Transcript Highlights:

• We have grinder pumps on some properties.
• My feed is on my property. The only way to get them a transformer is on my property.
• Developers don't get to just do this on their own initiative.
• the easement on that property.
• But they still have to mitigate any development on that property.

Transcript Highlights:

• Good morning, Sui Lee Alex of Sacramento Valley Small Business Development...
• in question and use those properties for community-based and focused methods.
• So whether that's land banking, land trusts, making sure that any sort of development from those properties
• than not having electricity because of development reasons.
• development.

Summary: The Assembly Economic Development, Growth, and Household Impact Committee met in person and established quorum after beginning briefly as a subcommittee. The committee adopted its rules and then heard several bills focused on economic recovery, housing, technology, retail theft, and utility infrastructure. AB 265 (Caloza) would create a $100 million state-funded small business and nonprofit recovery program for organizations affected by declared emergencies; it drew broad support from small business, nonprofit, chamber, city, and community groups, with no opposition voiced. AB 797 (Harabedian) proposed a zero-cost state financing structure using CRA-backed securities to help community nonprofits buy wildfire-damaged properties at fair market value and prevent predatory investor purchases; it was presented as a community stabilization tool and received support from the California Community Foundation, with no opposition. AB 940 (Wicks/Ellis) would establish quantum innovation zones to strengthen California’s quantum computing economy, and AB 949 (Shiavo) would create a retail theft grant program for small businesses to fund security improvements and theft prevention measures; both bills were supported by business and university witnesses, though one member said they would not vote for AB 949 due to concerns about broader crime policy. AB 1347 (Carrillo) proposed a pilot program to speed utility interconnections in priority growth regions, including allowing developers to trade expedited connections for upfront infrastructure cost recovery and use microgrids in some cases; it had no opposition in the hearing. Committee members generally expressed support for the bills, especially those aimed at disaster recovery and small business resilience. Questions on AB 940 focused on where quantum innovation zones might be located and how local governments and universities would coordinate; the author and witnesses said the zones should be open statewide and could build on existing research centers such as Berkeley, Stanford, Caltech, UCSB, UCLA, and UCSC. On AB 797, members discussed the need to protect homeowners from below-market offers after wildfires. On AB 949, the author emphasized that modest grants could help small businesses make security upgrades and prevent repeated theft losses. The committee voted to send AB 265, AB 797, AB 940, AB 949, and AB 1347 forward, generally on party-line or near-unanimous votes, with the bills reported out of committee and placed on call as needed. The consent calendar, including AB 254, AB 415, AB 655, AB 1232, AB 1254, AB 1477, and HR 27, was also approved. The hearing adjourned at 10:33 a.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• that piece of property worth?"
• So they can regulate to protect all the property owners.
• ...their property.
• We use the models to develop... Okay.
• I'm not going to criticize the Water Development Board.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• property owner doesn't own the property property owner doesn't own the property property<01:30:02.719
• Porcupine Properties. Porcupine Properties.
• :04.560> the<01:32:04.800> property property value, I'm sorry, the property property value
• . properties. properties.
• . property. property.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The meeting began with roll call and approval of the prior meeting minutes, which passed unanimously. Members then introduced the day’s presentations, including one on the Canton network and another on tokenizing real-world assets, with a focus on how blockchain systems can support regulated financial institutions and asset tokenization. Julie, the director of policy and government affairs at Digital Asset, presented on the Canton network, describing it as a privacy-enabled public blockchain designed for regulated finance. She said tokenization should preserve the same legal and economic rights as the underlying asset, and argued that blockchain-based books and records can shorten settlement times, improve 24/7 trading, and reduce friction in capital markets. She identified three main barriers to institutional adoption of public blockchains: lack of privacy, limited throughput/scalability, and lack of control for compliance purposes such as freezing assets, pausing transactions, and meeting AML/sanctions obligations. She explained Canton’s structure as a public, permissionless network with application-level privacy controls, a global synchronizer, and super validators chosen by vote. She also highlighted current ecosystem participants and use cases, including Broadridge, Circle, and the DTCC’s planned tokenization of U.S. Treasuries on the network. Members and online participants asked about the relationship between tokenized assets and the Clarity Act, tokenized deposits, safeguards for faster settlement, and whether the platform could be used for municipal or property records. Julie said Digital Asset was not taking a position on rewards, but supported clearer statutory definitions because tokenized securities should carry the same rights as the underlying assets and investors need to know whether a token is a true tokenized security or a synthetic/reference token. She said the company is agnostic on whether the cash leg is stablecoins or tokenized deposits, though it expects both to develop. In response to concerns about rapid settlement, she pointed to institution-level permissions and SEC disclosure expectations as safeguards. She also said the technology could be used for other records, including potentially property-related records, if those assets can be tokenized.

Transcript Highlights:

• The developer, we went through competition, we selected a developer.
• their development scheme.
• And what the developers, like almost every developer, put forward was a more common... ...scheme.
• We have inertia on this property, right?
• I will say that we did develop, CDT developed, when, as part of the first EO, there is a risk assessment

Summary: The hearing began with a vote-only agenda and then focused first on San Mateo County’s request to restore in-lieu vehicle license fee (VLF) funding. County officials, city leaders, labor representatives, nonprofits, and public safety advocates argued that the loss of roughly $157 million would force major cuts to homelessness services, housing assistance, mental health programs, libraries, parks, fire and police staffing, and other local services. They described the current formula as outdated and unfair, tied to school funding and basic-aid dynamics that no longer work for San Mateo County, and urged both an immediate budget restoration and a permanent legislative fix. The Department of Finance said the payments are discretionary, not statutorily required, and noted the administration does not view the expenditure as sustainable in the current fiscal climate. Committee members expressed sympathy, questioned the formula, and said they would keep the issue under consideration; the committee later voted to move the two vote-only items on the agenda. The committee then received an update from the Department of General Services on state property redevelopment, including the Hillcrest DMV site in San Diego, the Fell Street DMV site in San Francisco, and other state-owned properties. DGS explained that Hillcrest is not currently an active project, while the Fell Street project shifted from an integrated DMV-housing plan to a more feasible relocation of the DMV into leased commercial space, with a budget change proposal pending. Members pressed DGS on the slow pace of redevelopment, the potential for housing on state sites, and the costs and feasibility of adaptive reuse. DGS said many state buildings are aging and that adaptive reuse depends heavily on building design, floorplate depth, light, and risk from unknown conditions behind walls. The Government Operations portion then turned to the California Education Learning Lab, which supports intersegmental higher education innovation grants. The Lab asked for permanent restoration of $4 million in ongoing funding and a move of its home agency from the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation to GovOps, along with technical trailer bill changes. Supporters said the program has funded more than 120 projects reaching thousands of faculty and hundreds of thousands of students, including work on generative AI in higher education. The Legislative Analyst’s Office recommended rejecting the restoration and continuing the wind-down, citing the state’s projected deficit and suggesting the California Education Interagency Council could pursue non-state-funded grant opportunities instead. The committee held the item open. Finally, GovOps presented the new California Education Interagency Council staffing request, seeking four ongoing positions to support the council, with funding already included in last year’s budget. The department said the governor has appointed Debbie Cochran as executive officer and that the remaining positions are being recruited. Finance and LAO had no objections, and the committee began questions about how the council will be staffed and organized.

Transcript Highlights:

• other assistance to private development other assistance to private development projects.<00:10:
• <00:14:30.240> and completing important development and completing important development and
• <00:27:15.840> tax would go to the Helium property tax would go to the Helium property tax
• education, and community development. education, and community development.
• <00:44:15.200> tax much for tax uh public a property tax much for tax uh public a property

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

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

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Housing Finance and Affordability held its first hearing of 2025 to examine California’s housing finance system, with opening remarks emphasizing the state’s severe housing shortage, high costs, and the need for practical recommendations to the Legislature and Governor. Co-chairs described the committee as an educational and problem-solving forum focused on financing housing production, first-time homeownership, mixed-income developments, and affordability across the income spectrum. Witnesses from state agencies and the development sector were invited to explain how housing is financed and where the system is breaking down. Panelists from the California Housing Partnership, the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency, the Tax Credit Allocation Committee/State Treasurer’s Office, CalHFA, and Related outlined the “capital stack” used to finance affordable housing, stressing that projects typically rely on multiple public and private sources, including federal and state low-income housing tax credits, tax-exempt bonds, state subsidies, local funds, and rental income. Speakers noted that affordable housing rents generally cannot support full project costs without public subsidy, and that recent federal changes—especially the expansion of the 4% and 9% tax credit programs and the reduction of the bond financing threshold for 4% credits—should allow California to finance substantially more units. CalHFA also described its homeownership programs, including My Home, Dream For All, and disaster-related mortgage assistance, as well as its multifamily lending and bond issuance programs. Several witnesses and committee members emphasized that the system remains too complex, too slow, and underfunded. They pointed to the need for more state funding, a housing bond, a permanent funding source, and better coordination among agencies, while also citing recent streamlining efforts such as AB 434’s SuperNOFA, AB 519’s one-stop-shop working group, and the planned California Housing and Homeless Agency reorganization. Members raised concerns about equity, access, missing-middle housing, gender and racial disparities, and whether current programs adequately serve extremely low-income households and those at risk of homelessness. No formal votes or actions were taken during the hearing; the discussion ended with committee members and witnesses agreeing that both funding and administrative reform are needed to increase production and improve affordability.

Transcript Highlights:

• significant properties?
• significant properties?
• <01:04:07.480> developing<01:04:07.880> an requires developers developing an requires
• ; we ask of every developer.
• ; we ask of every developer.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several housing, land use, and preservation bills. HB 1008 HD2 would require the Department of Land and Natural Resources to complete historic preservation determinations for state affordable housing projects within 90 days and create sensitivity-based review pathways. HHFDC, DLNR’s State Historic Preservation Division, and written testimony from DBEDT supported the bill as an expedited process for projects unlikely to affect significant historic resources. Members asked how the bill would define significant versus non-significant historic properties, how it would interact with Kapakai analysis, and whether burial councils had been consulted; SHPD said the bill would not replace Kapakai review and that burial councils had not been included. Written support also came from OHA, Hawaii Realtors, and the Maui Chamber of Commerce. HB 1093 would clarify the Hawaii Public Housing Authority’s powers relating to housing projects. HPHA supported the measure, saying it would align definitions with prior law and help deconcentrate poverty by allowing mixed-income rebuilding. The director also said the bill was increasingly urgent because of reported federal HUD priorities that could affect public housing and Section 8 funding. HB 1096 HD1 would repeal state low-income housing preferences for disabled veterans and spouses of deceased veterans, with HPHA saying federal veteran programs such as VASH are a better mechanism and that the state preference has not been used in years. HB 1411 would allow HHFDC projects to give sale or lease preferences to applicants who live or work within five miles of a project; HHFDC and the Hawaii Chapter of NAIOP supported it as a way to keep residents connected to their communities, while members raised constitutional concerns about broader local-preference policies. The committee also heard HB 367 HD1, which would create county permit exemptions for certain agricultural and maintenance activities. Written testimony included opposition from the Department of Planning and Permitting and support from the Hawaii Farm Bureau, Grassroot Institute, and others. A public testifier opposed the bill, arguing that permit exemptions could worsen safety and compliance problems. Finally, HB 826 HD1 would allow county planning commissions, by special permit, to authorize residential housing in agricultural districts for agricultural workforce housing, long-term rental, or fee simple ownership under certain conditions. HHFDC supported it as a faster alternative to lengthy state land-use redistricting, but the Department of Agriculture, Land Use Commission, and Office of Planning and Sustainable Development raised concerns about food production impacts, due process, service provision, jurisdictional conflicts, and the use of special permits for what could amount to district boundary changes. Public testimony was mixed, with some support and some opposition. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• ownership of the property, which in turn means that the property maintains its status as taxable for
• of development, land use categories such as crop type, and proximity to a...
• in doing so is responsible for the upkeep and maintenance of the property.
• What we're doing is protecting from development. Thank you.
• We do a lot of timber sales on our property. We actively manage it.

Summary: The Agriculture and Natural Resources Budget Committee met with a quorum and heard two Department of Agriculture presentations. First, the Director of Rural and Family Lands described the Rural and Family Lands Protection Program, which buys development rights through perpetual conservation easements on private agricultural land to preserve farming, wildlife habitat, water resources, and open space while keeping land taxable and avoiding state maintenance costs. He said the program has expanded rapidly since 2023 through streamlined applications, templates, and an online portal, increasing acreage protected from about 66,000 acres through 2022 to more than 210,000 acres, with a higher share in the Florida wildlife corridor. He also said review times were reduced by more than 85 days and that projects under $5 million can move faster under statutory authority. The department is seeking $200 million in nonrecurring funding on top of $100 million recurring, citing 203 existing projects and 224 new applications totaling nearly $2 billion in estimated need. Members asked about the scientific ranking process, South Florida participation, project prioritization, maintenance responsibilities, and whether landowners can exit the program; staff said land remains privately owned, easements are in perpetuity, and partnerships and cost-sharing are prioritized. The committee then heard from the Florida Forest Service director, who outlined the agency’s dual mission of wildfire response and land management. He said the service responds to roughly 2,200 to 2,500 wildfires annually, manages 38 state forests and one ranch totaling more than 1.1 million acres, and receives about 15 million visitors each year. He highlighted the impact of Senate Bill 1638 gaming compact funds, which provided $32 million for land management, recreation, equipment, roads, invasive species control, habitat restoration, prescribed burning, reforestation, and staffing support. He said Florida leads the nation in prescribed fire, with 277,818 acres burned on state forests last year and 2.47 million acres burned statewide, and noted ongoing restoration work such as Picayune Strand. He also described challenges including aging equipment, deferred maintenance, contractor availability, and timber market instability caused by hurricanes and mill closures, and suggested longer-term funding and a higher capital asset allowance. Members discussed timber markets, public communication and marketing, recreation fees, and coordination with other agencies and FDOT. The meeting ended with the chair noting that next week’s meeting would report out agency conversations and budget recommendations, and the committee rose.

Transcript Highlights:

• If that was your property, let's say you spent 30 years, you bought your dream property, and then next
• , the property acquisition costs, the amount paid to the property owners, is a very small part of virtually
• , the property acquisition costs, the amount paid to the property owners is a very small part of virtually
• the value of the whole property.
• the value of the whole property.

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 5695, which would create the Sayers Ranch Municipal Utility District in Bastrop County between Elgin and Bastrop. Representative Gurdis said Bastrop County commissioners unanimously supported the district. There was no public testimony, the bill was left pending, and later reported favorably to the full House on an 8-0 vote. The main debate centered on Senate Bill 291, which would require condemning entities to pay landowner attorney’s fees if they fail to provide 10 years of appraisal reports with an initial offer in an eminent domain case. Supporters, including Rita Beving and Charles Maley, argued the bill would add an enforcement mechanism and better protect landowners in a process they described as intimidating and lopsided. Opponents, including Tom Zabel and Lisa Kaufman, said current law already provides a remedy through abatement and attorney’s fees under Section 21.047 of the Property Code, and warned the bill could create inconsistency, delay public infrastructure projects, and increase costs. The bill was left pending. The committee also heard House Bill 5699, a simple MUD boundary change in Harris County Municipal Utility District No. 405 that would allow a tract to leave one district and join another. Representative Schofield said the landowner and district agreed to the change and to pay the tract’s share of debt. The committee substitute was adopted and the bill was reported favorably on an 8-0 vote. Later, the committee considered House Bill 5489, which would impose a four-year moratorium on impact fees. Representative Dyson framed it as an “active study” to test whether impact fees raise housing costs. College Station officials and other opponents argued impact fees help fund infrastructure for growth and that local governments should retain control; supporters said the fees are regressive and add to housing prices. The bill was left pending. The committee then heard Senate Bill 292, which would update the Landowner Bill of Rights to add information on surveys, require separate offers for property not sought in condemnation, and require the rights document to be delivered with the initial offer. Supporters said it would improve transparency and fill gaps in the current document, while opponents said it was unnecessary because the law already exists and warned against revisiting a 2021 compromise. The transcript ends during that discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Extensive development over the last year.
• Currently developers face challenges.
• You're self-insured for property and everything.
• No, we do have property insurance.
• In the comptroller's biannual tax report, uh, property tax report 2023, property tax revenue declined

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:06:00.960> in including China from owning property in including China from owning property
• the property, accommodate the existing tenant, but be able to develop affordable housing there.
• <00:09:29.440> the develop the property um accommodate the develop the property um accommodate
• The piece of property is nice.
• would be paid for by the developers. would be paid for by the developers.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• tax yields… Homestead property tax yields, the nonhomestead property tax rate, and technical changes
• So property taxes need to increase to make up the difference.
• Property bills are going to be.
• property valuation, uh, PVR.
• impacted properties around the state.

Keywords: 926, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Gossett Seidman: and serve the new development.
• Or does the property owner?
• Their density impacts on that property and the county is telling you that the property you own you cannot
• Borrero: Get a development application reviewed.
• Developers have to go through just an egregious amount of cost and red tape in order to get a development

Transcript Highlights:

• So this chapter relates to the restrictions on the transfer of real property developed and sold under
• law they do have some Li Tech properties law they do have some Li Tech properties that<00:07:54.440
• <00:08:53.560> and support wine homelands development and support wine homelands development
• HHFDC works with developers to expedite and speed up the 201H process while working with developers and
• HHFDC works with developers to expedite and speed up the 201H process while working with developers and

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on SB 834, which would change restrictions on transfers of real property under chapter 201H, HRS, and was discussed in the context of Hawaiian homelands and HHFDC-funded projects. Supporters, including HHFDC, DHHL, and individual testifiers, said the bill would clarify that Hawaiian homelands should not be subject to the 201H buyback and appreciation restrictions, while preserving affordability requirements tied to federal mortgage and tax credit programs. HHFDC explained that the main concern was the buyback/share-appreciation provisions, especially for DHHL projects using LIHTC or similar financing, and said aligning the statute with DHHL’s program goals would not be a problem. Members questioned whether removing the restrictions could weaken affordability protections, and whether the state could still prioritize beneficiaries and workforce housing, but no vote was taken in the portion provided. The committee then took up SB 759, which would add the DHHL chairperson or designee to the HHFDC board of directors and adjust quorum requirements. DHHL and several supporters argued the measure would give Hawaiian Homes a seat at the table, improve access to HHFDC funding sources such as tax credits, private activity bonds, and revolving funds, and help leverage limited resources to reduce the Hawaiian Homes waitlist. One testifier supported the bill but urged safeguards to prevent favoritism or abuse of power, and another raised concerns about whether a DHHL representative would need to recuse from voting on projects involving DHHL. HHFDC testified that DHHL projects still must compete under the same criteria and set-asides as other applicants, and that the board already includes multiple public and executive representatives. Members pressed on whether DHHL could achieve the same informational goals without a voting seat, and whether the added board role would create leverage or conflicts. The DHHL witness said a nonvoting role could provide information, but a voting seat would be more useful for decision-making and advocacy. The discussion also covered DHHL’s use of LIHTC, rent-to-own models, transitional housing, and other layered financing, as well as the broader need to coordinate state housing resources. The transcript ends during continued questioning, with no final committee action or vote shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• actually present on that property. actually present on that property.
• Um, if it's private property, um, there's private property rights.
• Representative Dvito: Thank you. onto your property without the property onto your property without the
• our property.
• . property. property.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We built point clouds, and then we developed and actually developed this map that you guys see there
• Because you can work on private property.
• So the property continues to comply with property requirements.
• get property insurance.
• New Mexico Property Insurance Program.

Transcript Highlights:

• PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT SORT OF GOES ALONG WITH THAT.
• INSURANCE COMPANIES ARE USING AI TO HELP DEVELOP THOSE PRODUCTS.
• PROPERTY INSURANCE CURRENTLY USE AI MORE THAN, FOR EXAMPLE, MEDICAL INSURANCE?
• PROPERTY INSURANCE VERSUS A MALPRACTICE INSURANCE. RIGHT?
• IT IS DEVELOPING. TO YOUR POINT, THAT IS THE HOPEFUL AND EXPECTED RESULT.

Transcript Highlights:

• On your property and give us assurances.
• Research and development to assist the travel industry with reporting and tourism development.
• I was privileged to serve on the Economic Development Advisory Council that helped economic development
• So, and that's basically when our policies have the incentive incentivizing development... development
• We put up a high fence. on our property, and it quickly developed into a breeding operation that started

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• property for $79,000 in the open market. property for $79,000 in the open market.
• in acquiring these subject properties. in acquiring these subject properties.
• directed toward their own property. directed toward their own property.
• . properties. properties.
• They are accessing that property from there. We feel it's an acceptable use of the property.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The committee approved the minutes from its September 29 meeting and then took up a series of Department of Transportation and Department of Administrative Services property actions. Several DOT items involved disposal of land originally acquired for the now-dissolved Conway bypass or other highway projects, including a 445.6-acre Conway parcel proposed for sale to the town of Conway for conservation use, a 1.78-acre Chesterfield parcel for sale to an abutter, a 6.13-acre Madison parcel tied to the Conway bypass, and a bulk disposal package of 22 improved parcels in Merrimack, Litchfield, and Hudson. Members asked about appraisals, conservation easements, federal funding restrictions, tenant occupancy, and whether the state would recover its original investment; DOT said values were based on appraisal or market analysis, federal reimbursements may be required where federal funds were used, and proceeds from turnpike-related property would return to the turnpike fund. All of these disposal motions were approved. The committee also approved several DOT lease/easement items. These included a Greenfield railroad-corridor lease for equestrian use, a Lake Winnipesaukee dock lease to CE Realty Trust, a similar dock lease to Needle Eye Association, and an easement in Carroll for Industrial Wireless to build a private road and cross Mount Deception Brook for a cell tower project. Members focused on maintenance responsibilities, liability insurance, access limitations, fencing, and the relationship between the railroad corridor and adjacent uses. DOT said lessees would be responsible for maintenance, access to the railroad would be restricted, and liability insurance would be included where appropriate. The committee also approved a separate easement for Eversource in Rochester to install utility lines serving the new courthouse, with the department explaining that the easement is a narrow strip needed to complete construction. The Department of Administrative Services received approval for a use-of-premises agreement allowing Rockingham County to lease 300 square feet in the Brentwood courthouse for office space, and for a perpetual utility easement in Rochester for Eversource, with a waiver of the administrative fee. The committee also heard that the Rochester courthouse project needs the utility work to finish construction. Throughout the meeting, members repeatedly asked about insurance, public access, valuation, and whether tenants or abutters would have first opportunity to buy or lease the affected properties. All motions before the committee were adopted.