Transcript Highlights:

• If it's about as clear as mud, and so just requiring that transparent budgeting process, and you may
• And then, particularly now that Workforce Pell is coming out, having a very clear process for calling
• You may as a state to say, well, we want every local area to have to go through this process.
• The letter is before y'all that we are still working through the process.
• It always depends on the review process and the questions and answers that we get back.

Summary: The committee heard a presentation from Nick Moore, Acting Assistant Secretary of the Office of Career and Technical Education, focused on integrating workforce, education, training, and human services systems. Moore argued that WIOA, Perkins, and ESSA should be aligned more closely, with fewer federal and state bureaucratic layers, more state flexibility, and a stronger emphasis on labor force participation, postsecondary attainment, and training tied to in-demand jobs. He said the federal agencies are moving toward combined plan timelines for 2026, encouraged states to pursue combined plans and waivers, and described efforts to streamline reporting, reduce administrative overhead, and expand tools such as integrated intake, cross-training, virtual and mobile service delivery, apprenticeship, and talent marketplaces. Moore also emphasized accountability and outcomes, saying states should measure training-related employment, retention, and the share of funds going to direct services rather than administration. He criticized the current workforce system as too costly and ineffective, and said states should use primary labor market information, better wage records, and employer input to align training with actual job demand. Members asked about balancing flexibility with accountability, the role of employers versus postsecondary institutions, serving rural “training deserts,” state waivers, and data-sharing systems such as Mississippi’s workforce technology efforts. Moore said states can use waivers and technology to create common intake and co-enrollment across programs, and that enhanced wage records are key to better workforce planning. The committee then received a separate update from DHS Secretary Janet Mann and Director Jay Hill on reimbursement rates for aging and adult behavioral health services. They said DHS had compiled more than 100 public comments, submitted a recommendation to the governor to hold current rates, and was awaiting executive review, which they estimated could take 30 to 60 days. Members asked about the timeline and the scope of the legislation requiring monthly reports. The meeting ended with notice of a later audit presentation scheduled for 1:00 p.m. at the Big Mac building.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have an enforcement process, we have a licensing process, we have a criminal history process, and
• Another option would be for certificate holders to still go through the licensing process.
• process and then backfill any other outstanding requirements that they haven't had.
• It would require, I guess, significant more review and more familiarity with their processes.
• Budgeting is the cornerstone of the legislative process, as I know this body knows, absolutely.

Bills: HB5208, SB863, SB1243, SB1624, SB1965, SB2660, SB2702, SB2885

Keywords: water filtration, public drinking water, health and safety, well maintenance, water quality, Edwards Aquifer, water conservation, reclaimed water, aquifer storage, environmental protection, public utility agency, dissolution, local government, regulatory framework, municipal authority, Texas Water Bank, Texas Water Trust, water rights, water banking, instream flow

Transcript Highlights:

• process more reasonable for real people. process more reasonable for real people.
• Currently, that's how the process works. We process the applications the same day we receive them.
• Um our we process the process works.
• background check process." background check process." >> Anybody<01:29:55.840> else?
• the process. Thank you. Thank you, sir. the process. Thank you. Thank you, sir.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• school in the process school in the process great<00:32:58.720> thank<00:32:58.919> you
• out on you know less than a fair process out on you know less than a fair process imagine<02:08:
• <02:25:52.920> that's third third party to a process that's third third party to a process
• <02:34:33.279> procedures have extensive due process procedures have extensive due process
• <02:42:04.000> but that the students got due process but that the students got due process

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee held a hearing on HB 366, which would increase school building aid for eligible projects. Representative Cahill, the prime sponsor, said the bill would raise the annual minimum from $50 million to $60 million and help address a long backlog of school construction and renovation needs after years of a moratorium on applications. He argued that districts forced to build during the moratorium were left to shoulder costs through local property taxes, and he cited examples such as Londonderry, Claremont, and other communities with aging or inadequate facilities. He also said the current aid structure, including paying 80% upfront and 20% at completion, concentrates too much spending at once and limits how many projects can be funded. Several committee members asked about the fairness and structure of the program. Representative Maguire questioned whether aid should be distributed more broadly to all districts rather than only a few selected projects, and Representative Luneau noted that the committee would also be considering related bills on catastrophic aid, special education aid, and the school foundation formula. Cahill responded that building aid has historically been targeted to property-poor communities and that the state should be a reliable partner in school construction. He also said the bill includes a small retroactive component for communities that built during the moratorium, which he described as a compromise. Testimony in support came from Representative Cluder, who described Claremont’s Stevens High School project as a case where a bond issue narrowly failed and the city later had to fund renovations without state aid, contributing to high property taxes. He said the bill would help property-poor communities and urged passage. Tony Weinstein of New Market also supported the bill, saying his community had serious facility and safety needs, had moved forward with scaled-back renovations during the moratorium, and still faced debt-service burdens without state participation. Robert Thompson, superintendent in Hampstead, testified that his district needs an addition for overcrowding, safety, and special education space, and said building aid would help reduce out-of-district placements and transportation costs. No vote was taken in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Now this system is not processed.
• It's excess process. Satiating.
• It's excess process.
• It's excess process.
• It's excess process. itself. It's excess process.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The meeting opened with roll call and housekeeping, including moving standing attendees to an overflow room and asking the audience to avoid interruptions. The task force then heard testimony from Allison Adams of the Foundation for a Healthy Kentucky, who presented statewide health trend data showing Kentucky ranked 41st overall and 44th in health outcomes, with especially poor performance on premature death, chronic disease, diabetes, and vaccination rates. She emphasized that Kentucky has the highest rates of residents with multiple chronic conditions, that diabetes remains above the national average, and that childhood immunization rates have worsened. She also highlighted major provider shortages in rural areas, noting that 43 of 120 counties meet shortage criteria and that more than half of primary care providers are concentrated in Fayette and Jefferson counties. Adams urged the task force to focus on prevention, early intervention, access to care, physical activity, and healthier school and community environments, and said the foundation is prepared to share results from its demonstration projects. Task force members asked follow-up questions about the age range for chronic-condition data and whether the diabetes figure reflected type 1 or type 2 diabetes; Adams said the chronic-condition measure spans all ages and that the diabetes figure likely reflects type 2, though she offered to provide the full report. The task force then approved the minutes from the prior meeting. The committee next turned to SNAP benefits and heard from Lisa Dennis, commissioner of the Department for Community Based Services, and Roger McCann, director of the Division of Family Support. They explained that SNAP is not only a food assistance program but also a public health and family stability tool, arguing that poor diet contributes to chronic disease and that food insecurity is linked to family stress, child welfare involvement, and neglect-related CPS referrals. They cited research showing that more generous SNAP policies are associated with fewer CPS reports, fewer substantiated reports, and fewer foster care placements, and said SNAP helps reduce risk and promote stability across vulnerable populations including children, older adults, people with disabilities, and pregnant women. They also described SNAP-Ed as the nutrition education component that teaches healthy eating, cooking on a budget, and how to use fresh produce, but warned that recent federal legislation eliminates federal funding for SNAP-Ed beginning in federal fiscal year 2026. McCann outlined the remaining SNAP outreach and employment-and-training components, noting that outreach is typically run by nonprofits with a 50% match and that employment and training funds job-skills programs to help recipients move toward better jobs and self-sufficiency. The discussion emphasized that access to nutritious food, education, and job supports are all part of improving health outcomes and reducing food insecurity.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the process, first of all, is incredibly expensive. It's a big lift.
• So the process, first of all, is incredibly expensive. It's a big lift.
• There is no process for that.
• How do we manage this process? That was two years ago.
• The process is unnecessarily costly and burdensome.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Cannabis Policy held its first hearing of the 194th session to take public testimony on 21 cannabis-related bills. Chairs Donahue and Gómez outlined hearing procedures and noted that written testimony would also be accepted. Much of the hearing focused on the Cannabis Control Commission (CCC), with Senator Mike Moore urging support for S. 90 to create an inspector general unit within the CCC. He argued the commission has suffered from dysfunction, workplace harassment allegations, delayed governance reforms, missed fee collections, and high legal costs, and said stronger legislative oversight is needed. Committee members largely agreed the CCC needs reform, though some expressed hope that new leadership would improve operations. A major theme was market structure and business viability. Representative Tyler testified for H. 183 to raise adult-use purchase limits from one ounce to two ounces, saying the change would reduce confusion and help retailers compete with neighboring states. Senator Payano supported S. 100, which would require a study of cannabis supply and demand to guide cultivation licensing, warning that oversupply is driving down prices and threatening cultivators. The Massachusetts Cannabis Coalition, represented by Ryan Dominguez, backed a package of bills aimed at increasing revenue, reducing regulatory burdens, attracting investment, and stabilizing the market, including higher purchase limits, simpler badge and testing rules, and a phased increase in the retail license cap. Attorneys Kevin Conroy and Mike Ross also supported raising the cap, arguing that the industry lacks capital and that more investment and exit opportunities are needed for provisional and distressed licensees. The most contentious issue was whether to raise the retail license cap from three to six. Supporters, including several business owners and industry advocates such as Peyton Shubrick, Tito Jackson, Armani White, Sean Burt, and others, said the current cap traps owners in declining businesses, prevents exits, and limits access to capital. They argued that many social equity and economic empowerment operators are struggling, that oversupply has pushed prices down, and that allowing more ownership could help businesses scale or sell. Opponents, including Senator Liz Miranda and several social equity operators, warned that lifting the cap now would let larger operators and multi-state companies dominate the market and harm equity-owned businesses. Miranda’s S. 88 would instead strengthen enforcement of ownership limits through audits, whistleblower protections, an anonymous tip line, and greater transparency. Another major topic was worker and consumer safety: Laura Bruno, Danny Carson, Al Vega, and others supported H. 194 after the death of Lorna McMurray, arguing for a CCC workplace and consumer safety department, better ventilation and PPE standards, stronger testing oversight, and retaliation protections for workers. The hearing ended without votes, with members thanking testifiers and indicating the committee would continue reviewing the bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• Sadly, one of the big outcomes for young children that eat highly processed, ultra processed foods is
• will help to facilitate the process much more easily.
• SB 241 would take important steps to improve the conditioning process.
• They're in the process of doing that right now everybody.
• While the current process does provide a 30 day written comment period.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• if we could at least agree to a process if we could at least agree to a process where<00:36:56.800
• For example, how um process in the bill.
• What's the process? Who standard. What's the process?
• <01:42:32.239> analysis same sophisticated due process analysis same sophisticated due process
• Due process is a they do now.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• there where there there was a process there where there there was a process<01:17:01.840> but
• That is the process now.
• That's the process now for all our liquor licenses.
• <01:29:53.639> I is for you Carri DS will not process I is for you Carri DS will not process
• Yeah, our—so, we have two processes right now.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee first took up an amendment to a bill dealing with digital assets, zoning, utilities, and noise. Members discussed removing the “private key” language, clarifying that the bill would prohibit state or local governments from treating digital asset mining differently from other industrial uses, and narrowing several provisions based on feedback from the Municipal Association. There was also discussion about electricity use, rate schedules, and whether the bill would allow payment of electric bills in Bitcoin; members clarified that bills would still be paid in dollars and that discriminatory rates were not allowed. The amendment was approved on a straw vote, and the committee then voted 7-1 to adopt the amended bill. The committee then considered a separate bill related to a paint stewardship program. The sponsor explained that the amendment would remove references to a fee structure that had troubled him in public hearing, while still preserving the plan and oversight by the Department of Environmental Services. Members discussed whether the bill’s liability and disclosure language affected antitrust concerns, and a representative from the American Coatings Association testified that the program’s environmental management practices and liability provisions were intended to ensure responsible handling and cleanup. The committee ultimately voted 7-1 to adopt the amended bill. Later, the subcommittee moved to liquor-related business. It first voted unanimously, 7-0, to retain a cannabis-related item. It then discussed a tavern license bill that would create a 21-plus tavern category, with the Liquor Enforcement Division explaining that the restriction was tied to alcohol-only venues and the potential for late-night entertainment and nightclub-style operations. Members raised concerns about local control and public safety, and the discussion referenced existing cocktail lounge rules and the possibility of towns opting into such a license. The transcript cuts off before a final vote on that item is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• There's all sorts of processes through acquisition.
• We have built out a process for this, and so our funding process is every two years we do put a request
• We have built out a process for this, and so our funding process is every two years we do put a request
• We have built out a process for this, and so our funding process is every two years we do put a request
• The process itself, and the loans and the grants.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• >> So this has been an educational process, and every meeting we are in is an educational process.
• >> So this has been an educational process, and every meeting we are in is an educational process.
• <00:38:30.800> process.
• Every county budget is developed through public process.
• Every county budget is developed through public process.

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Given that budget negotiations and considerations of our January proposals are still in process, this
• So that doesn't reduce the capacity to process administratively for the council? Correct.
• You know, how do we ensure that there is equity in this process?
• Just like our existing programs, CalHFA will establish a lender application and approval process that
• This should go through the policy process.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The subcommittee heard May Revision proposals focused on housing, homelessness, and related administrative changes, and took no votes, holding items open for later action. Item 1 would realign staff positions and resources as part of the Governor’s housing and homelessness reorganization, including shifting two Cal ICH positions to HCD, moving one Cal ICH position for communications/external affairs, and authorizing a chief deputy director at the new Housing Development Finance Committee. Administration witnesses said the changes were technical and net zero-cost, while the LAO recommended approval but asked for clarification on funding for the chief deputy. Several senators questioned whether the staffing shifts would weaken Cal ICH’s homelessness work and whether adding communications capacity was appropriate without new housing funding. Item 2 proposed creating a $100 million Disaster Rebuilding Fund at CalHFA, with $56 million General Fund and $44 million in existing National Mortgage Settlement funds, to support disaster-impacted homeowners through tools such as loan loss guarantees and interest rate buy-downs. CalHFA said the fund would help homeowners bridge the gap between insurance proceeds and rebuilding costs and would work through approved lenders. The LAO raised concerns about the lack of alternatives in the proposal, the broad discretion left to CalHFA in program design, and the General Fund cost. Senators pressed for more detail on eligibility, equity safeguards, lender oversight, and how many homeowners would actually benefit, with some warning the proposal was too open-ended and could miss the most vulnerable households. Item 3 addressed trailer bill language for HAP Round 7, including a proposed $500 million General Fund allocation tied to new accountability measures, pro-housing designation requirements for 14 large cities and 11 counties, local match requirements, streamlined system performance metrics, and recapture/reallocation of unspent funds. HCD said the proposal would avoid a new application process by treating Round 7 as additional disbursements of Round 6 and would provide technical assistance to jurisdictions. The LAO and several senators questioned the timing, the burden of pro-housing designation and local match requirements, the vagueness of some standards, and whether the proposal would delay rather than speed up funding. Members also debated whether the trailer bill preserved or weakened existing homelessness accountability metrics and whether the approach was too complicated given local budget pressures and ongoing homelessness needs.

Transcript Highlights:

• They didn't have to go through any type of processing.
• So I want to try to ensure that they're in the process.
• So I want to try to ensure that they're in the process.
• So this is just going to ensure that the process, the integrity of the process, stays that way, where
• That way, the process stays clean and the integrity of that process stays intact.

Bills: HCR41, HB11, HB227, HB243, HB278, HB335, HB424, HB454, HB455, HB492, HB623, HB641, HB660, HB708, HB719, HB940, HB1029, HB1053, HB1069, HB1077

Keywords: coupons, rebates, alcohol regulation, malt beverages, Louisiana Department of Revenue, remembrance, Charlie Kirk, state recognition, October 14, memorial day, court filings, electronic filing, letter size paper, privacy, legal procedure, recusal, district attorney, substitute attorney, appointment process, legal proceedings

Transcript Highlights:

• Nothing changes from the process, Senator Hill.
• Nothing changes from the process. force. Nothing changes from the process.
• >> this doesn't negate any standard process >> this doesn't negate any standard process
• Um, this needs to move through the process. Other states are doing this.
• process. Other states are doing this. process. Other states are doing this.

Keywords: Judiciary, Division B - Room 409, 3 February, 2026; 9:00 A.M., 925, all

Summary: The committee took up several criminal justice and public safety bills. Senator Sparks explained SB 2416, which would let a law enforcement officer who tests positive on an initial drug screen obtain a more invasive follow-up test at the officer’s expense; if the second test is negative, the first result would be treated as a false positive and the officer’s certification would not be put at risk. The committee also heard SB 2228, which would reduce the waiting period for certain felony expungements from five years to three years, following a recommendation from the criminal justice task force. Members discussed how expungement remains discretionary with the court and does not change which offenses are eligible; the bill passed committee after a motion and voice vote. The committee then considered a committee substitute for SB 21108, a combined bail bill. Counsel said it would require suspension of a bail agent’s license when there is a civil judgment, exclude credit card transaction fees from authorized bail fees, clarify requirements for cash deposits in lieu of surety or property bonds, bar unsecured judicial release for bail-restricted offenses, and allow courts to assess service-of-process costs against bail agents in certain failure-to-appear cases. A reverse repealer was added, and the committee voted to pass the committee substitute. Finally, the committee heard SB 2114, which would expand state immigration enforcement efforts by allowing DPS to collect information on illegal aliens, codifying participation in the federal 287(g) program, and creating state penalties for certain unlawful entry and criminal conduct by undocumented persons, including enhanced penalties for violent or sex offenses. The sponsor and counsel said the bill is intended to work with federal law and includes exemptions for certain federal immigration statuses and a provision allowing some nonviolent defendants to agree to deportation in lieu of prosecution. Members raised concerns about enforcement, probable cause, and unintended consequences, but the sponsor said the bill would require proof of entry through the Gulf of Mexico for the new entry offense and that the measure would enhance cooperation with federal authorities.

Transcript Highlights:

• And through the 100 steps of the process.
• What is the IMRA process?
• Um, believe it or not, this is a very deliberative, um, process.
• this process.
• publishers are reacting to the process.

Bills: SB451, SB762, SB1490, SB1262, SB1459, SB1750, SB1962, SB2252, SB2253, SB2365

Keywords: instructional materials, public schools, Education Code, adoption, rejected materials, local funds, open educational resources, Texas Education Code, school districts, open enrollment charter schools, funding restrictions, environmental regulation, business compliance, local authority, economic development, state preemption, local control, open education resources, SB 762, Texas public schools

Transcript Highlights:

• This way, we can try to get through this process efficiently so everyone can have the opportunity to
• And they are working with the family throughout the criminal justice process as well.
• They are working with the family throughout the criminal justice process as well.
• While in ABA, he played soccer and began the process for joining a general education preschool.
• Many of us who have seen people processed through jail and talked to parents can relate.

Bills: SB1, SB 1

Keywords: appropriations, budget, state funding, education, healthcare, infrastructure, campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• language just continues the process language just continues the process that's<00:21:42.720>
• continues the way it has now for two years. confirmation process and it really confirmation process
• We can do it and then clean up in the end through the process.
• So my function primarily is to manage the process.
• manage the process manage the process um<00:49:32.520> we<00:49:32.880> we<00:49:33.119

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee first took up HB 428, with Philip Sherman of the Building Code Review Board presenting a detailed amendment intended to reorganize building-code statutes and limit local changes. He said the proposal would move code-related provisions into RSA 155-A, preserve municipalities’ ability to adopt and administer local enforcement mechanisms and additional non-state codes such as housing or property maintenance codes, but prohibit technical amendments to the State Building Code. He also explained that local administrative functions like permits, fees, certificates of occupancy, plan review, and staffing would remain local, while any local ordinance would still need BCRB confirmation. Members discussed the distinction between administrative and technical amendments, the need to keep fire-code provisions separate, and a date error in the draft’s submission deadline; Sherman suggested the effective-date language should be corrected to reference July 1, 2024. The committee did not vote on the amendment and instead agreed to circulate the draft and revisit it in a later subcommittee meeting before bringing it to the full committee. The discussion then shifted to fire-code issues, with State Fire Marshal Sean Tumi explaining that fire-code-related provisions should be cleaned up in the fire-code statutes and that the state should restrict technical local amendments while possibly allowing limited administrative local standards for transparency and operational consistency. He gave examples such as driveway access, sprinkler connections, key boxes, and other fire-system details that could benefit from local standardization if clearly disclosed. He noted that a separate Senate bill, SB 94, may be a more appropriate vehicle for some of the fire-code language. The chair again emphasized the need for further review and scheduled another subcommittee meeting before the matter would go to the full committee. The committee then began HB 244, and Sherman introduced it as a cleanup of the older municipal-building-code provisions scattered through the RSA 67X series. He said the bill would consolidate and update those references, continuing the effort to align municipal enforcement and appeals provisions with the statewide building-code structure. The transcript cuts off before any further action or vote on HB 244.

Transcript Highlights:

• There's two bills that we've added since 2001 that followed under that PERS pilot mandate process.
• There may also be statutory reports required through the Employee Benefits Committee process.
• You're talking about the entire process, the entire seven and a half to line 9? Correct, yes.
• But the insurance department was essentially removed from the process.
• the actuarial report or at any time during the process.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And this bill, as the Senator says, seeks to make further improvements to the POLST process in California
• I think it's a new process and I think that... We've been able to do through CARE Court.
• Who is it that's requesting this, and what is the process, and is there a stay on the involvement of
• Nothing's going to happen until they get the application process.
• and rebuilding in a community that's been That it takes for the rebuild process, typically.

Summary: The Senate Judiciary Committee heard several bills focused on health care planning, mental health court participation, homeowners association governance, groundwater enforcement, pet-policy disclosure in rentals, and post-disaster property speculation. SB 1088 would update California’s POLST and DNR laws by renaming POLST to Portable Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment, allowing electronic signatures, clarifying who may sign on a patient’s behalf, and making clear that these forms are voluntary; it drew support from the Coalition for Compassionate Care and no opposition. SB 1242 would let original family petitioners participate in CARE Court for care coordination and information-sharing, while preserving judicial discretion to exclude them if harmful; supporters said it would improve treatment coordination, while Disability Rights California opposed it as coercive and a removal of patient consent. The committee advanced SB 1242 on a 7-0 vote, with the bill placed on call. The committee also considered SB 1007, which would require more HOA budget transparency, disclosure of evidence for violations, and a lower cap on regular assessment increases without a homeowner vote. Supporters argued it would improve accountability and protect homeowners from steep fee hikes, while HOA industry groups warned it could undermine funding for insurance, maintenance, and other operating costs. Members raised concerns about the cap and the need for flexibility for large expenses; the bill passed 6-1 and was placed on call. SB 1364, as amended, would prevent a person convicted of sexual assault from obtaining custody or visitation of a child conceived from that assault, while preserving the possibility of voluntary co-parenting and aiming to qualify California for federal grant funding; it passed 8-0 and was placed on call. Later, SB 997 would give the North Fork Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency lien authority to enforce fees and its groundwater sustainability plan, addressing an enforcement gap for a GSA created by special legislation rather than a joint powers agreement. It drew support from agricultural and county groups and passed 9-0, placed on call. SB 1296 would require landlords to disclose pet policies up front on applications, websites, and ads, and allow refund of an application fee if disclosure was not provided before payment; supporters said it would reduce wasted application costs and pet relinquishment, while rental housing groups said the ad disclosure requirements were impractical. The bill passed 8-0 and was placed on call. The final bill, SB 1090, was introduced to prohibit large property owners from making unsolicited purchase offers for five years in wildfire-disaster areas, responding to investor activity after the Eaton and Palisades fires; the author and a SAGE witness described it as a protection against disaster capitalism and predatory low offers to displaced residents.

Transcript Highlights:

• And we will continue the negotiations in that process.
• And we will continue the negotiations in that process.
• What's the thought process? within this bill. What's the thought process?
• The liability waivers and HCD's processing time, right?
• The processing time, right?

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard AB 736, the Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2026, which would place a $10 billion housing bond on the ballot to fund multifamily housing, permanent supportive housing, homeownership, preservation of existing deed-restricted units, acquisition/rehabilitation of naturally affordable housing, farmworker housing, and tribal housing. The author and supporters argued the state needs major new subsidy to address homelessness and the affordable housing shortage, while many organizations and local governments testified in support. Habitat for Humanity opposed unless the bond explicitly reserved 10% for CalHome; members discussed that issue and broader negotiations over possible amendments. After quorum was established, the committee approved the bill on a do-pass motion to Senate Appropriations, with several members voting aye and the measure held on call for absent members. The committee also heard SB 1361, which would limit local governments from using SB 79 transit-oriented housing requirements as a reason to stall or condition planned transit projects. The author and supporters from LA Metro and the building trades said the bill would prevent opposition to future transit stops from undermining transit expansion, jobs, and climate goals. Several groups that had initially opposed or been neutral, including cities and housing advocates, withdrew opposition after amendments; the League of California Cities moved to no position pending review. The bill passed the committee as amended to Senate Local Government on a do-pass motion, with the roll held open for absent members. Senator Grayson presented SB 1003, creating an Infrastructure Partnership Financing Program to help local governments and developers fund infrastructure needed for infill housing, and SB 1014, requiring local agencies to provide early good-faith estimates and itemized lists of on-site and off-site improvements tied to housing projects. Supporters said both bills would improve project feasibility and reduce late-stage cost surprises; there was little opposition, though some local government representatives sought continued discussion on implementation details. Both measures were approved on do-pass motions to Senate Appropriations and held on call. The committee also took up SB 908, which streamlines permitting for energy-code-compliant window replacements and limits added aesthetic requirements, with the new-construction portion narrowed to San Francisco; it received support from housing and decarbonization groups and was moved to Appropriations on a do-pass motion, also held on call.