout the state to multiple tribal entities
• Where I would need to get further clarification is at the chapter level, if they would be the entity

Bills: SB1041, SB1363, SB1418, SB1419, SB1445, SB1447, SB1488, SB1519, SB1523, SB1560, SB1580

Keywords: electronic monitoring, nursing care, assisted living, resident rights, privacy, consent, surveillance, marijuana, rural opportunity, dispensary, economic development, licensing, social equity, unserved communities, Arizona, small modular reactors, energy regulation, environmental compatibility, utility construction, agricultural use

Transcript Highlights:

• So, can you just clarify what a red bridge—that's a category—but I mean that's got to cover a range of
• Compliance with this section by municipal and county entities shall be contingent on available funding
• </c><01:27:14.960><c> but</c> for not only the uh private entities but for not only the uh private entities
• And is this intended to use the cover salt that's used on roads?
• </c> cover salt that's used on roads? cover salt that's used on roads?

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• entities under Proposition 12.
• entities under Proposition 12.
• AB 1592 covers the same issue.
• AB 1592 covers the same issue.
• AB 1592 covers the same issue.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So is it different for those covered by Medicaid? Mr. Speaker, gentlelady, thank you.
• Speaker, gentlelady, would it be safe for me to say that some kids would not be covered?
• Covered, not all.
• For those that are covered under that avenue, is that correct, Mr. Speaker, gentlelady?
• So would insurance then be forced to cover them with no cost sharing?

Transcript Highlights:

• Voc Rehab and Blind Services are two different budget entities.
• It is not a degree-granting entity; rather, it's a certificate-granting entity.
• Over half of the entities that we surveyed don't keep their patches up to date.
• And, of course, many of our programs and our grants cover a job coach.
• And, of course, many of our programs and our grants cover a job coach.

Summary: The committee held its first meeting of the session and received an overview of the Higher Education Appropriations budget from staff director Tim Elwell. He explained the committee’s broad jurisdiction over universities, state colleges, district workforce programs, vocational rehabilitation, blind services, student financial aid, private colleges, and the Board of Governors, and reviewed key budget concepts such as local funds, funds per FTE, performance funding, and the distinction between the total appropriation and the recurring base budget. He noted that higher education is funded largely through state and local sources, with substantial flexibility compared with other state budgets, and that the base budget is heavily weighted toward lump-sum allocations to the public systems. The committee then heard a presentation from the University of South Florida’s Florida Center for Cybersecurity (Cyber Florida), led by retired Marine Gen. Frank McKenzie and USF representative Mark Walsh. They described Cyber Florida as a statewide cybersecurity platform created by the Legislature in 2014 to support education, research, workforce development, public policy, and community engagement. McKenzie emphasized the growing cyber threat environment, Florida’s leadership role, and several funded initiatives, including K-12 outreach, workforce training, a cyber range for county governments, critical infrastructure assessments, grant development, and public conferences and outreach. Members asked about public cyber awareness, the lack of a national cyber defense strategy, school district participation in Cyber Launch, and which counties are most at risk; McKenzie said smaller counties with limited cybersecurity staffing are generally more vulnerable and offered to provide follow-up information. Finally, the committee heard from the Florida Center for Students with Unique Abilities at the University of Central Florida, led by Dr. Drew Andrews, along with program and parent representatives from participating institutions. Andrews explained the center’s role in coordinating Florida’s postsecondary comprehensive transition programs for students with intellectual disabilities, supporting program development, distributing grants and scholarships, and monitoring outcomes. He reported that the state now has 33 approved programs at 35 institutions, including universities, state colleges, and technical colleges, and that scholarship and grant funding has grown significantly. He said student retention is about 88 percent, many graduates are employed, and median hourly earnings have increased over time. A representative from Southeastern University described how the center’s support helped build and sustain SEU Link, including a new third-year employment-focused option for students.

Transcript Highlights:

• Under current law, taxing entities may notify the public about rate changes by mail, Senator Betancourt
• HB 17 requires taxing entities to mail notice to every property owner in a tax rate hearing while still
• HB 17 will require taxing entities to provide uniform, easy to understand notices, empowering Texans
• OK, but that's what I think covers it.
• I would think all the taxing entities would Kelly Rasty: try to help drive people to that.

Bills: HB17, HB23

Keywords: property tax, school funding, enrollment changes, inflation adjustment, tax rate notice, property tax exemption, ad valorem tax, Texas Tax Code, nonprofit corporation, charitable organization, educational nonprofit, scientific nonprofit, agriculture support, youth programs, community education, county population threshold, large county, local government revenue, leasehold interest, possessory interest

Transcript Highlights:

• So, it did uh deny credit to entity tax.
• And so, if the entity doesn't pay, you know, the credit is the idea is so you don't have to pay twice
• Whereas these entities typically have property tax levy authority, the bill would deny that authority
• But and did you cover maybe I was distracted the last one on, uh, on other items to consider?
• But and did you Did you<00:42:14.320><c> cover</c> you cover you cover Maybe<00:42:15.960><c> I</c><00

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And then when you go to line 37, there will not be increased employee compensation to cover union dues
• So no additional unions are covered by this.
• Representative, it's all of the above, everything that's covered in the bill. Okay, follow up.
• If the unions are paying for my time, then the union's covering the bill and not the taxpayer.
• As has been stated previously, unions are private entities. They operate as private entities.

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes from February 17 and introduced a new page. It then took up Senate Bill 1261, which would add the word “appointed” to code so that an appointed officeholder is treated the same as an elected one after a resignation and appointment. There was no opposition, and the committee voted to send SB 1261 to the floor with a do-pass recommendation. The main item was House Bill 745, a proposal by Rep. Judy Boyle to bar school districts from using public funds or payroll systems for certain union-related activities. Boyle said the bill would stop districts from paying union dues, increasing compensation to cover dues, providing paid leave for union work, sharing extra personal information with unions, or distributing union communications, while exempting police and firefighter unions and preserving collective bargaining. Committee members pressed her on why teachers were singled out, how the bill fit with existing law, and whether the claimed $1.2 million fiscal impact was consistent with the fiscal note. Boyle said the bill was aimed at keeping taxpayer money in classrooms and that some districts already use public funds for union-related costs. Public testimony on HB 745 was split. Supporters, including representatives of the Freedom Foundation, Americans for Prosperity, the National Right to Work Committee, parents, taxpayers, and several teachers or school employees, argued that payroll deductions, paid release time, and district support for union activities improperly subsidize private political organizations and should be paid for by unions themselves. Opponents, including the Idaho Education Association, the AFL-CIO, a superintendent, and an educator, argued the bill is aimed at teachers’ unions, is not neutral because it excludes police and fire, could interfere with local community events and school partnerships, and may create legal and administrative problems. No final vote on HB 745 was taken in the portion provided; testimony continued with the bill still under consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• So that's an ongoing conversation that's always going on with all the entities involved.
• In total, the $120 covers the three months.
• If there is a crop loss, it will raise the amount that is covered.
• Why weren't we covering the entire handout?
• state funding and covering it in that way.

Transcript Highlights:

• They cover Canada, the United States, and a small part of northern Mexico.
• They cover Canada, the United States, and a small part of northern Mexico.
• So it covers a bunch of kinds of payment issues. Okay.
• It covers a bunch of kinds of payment issues. Okay.
• I know you mentioned some of the entities, because I think that was going to be my question.

Bills: HB241, HB267, HB467, HB673, HB744, HB798, HB1026, HB1027, HB1091, HB1096, HB1103, HB1212, HB1230

Keywords: financial records, consumer protection, banking law, disclosure, service of process, home inspectors, board membership, licensing, term limits, Louisiana State Board, residential roof, coastal zone, fortified roof, building standards, construction code, insurance, hurricane resilience, safety, security cameras, abandoned property

Transcript Highlights:

• I know because we picked, you said we picked some cases to go after court costs and cover you guys, and
• any of those kind of employment termination, or would UAMS be responsible for covering any of those
• Later, there is another corporate entity of Blue Oak that returned some money to investors, including
• How is that even an entity that can bring a claim? Your Honor, what are... That's okay.
• These were separate entities altogether.

Summary: The committee first reviewed litigation reports from the Department of Labor and Licensing involving wage claims brought under the Arkansas Minimum Wage Act. Members questioned the department’s authority, jurisdiction, use of attorney fees and costs, and whether defendants had to be licensed. The department explained it has long enforced wage and overtime laws, that the claims were small-dollar cases handled by investigators and counsel, and that one case had been paid and dismissed while others were unresolved or had service issues. The committee voted to review or batch-file the labor cases after discussion. The University of Arkansas System then reported three pending lawsuits: an age- and race-discrimination claim by a tenured professor that was resolved early; an ADA/FMLA retaliation claim by a former employee that survived in part on a motion to dismiss and was moving into discovery; and a Section 1983 claim against a UAMS sergeant arising from a parking-ticket dispute, with the university explaining that only punitive damages could create personal exposure for the officer. The committee reviewed each report and voted to accept them. The Department of Finance and Administration presented a proposed tax settlement reducing a sales-and-use tax assessment from about $48,000 to $20,000 and waiving interest and penalties, which the committee approved for review. The Claims Commission then presented several claims: an unpaid salary differential for a Department of Health employee, reissued warrants, unpaid DHS bills, and multiple negotiated settlements involving ATRS, UAMS, Arkansas State Police, and ARDOT. Members approved or affirmed most of these items, including a $65,000 settlement in the Tetronics/ATRS matter, a $150,000 medical-negligence settlement, and several vehicle-accident settlements. The most extended debate involved a tax-delinquent property sale claim by Sharon Greer and relatives. The claimant argued they were not properly notified and sought the $4,200 excess from the 2009 sale. Land Commissioner counsel explained the excess had escheated to the county after the statutory claim period expired, while members debated sovereign immunity, standing, heirs, and whether the committee could or should award money anyway. The committee ultimately chose to hold the matter over for further review in a future joint session rather than decide it immediately. The committee also heard appeals from dismissed claims, including a UAMS medical-negligence claim, a land-sale notice claim, a pothole claim against ARDOT, and a judicial-immunity claim against the Court of Appeals; most dismissals were affirmed, and the Simpson matter was held over for additional review after the claimant testified.

Transcript Highlights:

• I know because we picked, you said we picked some cases to go after court costs and cover you guys, and
• any of those kind of employment termination, or would UAMS be responsible for covering any of those
• Later, there is another corporate entity of Blue Oak that returned some money to investors, including
• How is that even an entity that can bring a claim? Your Honor, what are... That's okay.
• These were separate entities altogether.

Summary: The committee first reviewed several wage-claim and labor-related litigation reports from the Department of Labor and Licensing. Members questioned the department’s authority and jurisdiction, whether it was acting like a court, and why it sought attorney’s fees and costs. Department staff explained that the claims arose under the Arkansas Minimum Wage Act and related labor statutes, that the department investigates small wage claims and can file suit when informal resolution fails, and that filing fees are waived by statute though service costs may be incurred. The committee reviewed individual cases, including one where the employer had not proven cash payments, another that had already been paid and dismissed, and a third where service could not yet be completed. The committee then voted to review or batch-file the labor items. The University of Arkansas System then reported on three pending lawsuits under the litigation-notification statute. One case involving a tenured professor alleging age and race discrimination had already been resolved and dismissed after the university re-engaged in discussions about a position. A second case involving a former employee alleging ADA and FMLA retaliation was moving forward after partial dismissal and an answer denying liability. A third case involved a former vendor employee alleging retaliation tied to a parking ticket; members asked about individual-capacity exposure for a university police sergeant, and counsel explained that punitive damages could potentially create personal exposure. The committee reviewed each report. The Department of Finance and Administration presented a proposed tax settlement reducing a sales-and-use tax assessment from about $48,000 to $20,000, with interest and penalties waived, and the committee approved it. The Claims Commission then presented several claims and settlements, including an unpaid salary differential for the Department of Health, reissued warrants, unpaid bills for DHS, and multiple negotiated settlements involving UAMS, Arkansas State Police, and ARDOT; these were generally approved or batched for approval. The most extensive discussion involved a settlement between the Teacher Retirement System and Tetronics International Limited in liquidation, arising from losses tied to the failed Blue Oak project; members questioned the company’s liquidation status, the prior investment loss, and why the matter was settling for $65,000, and the committee ultimately affirmed the settlement. The committee also heard a disputed tax-sale claim involving the Commissioner of State Lands, where a claimant argued that excess proceeds from a 2009 tax sale should have gone to her family rather than escheating to the county. After testimony from the claimant and counsel, members debated sovereign immunity, heirship, and whether the committee could or should award the $4,200 overage. The motion was amended and then replaced with a motion to hold the matter over for further review in a future joint session, which passed. Finally, the committee considered an appeal by Andrew Simpson challenging dismissal of his claim against the Arkansas Court of Appeals; after Simpson and court staff explained the underlying dispute, the committee reviewed the dismissal and the matter was held over for further consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• The first page here covers the largest funds: the Land Grant Permanent Fund, Severance Tax.
• If you go to page five, this slide covers the same sort of information regarding some of our older, but
• Finally, just because it's a different type of investment, I want to cover Harvest SIC fund.
• How are you working with these entities to ensure that you're at the table?
• It's really the work of both entities that resulted in that $1.2 billion project being announced.

Transcript Highlights:

• families to have more options in homeownership opportunities while working along with a nonprofit entity
• families to have more options in homeownership opportunities while working along with a nonprofit entity
• families to have more options in homeownership opportunities while working along with a nonprofit entity
• But now we're introducing another entity to come in and buy homes as well when we can't build fast enough
• But now we're introducing another entity to come in positioning.

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Housing and Community Development met first as a subcommittee because quorum was initially lacking, then later established quorum and heard five housing-related bills. AB 748 would require local governments to create preapproved housing plan programs for single-family and small multifamily projects under 10 units, expanding a model already used for ADUs; the author and Habitat for Humanity argued it would save time and money, and there was no opposition. The committee later passed AB 748 unanimously to the Assembly Committee on Local Government. AB 739 would require managing agents for common interest developments to provide HOAs a summary of fees charged and paid to management companies. Realtors and community managers supported the bill as a transparency measure, while the California Association of Community Managers initially opposed it but said it would remove opposition if committee amendments were adopted to avoid blanket mailings and cost increases. The committee adopted the amendments and passed AB 739 7-0 to Appropriations. AB 939 would remove the 180-day resale restriction for certain income-restricted for-sale units when a developer is under contract with a qualified nonprofit affordable housing organization, allowing units to be sold sooner to low-income buyers. Habitat for Humanity, the California Building Industry Association, and several housing groups supported the measure as a no-cost fix to reduce vacancy and carrying costs, while the California Association of Realtors opposed it, warning it could create a right of first refusal and set a precedent affecting property rights and competition. After discussion about the narrow scope and committee amendments, the bill passed 6-1 to Appropriations. AB 1070 would direct the state to study and potentially modernize building code treatment for small, middle-housing projects so that low-rise buildings with three to ten units could be regulated more like residential structures rather than commercial ones. Supporters said the current code makes small multifamily projects unnecessarily expensive and that other states have adopted similar approaches; there was no opposition. The committee passed AB 1070 unanimously to Appropriations. Finally, AB 1184, by the vice chair, would increase HOA transparency and resident access to records, including recordings of HOA meetings; it had no witnesses in opposition and passed 8-0 as amended to Appropriations. After the meeting, absent members later added votes, and the final recorded votes were 10-1 for AB 939, 11-0 for AB 1070 and AB 1184, and unanimous support for AB 739 and AB 748.

Transcript Highlights:

• Department of Health and Human Services, the plan covers a wide variety of topic areas pertaining to
• California Community Action and CSBG-eligible entities have long been leaders in this national community
• Knight, could you talk about how CalCAPA has supported CSBG entities with the implementation of CalAIM
• And NCIDC also contracts directly with each tribal government or their designated tribal entity.
• I'll speak maybe on behalf of counties and public entities.

Summary: The Senate and Assembly Human Services Committees held a special oversight hearing on California’s 2026-27 Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) state plan, a federal anti-poverty funding stream. Committee members opened by citing statewide poverty and homelessness data and said the hearing was meant to review how CSBG dollars are used, how local agencies respond to community needs, and how the state is preparing for possible federal funding cuts. Jason Wimbley of the Department of Community Services and Development (CSD) explained that California’s CSBG network works through 60 organizations in 58 counties, serving about 1.5 million low-income Californians in 2023, and that the state received $68.4 million in federal CSBG funds in fiscal year 2025. He described the program as flexible funding used for housing, employment, education, food, health, transportation, and emergency response, and noted that the federal administration had proposed eliminating CSBG, though the Senate Appropriations Committee had voted to fully fund it for the coming year. Representatives from the California Community Action Partnership Association and several CSBG-funded agencies described how the program supports local anti-poverty work and leverages other funding. CalCAPA emphasized local flexibility, workforce development, partnerships, and data systems such as ROMA, while also warning that agencies are preparing for possible reductions by tightening budgets, planning staffing contingencies, and seeking private foundation support. Agency witnesses from Contra Costa County, Northern California Indian Development Council, Proteus, and Sacred Heart Community Service described services including housing assistance, food distribution, utility help, employment training, youth programs, and culturally specific services for Native communities and migrant farmworkers. They repeatedly said CSBG is essential because it funds staffing and infrastructure that allow them to braid other grants and serve people who do not qualify for standard safety-net programs. Members also asked about the impact of federal staffing changes and the Los Angeles fires. Wimbley said federal layoffs had affected some CSD programs but not CSBG administration, and that the department coordinated disaster response with state agencies and used CSBG-funded supply distribution, food, water, clothing, and documentation support during the fires. Witnesses said they were preparing for possible future cuts by diversifying funding, reducing expenses, and considering service changes, while county officials warned that state and federal reductions could not be backfilled locally. During public comment, one speaker urged stronger oversight of community action agencies and raised concerns about transparency and compliance with state law. The chair then thanked the witnesses, emphasized the importance of CSBG for low-income seniors, youth, and people with disabilities, and adjourned the hearing without any votes or formal action taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• These plans establish the framework to ensure that all entities are adequately prepared to deal with
• The Recovery Bureau works to maximize disaster assistance to eligible public entities, individuals and
• An agency or an entity that we could not be here without are our linemen, and those are the folks in
• All entities that were safely able to receive power were restored within four days.
• This is the first time we've had 200 miles of interstate covered in inches of snow.

Summary: The Natural Resources and Disaster Subcommittee met to continue its review of hurricane impacts and state response. The committee first heard from the Florida Division of Emergency Management, which described its four core functions—preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation—and highlighted its 24/7 State Watch Office, regional training efforts, and disaster assistance work. Deputy Executive Director Keith Pruitt detailed the state’s 2024 storm response, including Hurricanes Debby, Helene, and Milton, citing large-scale mission support, flood-control deployments, meal and water distribution, power restoration, debris removal, and billions in disaster funding and mitigation dollars. He also discussed debris management challenges and recommended that local governments update and exercise debris plans and maintain contingency contracts.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think that answer covers everything that I was going to ask, so thank you so much.
• Who covers these costs in the hospital if the birth mom changes her mind?
• This bill expands this authority to allow any entity in Texas to adopt an EpiPen policy.
• And finally... ...of graduate medical education entities in foreign countries also.
• Wolfson have covered quite a bit of ground here.

Bills: HB163, HB216, HB721, HB2035, HB2038, HB3057, HB3153, HB3233, HB3595, HB3801, HB3812, HB4076, HB4129, HB4377, HB4535, HB4666, HB4730, HB4743, HB4903, HB5149, HB5155, HB1534

Keywords: epinephrine, healthcare, emergency response, administration, medical policy, health care, itemized billing, patient rights, provider regulations, Texas Health and Safety Code, cost disclosure, insurance, benefit plan, administrators, chemical dependency, treatment facilities, minor admissions, parental notice, mental health, medical licensing

Summary: The committee met without a quorum at first, then established a quorum with five members present. Members heard and left pending several House bills, including HB 4743 on allowing hospitals to license mobile stroke units under a hospital license, HB 4129 on earlier DFPS enforcement tools for single-source continuum contractors in community-based foster care, HB 4903 creating a Quad Agency Child Care Initiative to coordinate child care regulations across state agencies, HB 3812 revising the gold card/prior authorization process for physicians, HB 4535 requiring written informed consent before COVID-19 vaccination and a standardized state information sheet, and HB 4666 reducing the frequency of some HHSC reports to the legislature. The chair also noted HB 35 would be voted on later after a subcommittee back was received, and that a large number of bills would be heard the next day. Most of the testimony focused on HB 4535 and HB 4730. On HB 4535, supporters argued the bill would strengthen informed consent for COVID vaccination by requiring written consent and clearer state-level information about risks, manufacturer liability protections, and adverse-event reporting; opponents, including a pediatrician and medical groups, said existing federal and state informed-consent materials already cover these topics and warned the bill could create duplicative paperwork and penalties. On HB 3812, the Texas Medical Association supported changes that would extend the gold-card evaluation period to one year, raise transparency, and make prior authorization exemptions easier to administer, while health plans said they were neutral and viewed the bill as a balance between reducing burden and preventing fraud or unsafe care. HB 4730 drew extensive testimony from adoption professionals, birth mothers, adoptive parents, and child welfare advocates. The bill would require DFPS to create a relinquishment form, train child-placing agency staff, and extend the minimum waiting period for voluntary relinquishment from 48 hours to seven days. Supporters of the current law argued the 48-hour period aligns with hospital discharge, allows informed decisions, and helps birth parents and adoptive families begin healing and bonding without pushing children into foster care or creating legal and Medicaid complications. The author said the bill would be revised and that the seven-day provision was a work in progress. No votes were taken on the bills during the meeting; each bill was left pending after public testimony closed.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, the, uh, other types of institutions are accredited by accrediting entities that are affiliated with
• Uh, institution may be accredited by an entity other than, uh, one of those regional accreditors, but
• Lastly, users can also estimate wages needed for full-time worker to cover the cost of basic household
• Title IV federal financial aid, we must be accredited by a US Department of Education recognized entity
• Um, do you know if many private entities have withdrawn funds from your foundation due to some of the

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair Gleeson, I think, has covered that very adequately.
• I mean, we're going to just cover up West Texas with...
• It's going to be all covered up with panels everywhere.
• Covered up with electric lines. Totally covered up with electric lines. It's right there.
• I even shot my last album cover there.

Summary: The Senate Business and Commerce Committee held its third interim hearing on Texas electric grid reliability and 765 kV transmission lines/private property rights. Chair Schwertner opened by noting record ERCOT summer demand of 91,089 MW and emphasized the committee’s focus on managing rapid load growth, ensuring adequate generation, and protecting homeowners, businesses, landowners, and ratepayers. The committee also adopted strict two-minute limits for public testimony and planned to hear invited witnesses first, then public testimony. PUC Chairman Thomas Gleeson, ERCOT CEO Pablo Vegas, and OPUC Chief Counsel Benjamin Barclay testified on Senate Bill 6 implementation, large-load interconnection, transmission cost allocation, and market design. Gleeson said the PUC has adopted or is finalizing rules on net metering/co-location, large load interconnection standards, and a transmission cost recovery rule that would move from 4CP to 12CP, lengthen the interval to 30 minutes, and add a minimum demand charge to better allocate costs to large loads. Vegas explained ERCOT’s new batch process for large loads, saying it provides year-by-year capacity allocations, clearer financial obligations, and a transmission plan; he reported 205 GW eligible for Batch Zero, with 65 GW classified as baseload, 25 GW in an intermediate category, and 114 GW as allocated load. Barclay supported the changes as better protection for residential and small commercial customers, while warning that the minimum demand charge may need an exit-fee concept to address stranded costs if large loads leave. Members pressed witnesses on whether additional market changes are needed to attract dispatchable thermal generation and whether DRS/DRRS Plus could become a capacity-market substitute. Gleeson and Vegas said the current market still favors solar, batteries, and other low-variable-cost resources, and that more incentives may be needed for gas and other thermal generation; Gleeson said the commission’s reliability standard assessment will begin this year and conclude next year with a 2029 outlook. They described DRS as an ancillary service for intraday reliability and DRS Plus as a proposed real-time revenue mechanism for thermal resources during scarcity, not a forward capacity market. Senators also questioned whether 12CP could still be gamed, whether curtailment authority under SB 6 should be expanded from EEA 2 to earlier stages, and whether the batch process should be bifurcated so traditional industrial loads are handled differently from data centers. Witnesses said the batch process is intended to prevent speculative projects from driving transmission costs, that most large-load projects are data centers, and that future rules may need to better distinguish among types of large loads.