Transcript Highlights:

• I wasn't throwing shade, but Representative. All right, thank you, Madam Chair.
• How often do you have to go and get coverage under Medicaid? And how acute are you?
• Slide 7: Insurance coverage for GLP-1s in general...
• Among employers with over 5,000 employees, coverage for GLP-1s for weight loss and obesity grew from
• Only 16% of them provide health insurance coverage for GLP-1s for weight loss.

Transcript Highlights:

• Those all of those counties got darker shaded on our map since last year.
• Those all of those counties got darker shaded on our map since last year.
• Those all of those counties got darker shaded on our map since last year.
• Those all of those counties got darker shaded on our map since last year.
• Those all of those counties got darker shaded on our map since last year.

Bills: HB187, HB98, HB360, HB394, HB398, HB388, HB187, HB98, HB360, HB394, HB398, HB388

Keywords: school safety, emergency response, training, public safety, Alyssa's Law, law enforcement, scholarship, tuition assistance, dependent education, Alabama, blackout license plate, HB360, Second Amendment Sales Tax Holiday, sales tax holiday, firearms, guns, ammunition, bullets, primers, gun accessories

Transcript Highlights:

• elective circumcision, coverage of elective circumcision, right?
• Or 413 is relative to renewability of health coverage.
• of health coverage. of health coverage.
• <06:15:41.440> Big<06:15:41.680> shade.
• But these sections require insurance coverage, including Medicaid coverage of biomarker testing.

Keywords: 10am HB 1 & HB 2, 928, house, all

Summary: The committee of conference on HB 1 and HB 2 reviewed comparison documents and worked through a long list of House and Senate positions, agreeing on some technical or already-enacted items while setting aside others for later discussion. Early on, members agreed to delete a House Bill 2 section tied to a bill already passed into law, and a representative explained a technical amendment to the EFA provisions clarifying enrollment-cap repeal language and compulsory attendance rules for EFA students. That amendment was discussed but a vote was postponed because not all members were present. The committee also noted that the overall EFA budget numbers had already been settled separately. Several items were either agreed to or held for further negotiation. Members agreed to delete sections already covered by other enacted bills, including BTLA-related language, and to accept a technical amendment changing "municipalities" to "political subdivisions" in a section affecting funding eligibility. They also agreed on some items involving workers’ compensation second injuries, certain pilot-program language, and some sections related to state loan repayment and other technical corrections. In contrast, they set aside or disputed items involving site evaluation, lottery-related provisions, opioid abatement, the Commission on Aging, Granite Advantage premium costs, renewable energy/offshore wind funding, special education funding, and several education trust fund and unique-fund provisions. The committee spent substantial time on policy disputes. The House side argued against keeping money in dedicated Fish and Game funds rather than increasing the main Fish and Game fund, while the Senate side defended its approach and raised concerns about fee impacts, including one tied to the fishing license. The members also discussed a housing appeals board proposal, with one member suggesting a possible compromise that would preserve some function while shifting duties and possibly sunsetting the arrangement later; the contracts for the positions were noted as running through June 30, 2028 and June 30, 2029. Another extended discussion concerned the child advocate records-access section, which one side wanted removed as policy that should go through the normal bill process, while another member asked to hold it and suggested a possible middle-ground, time-limited approach. Later, the committee agreed to remove sections already handled in other bills, including House sections 254 and 255, and discussed but did not resolve disputes over liquor licensing functions, cannabis-related language, cost containment, special education, and several fee and fund provisions. The Senate explained its position on the governor’s commission language, saying opioid abatement trust funds could not be used for that purpose and that the commission should continue to be funded through 5% of gross liquor profits; it also described renaming the body the Commission on Addiction Treatment and Prevention and expanding its scope to include problem gambling. The meeting ended with several major items still open for later negotiation.

Transcript Highlights:

• operating structure and agreements with ODMH on how the OSU faculty physicians will be providing coverage
• And just a shade over 4.75 million dollars is what we're requesting for appropriation.

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• There was fentanyl found, meth found, alongside the victims in the motels in Pensock and Maple Shade.
• Thank you for the coverage of telling your story. We appreciate that for your coverage here today.
• The coverage of telling your story. We appreciate that for your coverage here today. Thank you.
• have police coverage, which district’s actually picking up the tab?
• ...coverage, presuming that town doesn’t have police coverage, which district’s actually picking up the

Keywords: 1146, all

Transcript Highlights:

• For the last 16 years, the community has been collaborating, getting meetings, and the little shade,
• you know, a little bit pictures of what they did, shade that been working with Kah Homestead. questions
• And if I may, again, my name is Dean Sakamoto, and I represent SHADE Institute, which is a nonprofit.
• c> represent my name is Dean Sakamoto and I represent my name is Dean Sakamoto and I represent shade
• <00:11:11.560> is<00:11:11.639> a<00:11:11.760> nonprofit Dean Sakamoto, from SHADE

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Committee on Hawaiian Affairs met on February 13 and heard testimony on three measures before taking up decision-making. On SB 1410, the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands supported the bill as a practical way to require counties to timely respond when DHHL seeks transfer of infrastructure or facilities, and the chair later recommended passage without amendment. The committee adopted that recommendation, with Senator Ihara excused. The committee then heard extensive testimony on SB 1549, which would help fund the Kahili Homestead community’s planned multi-service center and park improvements. DHHL supported the measure, and community witnesses described a 16-year planning process, prior grant and developer funding, completed phase-one park work, and the need for state bonding to complete phase two. Members asked about community engagement, fundraising, and whether the design included features such as a lāʻau garden, Hōlua mound, imu hall, craft pavilion, and space for Native Hawaiian games and lua practice. The chair recommended passage of SB 1549 unamended, and the committee adopted the recommendation. The committee also considered SB 903, described as a housekeeping bill to create a vehicle for continued funding of OHA after the current working group sunsets. The chair recommended passage with amendments incorporating the contents of proposed Senate Draft 1 and recommittal to the Hawaiian Affairs committee, and that recommendation was adopted. The meeting then shifted to a joint hearing with Transportation and Culture and the Arts on SB 614, relating to Hawaiian Independence Day, and SB 1051, relating to Hawaiian History Month. Testimony on SB 614 was largely supportive, emphasizing cultural recognition and education, though one witness from Hawaii Sovereignty Studies opposed it; the Office of Collective Bargaining said it did not yet know the cost. SB 1051 also drew support, with testimony stressing the importance of teaching the history of the overthrow and Hawaiian sovereignty. Both bills were advanced with amendments, including technical changes and effective dates, and both committees adopted the chair’s recommendations.

Transcript Highlights:

• Shaded items are considered closed. Yesterday. We appreciate your hard work on this.
• Shaded items are considered closed, and open items will be bumped.
• Those items have been shaded and are noted as closed. Open items will be bumped.

Summary: The Higher Education Budget Conference Committee met to review and compare House and Senate counteroffers on the higher education budget, implementing bill, conforming bill, and related provisos. Members noted that several items were now in agreement and marked closed, including specific lines in the implementing bill, multiple lines in the conforming bill, and a number of budget and proviso items that had moved closer between the chambers. Remaining unresolved items were set aside to be bumped to leadership for further negotiation. Senator Harold thanked the committee and staff, expressing confidence that the final budget would support a strong higher education system and that the outstanding issues would be resolved soon. The chair also thanked House and Senate staff for their work and announced that future meeting notices would be posted, with the committee operating on one-hour notice. No public testimony was taken, no questions were raised, and no formal vote on the budget items was recorded. The meeting concluded with a motion to rise.

Transcript Highlights:

• Shaded items are considered closed. Yesterday. We appreciate your hard work on this.
• Shaded items are considered closed, and open items will be bumped.
• Those items have been shaded and are noted as closed. Open items will be bumped.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Shaded items are considered closed. Yesterday. We appreciate your hard work on this.
• Shaded items are considered closed, and open items will be bumped.
• Those items have been shaded and are noted as closed. Open items will be bumped.

Summary: The Higher Education Budget Conference Committee met to review the House and Senate counter-offers on the higher education budget, related projects, the implementing bill, the conforming bill, and proviso language. Members noted that several items were now in agreement and marked closed, including implementing bill lines 1-4 and 6, conforming bill lines 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, and 13, and a number of proviso items that moved closer between the chambers. Remaining disagreements on the budget and bills were set aside to be bumped to leadership for resolution. Senator Harold thanked the committee and staff, expressing confidence that the remaining issues would be resolved soon and that the final budget would support a strong higher education system. The chair also thanked House and Senate staff for their work and said the committee had reached the end of this conference meeting. No public testimony or member questions were raised. The committee announced that future meeting notices would be posted, that the committee would be on one-hour notice, and Senator Calatayud moved that the committee rise.

Transcript Highlights:

• It authorizes local governments to discuss, in a confidential what's known as a shade meeting, pre-suit
• pre-litigation—a local government doesn't have the authority to have the conversation about settlements in the shade
• What this would do is authorize them to have those meetings in the shade, but with all of the same existing
• So they have to give public notice that they're going to discuss it in the shade.

Transcript Highlights:

• The first offer from the budget, as you see, you'll see that the shaded areas... ...budget, as you see
• , you'll see that the shaded areas we are in agreement are either grayed out or shaded, and also you'll

Summary: The Higher Education Appropriations Conference Committee convened and organized its leadership, with Senator Harrell named chair and Representative Snyder named vice chair by unanimous consent. Senator Harrell noted that Chair Basada was absent due to family obligations but remained engaged in the process and would participate in future decisions. Both chairs made brief opening remarks emphasizing the goal of maintaining Florida’s higher education system as the nation’s best. The committee then reviewed a conference offer package for the higher education budget, including the budget, proviso, and implementing bill. Members were given side-by-side spreadsheets showing House and Senate positions, with shaded areas indicating agreement and highlighted columns showing the offer and any changes. The chair explained that the committee would not go through the proposal line by line and that the implementing bill had replaced a conforming bill. No questions or objections were raised by members. The committee was placed on one-hour notice to consider the offer and continue negotiations, and the meeting adjourned without any vote on the substance of the budget offer.

Transcript Highlights:

• He gave an example of his own neighbor: when he was putting in a new fence, the shade trees were on the
• neighbor’s side, and he did not want to give those up because he depended on the shade.
• Now, as example, my neighbor, I was putting a new fence in, and he had the shade trees were on his side
• Well, I didn't want to give those up because I depend on the shade for it. So we negotiated.
• Because I depend on the shade for it, so we negotiate.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Rows become shaded as offers begin to match up on items.
• Rows that are shaded represent items where we match with the Senate.
• Also shaded are rows that represent member projects.

Summary: The Higher Education Budget Subcommittee met with a quorum present for what was described as its final committee meeting of the session. Chair Busatta opened the meeting by outlining the upcoming budget conference process, explaining that the House and Senate had both passed their budget bills and that conference negotiations would begin soon, with the Senate serving as the hosting chamber this year. She reviewed how the conference process works, including side-by-side budget documents, chamber offers, subcommittee negotiations, escalation to the chairs and then to the Speaker and President, and the required 72-hour cooling-off period before final budget passage. The main discussion focused on the differences between the House and Senate higher education budgets for fiscal year 2025-2026. The chair noted a total $62.5 million difference, with the Senate budget higher overall. Key differences included House reductions for vacant FTE positions, differing approaches to recurring versus nonrecurring funding in financial aid and workforce programs, the Senate’s larger funding level for workforce development capitalization incentive grants, and differing allocations for colleges and universities. In the university budget, the Senate centralized nurse education funding at the University of South Florida’s Center for Nursing and funded several specific initiatives, while the House proposed additional funding for performance-based metrics, faculty recruitment and retention, and tuition waivers. The chair also highlighted a major proviso difference involving the EASE grant, where the House proposed minimum benchmark metrics for institutional eligibility. No testimony was taken and no votes were held on the budget differences. After the overview and brief explanation of the budget and proviso side-by-side documents, the committee concluded its agenda and adjourned on a motion by Representative Blanco, without objection.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I began to realize there was a tremendous amount of shade of gray in between that black and white
• <00:26:42.360> of<00:26:42.560> gray tremendous amount of shade of gray tremendous
• amount of shade of gray in<00:26:44.400> between<00:26:44.840> that<00:26:45.040> black
• > in between that black and white, and in between that black and white, and every<00:26:47.120> shade
• every shade of gray is legitimate. every shade of gray is legitimate.

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: The program focused first on Minnesota’s energy and affordability agenda, with Senator Nick Frentz discussing the state’s clean-energy leadership, rising electricity demand, and the Senate’s 100% clean energy framework. He said Minnesota’s clean energy growth supports jobs, lowers costs for ratepayers, and includes recent wins such as sustainable aviation fuel tax treatment in the supplemental budget. Frentz also said the Senate passed an energy omnibus bill that continues clean-energy permitting reforms, promotes conservation and demand response, and includes a nuclear study rather than lifting the nuclear moratorium. Frentz spent much of the interview defending data centers as both a challenge and an opportunity. He said large hyperscale projects can create major construction jobs and substantial local property-tax revenue, while a 2025 law requires data-center companies to contribute to low-income energy assistance and report water use. He pointed to the Google data center planned for Pine Island as an example, saying it is air-cooled, will pay $5 million a year, and will fund 1,600 MW of clean energy at its own expense, which he argued could save Xcel ratepayers money over time. He also said climate change is already driving higher costs through homeowners insurance and storm damage. The second segment highlighted Senator Zach Duckworth’s housing and banking bills. Duckworth said Senate File 4168 would make it easier to finance investment properties by giving buyers more flexibility to roll closing costs and lender fees into payments, while keeping strong protections in place for primary residences. He emphasized that the bill is not about predatory lending and is intended to expand options for informed investors. He also described Senate File 4652 as an anti-fraud, no-cost measure that lets bank customers name a trusted contact so banks can alert someone if suspicious activity is detected. Duckworth said both bills passed unanimously in both chambers, and he credited quick action and good working relationships across the aisle for their success. The program closed with a broader reflection on the end of session and the Senate’s political climate. It noted that 15 senators are retiring and two are leaving for higher office, and that final floor votes often split along party lines, including one bill passing 34-33. Several retiring senators used farewell speeches to urge civility, compromise, and putting people first, while the segment emphasized that despite partisan conflict, quiet bipartisan cooperation still produced much of the session’s enacted legislation.

Transcript Highlights:

• here for the 2025 school year, there were 65 districts considered high need, shown in that darkest shade
• In the darkest shaded districts, more than one-third of teachers are teaching with an exception.
• The darkest shaded districts have the highest concentration of teaching positions that are not filled
• In the darkest shaded regions, the retention rate is higher than 86%.
• Darker shaded states have higher average salaries.

Keywords: 1204, all

Summary: The committee first received a presentation from Legislative Audit on Arkansas Department of Education grant distributions for fiscal year 2025. Auditors explained the report summarizes $4.6 billion in grants to school districts, charter schools, education cooperatives, and other entities, with most funding coming from the Public School Fund and federal sources. Members asked about specific recipients and programs, including ClassWallet, master principal bonuses, Economics Arkansas, and CDC surveillance grants. Department of Education staff clarified that the audit report only shows distributions, not how recipients ultimately used the money, and noted that some funding declines reflected the end of one-time federal COVID relief dollars. Senators also asked about the special-language appropriation for Economics Arkansas and the use of public school fund revenues. The committee then heard a Bureau of Legislative Research presentation on Consumer Price Index projections from Moody’s Analytics and S&P Global, followed by a detailed adequacy-study update on teacher recruitment, retention, and salaries. The teacher report covered teacher counts, education levels, experience, shortages, preparation pathways, licensure exceptions, survey results, and salary trends. Key findings included about 32,800 teachers statewide in 2025, an average retention rate of 87%, and 30% of surveyed teachers saying they were considering leaving the profession. The report also noted shortages in special education, math, science, and other areas, growth in alternative preparation pathways, and the phaseout of several licensure exceptions under Act 304 of 2025. Members asked extensively about survey methodology, teacher satisfaction, preparation for classroom environment and special education, the cost and return on investment of alternative licensure routes, and whether exit-interview data exists statewide. The presenters said they could follow up on several questions, including details on alternative programs, incentives for ESL and special education endorsements, and comparisons to other surveys. On salaries, the report said the statewide average teacher salary in 2025 was $60,254, with districts averaging slightly higher than charters. Arkansas ranked 45th nationally on average salary in 2025, though 36th when adjusted for cost of living, and average district salaries had declined 8% in inflation-adjusted terms since 2016. Members also discussed the LEARNS Act minimum salary floor of $50,000, salary disparities among districts, and whether the state should focus more on retaining experienced teachers as well as raising starting pay.

Transcript Highlights:

• There's also this concept around what constitutes basic service and basic coverage.
• as wireless, so the level of coverage by technology continues to be explored, continues to be looked
• What we have found with the wireless coverage map is that it is overestimated.
• Even the wireless carriers themselves have been very upfront to say that their wireless coverage map
• I myself don't even feel very comfortable in saying what that true coverage is.

Summary: The committee held an informational hearing on Carrier of Last Resort (COLR) to examine its history, current operation, and possible future changes in California. Chair Tasha Berner said the hearing was prompted in part by AT&T’s 2023 request for relief from COLR obligations and by broader concerns about public safety, affordability, universal service, and access to modern broadband and telecommunications. The first panel featured a telecommunications expert who traced COLR back to universal service principles and explained how states have handled COLR differently, including full deregulation, limited rural obligations, or transition pathways tied to competition and customer protections. Members asked about affordability, federal and state processes for service withdrawal, and whether COLR remains necessary given modern competition. CPUC staff then described California’s COLR framework, explaining that universal service rests on access, reliability/quality, and affordability, and that COLR requires carriers to provide basic service, including voice-grade calling, 911 access, relay services, and Lifeline. Staff said AT&T’s application sought relief in nearly all of its territory, but no replacement COLR came forward during the proceeding, and public participation hearings drew thousands of comments and strong concern from rural and vulnerable customers. The CPUC outlined its ongoing rulemaking to reconsider whether the 1996 COLR rules and 2012 basic-service definition still fit current conditions, with workshops and public hearings scheduled and a proposed decision expected later in the year or into 2026. Members pressed staff on geographic outreach, wireless coverage, whether broadband can be part of basic service, public safety during wildfires, and what reporting and complaint processes currently exist. In the final panel, industry and public-interest witnesses sharply disagreed. A U.S. Telecom representative argued COLR is outdated, costly, and copper-focused, and said reform should allow technology-neutral alternatives such as wireless, fiber, and satellite while preserving reliable voice and emergency access. The CPUC Public Advocates Office countered that COLR remains a necessary public safeguard, especially for rural and low-income customers, and argued that any transition should maintain or improve service, with public benefits such as broadband investment and continued protections for 911, disability access, and affordability. Committee members focused on the difference between an obligation to serve everyone and a mere option to serve, and on whether the Legislature should provide clearer guidance as the CPUC’s rulemaking moves forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, look for a little bit of shade. So that's also kind of a win-win situation.
• Cows like to get out of panels as shade.
• <00:18:54.080> little<00:18:54.160> bit<00:18:54.240> of<00:18:54.400> shade
• <00:18:54.720> So<00:18:54.880> it Uh look for a little bit of shade.
• So it Uh look for a little bit of shade.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• MAKES AND YOU WILL SEE THE SIDE BY SIDE SPREADSHEETS MODIFIED TO DISPLAY THE OFFER AND ROWS BECOME SHADED
• ROWS SHADED SHOW ITEMS WHERE WE MATCH WITH THE SENATE AND ALSO SHADED ARE ROWS THAT REPRESENT MEMBER

Transcript Highlights:

• And the Issaquah class, although only three of those are shaded, the other three boats are at about 58
• situation where the cars involved in the crash that hit the guardrail have maxed out the liability coverage
• That's a fairly quick process, especially if they accept liability and have coverage.
• They have not been told what coverage exists, but they are hoping for a $1 million check on that one

Summary: The committee received a detailed staff presentation on Washington State Ferries’ capital needs, current fleet status, and long-range funding outlook. Staff described the current service pattern, ridership recovery since the pandemic, the aging fleet, and the state’s plan to add three new hybrid-electric Olympic-class vessels under the 2025 budget, with delivery expected around 2030-2032. Members also heard that the fleet is operating with no reserve vessel, that preservation time is below the desired level, and that terminal electrification and vessel conversion plans face timing, cost, and procurement risks. Questions focused on ridership trends, biofuel supply, design-risk allocation in vessel contracts, sequencing of terminal electrification with new vessel delivery, and the cost and feasibility of restoring international Sidney service, which would require a SOLAS-certified vessel. Staff then outlined ferry capital funding, saying recent spending and programmed needs are far above regular ferry-specific revenues and that the system relies on a mix of dedicated accounts, transportation package money, federal grants, and transfers. They said the near-term budget is balanced through 2027-29, but the longer-term capital outlook shows a shortfall of roughly $250 million to $300 million per biennium, with broader unmet needs much higher. The presentation estimated costs for future vessels, life extensions, terminal electrification, and additional Jumbo Mark II conversions, and noted that the current enacted plan does not fully fund fleet replacement, full electrification, or life extension of older vessels. Members asked for follow-up information on terminal seismic/environmental issues, contract options for additional vessels, and the timing and cost of alternative vessel designs. The committee then shifted to WSDOT maintenance and preservation. Pascoe Focktich described maintenance operations, including winter response, guardrail repair, facilities, equipment, and the effects of underfunding and inflation. He said most of the maintenance budget is fixed cost and labor, that material prices have risen sharply, and that many facilities are in poor condition with asbestos issues and deferred upkeep. He also noted growing guardrail damage, increasing pavement claims, and the burden of maintaining aging bridges and facilities. Members asked about prior planning for these needs, the role of asbestos, and whether more proactive sequencing could help budget decisions. Troy Suing then presented the highway preservation program, saying WSDOT is in the early stages of critical failure and has stretched preservation dollars as far as possible. He explained the distinction between pavement, bridge, and other highway asset preservation, said the department is largely reactive, and estimated that delaying work can make it three to five times more expensive later. He said about 40% of roadways are currently due or overdue for preservation, bridge conditions are nearing the federal poor-bridge threshold, and the department’s 10-year preservation need is about $8 billion. Members asked about the cost of deferring work, whether the department could do more if funded, how priorities are set, and whether other states face similar problems. Finally, Evan Grimm and Mike Fay briefed the committee on bridge strikes by overheight vehicles. They described recent incidents on I-90 near Cle Elum and SR 410 near White River, the damage and closures caused, and possible countermeasures such as public outreach, improved trip-planning tools, and a pilot warning system with sensors and flashing beacons. Fay explained the state’s financial recovery process for third-party damage, saying WSDOT recovers roughly $20 million per biennium and about 78% to 80% of billed damages, with money going to the motor vehicle fund. Members asked about prevention, insurance recovery, and whether the state uses claim data to inform future design or safety changes.

Transcript Highlights:

• in our gateway cities and certainly Lawrence, where we are offsetting pollution but also providing shade
• She said street trees alone are not sufficient to provide enough shade and windbreaks to make a significant
• She said it will take at least 10 years for newly planted trees to begin delivering shade, clean air,
• of to the communities it would take at least 10 years for newly planted trees to begin delivering shade
• , communities it will take at least 10 years for newly planted trees to begin delivering shade clean

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee held a hearing on S.2542, the Mass Ready Act, a $3 billion environmental bond bill aimed at climate resilience, water infrastructure, conservation, and related permitting reforms. Secretary Rebecca Tepper and administration officials described the bill’s major investments in flood control, coastal resilience, DCR roads/bridges/dams and parks, drinking water and wastewater upgrades, PFAS remediation, land conservation, food security infrastructure, and expanded Municipal Vulnerability Preparedness funding. They also explained proposed streamlining measures for environmental permitting, flood risk disclosures, a Connecticut River Resilient Commission, and a new Resilience Revolving Fund to provide low-cost financing for municipal resilience projects. Committee members asked about affordability, useful life of projects, how the revolving fund would be capitalized, and how the bill would help communities such as Lawrence, Methuen, and coastal towns; officials said the fund would initially use existing trust resources, not new fees, and could later support special obligation bonds once it has a track record. Several witnesses supported the bill but urged larger authorizations or additional provisions. Boston Harbor Now asked for more funding for MVP and the state’s resilient coast plan, and supported permitting reforms for nature-based and hybrid solutions. The Massachusetts Rivers Alliance urged inclusion of drought-management language from separate bills, plus a statewide flood buyout program and a water reuse commission. Green Roots called for dedicated funding for outdoor and indoor air quality monitoring and indoor air quality improvements, especially in environmental justice communities affected by traffic and airport pollution. Conservation and forestry advocates requested more funding for urban tree canopy, local nurseries, and workforce training, while also raising concerns about PFAS impacts and the need for clearer municipal reforestation language. Agriculture and water infrastructure groups focused on food security and drinking water needs. The Southeastern Massachusetts Agricultural Partnership and the Mass Food System Collaborative backed the food security infrastructure grant program and farmland protection funding, warning that the program needs continued support in fiscal 2027 and that farmland loss is accelerating. The Massachusetts Waterworks Association said the bill does not go far enough on drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater infrastructure, citing large statewide capital needs and PFAS compliance costs, and asked for recurring funding and broader eligibility for climate resilience grants. A Product Stewardship Council representative also urged funding for a waste reduction needs assessment, citing growing landfill constraints and rising disposal costs. No votes were taken during the hearing."}{