Transcript Highlights:

• We have transportation infrastructure: roads.
• It's what we call our big six infrastructure focus areas.
• NASA's budget supports and only targets our NASA missions and their infrastructure needs.
• NASA's budget supports and only targets our NASA missions and their infrastructure needs.
• I mentioned all the investments in the infrastructure around Johnson Space Flight Center.

Summary: The committee on Military, Veterans Affairs, Space, and Domestic Security met with a quorum present and heard a series of presentations focused on Florida’s space and aerospace industry. Blue Origin’s Anna Spencer described the company’s Florida operations at Rocket Park, including New Glenn manufacturing and launch activities, Blue Moon lunar lander work, workforce development, and recent booster recovery and launch milestones. Amazon’s Beth Cooley presented an update on Amazon Leo (formerly Project Kuiper), outlining the satellite broadband network, customer terminals, dark skies mitigation efforts, Florida facilities and jobs, and launch plans; members asked about RV/mobile applications, satellite counts, and the role of fiber, but no action was taken. Starcatcher Industries CEO Andrew Rush then described his company’s effort to create an orbital energy grid that beams power to satellites to extend mission life and increase available power, citing demonstrations in Jacksonville and Cape Canaveral and plans for a first satellite launch next year. Space Florida CEO Rob Long gave a strategic update on the state’s aerospace sector, citing billions in private investment, hundreds of projects in the pipeline, the leverage of state spaceport funding, workforce and university programs, and the need for additional tools and infrastructure to keep Florida competitive. He emphasized growth in launch activity, manufacturing, research, and military support infrastructure, and said Space Florida would bring forward legislative proposals. Kennedy Space Center Director Janet Petro delivered the strongest policy message of the meeting, warning that KSC’s aging infrastructure and relatively smaller NASA budget share could cause Florida to lose aerospace leadership to states like Texas unless the state strengthens its partnership, research investment, and infrastructure support. Members questioned her about federal restrictions on commercial investment in common-use infrastructure, the need for more state-federal alignment, and how Florida can preserve its role as the launch capital of the world. After the presentations and questions, Senator Burgess moved to adjourn, there was no objection, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• U the idea stormwater infrastructure.
• Uh green storm water infrastructure Uh green storm water infrastructure consists<00:42:30.000>
• even a small water infrastructure right?
• , agricultural water infrastructure, agricultural water infrastructure, we<00:56:34.799> believe
• each water infrastructure could be, can each water infrastructure could be, can you<00:58:27.520>

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several agriculture-related bills. HB 1602 HD1 drew support from the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity, the Ulupono Initiative, and others, with testimony emphasizing the value of a dedicated grant writer who had secured nearly $9 million in federal funds and was pursuing additional grants. Members discussed how much time grant applications take and how the position helps position projects for implementation. The committee then moved on without objection. HB 1832, relating to aquaculture, received support from state agencies and industry groups, with one individual opposed. HB 1707 HD1, relating to agriculture, also drew broad support. A committee question focused on the bill’s definition of “necessary supplies,” and the Hawaii Farm Bureau said the language was broad enough to cover the inputs farmers need, including transportation-related costs, and would help reduce production costs and food prices. HB 2155 HD1, relating to agricultural statistics, prompted testimony in support of better data collection to help Hawaii compete for federal agriculture funding. The Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity explained that its role would focus on production, import, and export data, distinct from the scientific data collected by another unit, and said it wanted an electronic system tied to existing manifest and GIS tools to avoid duplicative clipboard-based collection. HB 1831 HD1, relating to agricultural lands, was heard with support and no questions. HB 1650 HD1, relating to environmental assessments, drew opposition from several individuals who argued it would weaken environmental protections and resident input; no action was taken. The committee then heard HB 1652 HD1, relating to storm water management systems. The engineering industry supported clarifying that low-risk green stormwater infrastructure such as rain gardens, bioswales, and permeable pavement should not be treated like detention or retention ponds subject to fencing and other safety requirements. Opponents, including family members affected by a drowning and other residents, argued the bill would weaken Act 281’s safety protections and increase liability. The Hawaii Farm Bureau questioned whether agricultural water infrastructure should be exempted from the fencing requirements and said the costs would vary by system, but the committee did not take final action during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• state, we're going to have huge infrastructure spend.
• But we do want the utilities to invest in necessary infrastructure.
• As demand for gas declines, infrastructure costs don't disappear.
• and gas infrastructure with different lenses for depreciation.
• PG&E has $73 billion worth of approved infrastructure work.

Summary: The committee first heard SB 804, the Hydrogen Pipeline Safety Act, from Senator Arreguín. He said the bill would designate the State Fire Marshal as the safety regulator for intrastate hydrogen pipelines and require hydrogen-specific standards, while not mandating any pipeline construction or bypassing environmental review. Supporters included labor groups, utility employees, and the City of Burbank, while Air Products opposed unless amended, citing concerns about the bill’s specificity, fee structure, and the need for a hydrogen-specific rulemaking process. The committee discussed safety, fees, and regulatory certainty, and later passed SB 804 on a 9-0 vote to Emergency Management with commitment to take amendments. The committee then took up SB 905 by Senator Becker, aimed at reducing electricity rates by changing utility incentives. The bill would tie part of executive compensation to keeping rates below inflation, require more performance metrics, and allow the CPUC to consider lower returns on equity for certain lower-risk investments and alternative financing options. Support came from consumer, environmental, agricultural, and large energy user groups, while Southern California Edison, CalChamber, PG&E, and utility labor groups raised concerns that the bill could reduce investment, create regulatory uncertainty, and raise borrowing costs. After extensive discussion about utility affordability, wildfire costs, and capital markets, the committee passed SB 905 on a 7-1 vote to Appropriations. SB 913, also by Senator Becker, would create a clearer pathway for distributed energy resources such as batteries and smart thermostats to participate in the resource adequacy market and compete with utility-scale resources. Supporters said the bill would better use existing grid capacity, lower costs, and build on the state’s Demand Side Grid Support Program; PG&E opposed unless amended, saying the use case was not yet proven and was already being addressed in other rulemakings. After the committee accepted amendments, one opposition group moved to neutral and another said it might do so after reviewing the changes. The bill passed 8-0 to Appropriations and was placed on call. Several other measures were heard and advanced, including SB 1196 on faster utility hookups for small energization projects such as ADUs and EV chargers, SB 931 reauthorizing the Diablo Canyon Essential Services Mitigation Fund through 2028, SB 1158 reducing the frequency of joint reliability assessments from quarterly to twice yearly, and SB 1245 directing further study of California’s gasoline market and potential use of non-CARBOB fuel during supply disruptions. SB 1196 and SB 931 both passed with broad support and no opposition after amendments, SB 1158 passed without testimony, and SB 1245 drew strong support from consumer and environmental advocates but opposition from fuel industry and business groups concerned about costs, confidentiality, and fuel standards.

Transcript Highlights:

• Starting off, the Mass Ready Act helps to improve our infrastructure.
• On water infrastructure priorities, adequate funding for drinking and wastewater infrastructure is drastically
• In the town of Beckett, we're facing numerous infrastructure needs.
• These programs reflect a simple but powerful truth: resilience begins with infrastructure, and infrastructure
• Like Doug said, they are living, breathing climate infrastructure.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing focused on the Healey-Driscoll administration’s Mass Ready Act, a $3 billion environmental bond bill. Administration officials said the bill would fund climate resilience, clean water, land conservation, parks, PFAS remediation, food security infrastructure, and coastal and inland flood protection, while also streamlining permitting for housing, restoration, and other resilience projects. They emphasized that the bond authorizes spending but does not itself obligate it, and said the proposal includes deauthorizations as housekeeping. Committee members asked about the new Resilience Revolving Fund, flood and drought management, MVP funding, land acquisition, Chapter 61 right-of-first-refusal changes, salt marsh carbon sequestration, and how the bill would help smaller municipalities and offset expected federal funding losses. Officials said the revolving fund would be managed through EEA and the Clean Water Trust, with criteria aimed at directing aid to communities most in need, and noted that drought issues would continue to be handled through existing DEP and drought commission tools. Several committee members and witnesses discussed specific policy provisions, including flood disclosure requirements for homebuyers and renters, expanded authority for regional planning and small-town access to grants, and permitting reforms that would exempt or expedite certain environmental restoration and priority housing projects from more time-consuming review processes. Administration witnesses defended the reforms as a way to achieve the same environmental outcomes faster and with more certainty, while some advocates argued the bill should go further, especially on Chapter 91 and restoration permitting. The administration also described investments in DCR facilities, water and wastewater systems, open space, agricultural easements, and a new focus on blue carbon and salt marsh restoration. Public testimony largely supported the bill. Mass Audubon, the Trustees of Reservations, the Environmental League of Massachusetts, The Nature Conservancy, MAPC, the Massachusetts Municipal Association, municipal officials, and others praised the bill’s resilience, conservation, and water infrastructure investments. Some witnesses urged additional funding for land protection, coastal resilience, buyouts, and restoration, and several called for stronger or simpler permitting reforms. Municipal witnesses from Boston, Beckett, Beverly, Conway, and regional planning organizations stressed the need for flexible financing, especially for small and rural communities facing costly infrastructure and climate adaptation projects. No votes were taken during the portion of the hearing provided; the committee heard testimony and asked questions before moving on to additional panels.

Transcript Highlights:

• Port activity is very critical to our infrastructure. We're bringing in billions of dollars.
• infrastructure fund to help finance critical infrastructure projects across California.
• California's infrastructure is under stress. We know that our roads need work.
• The American Society of Civil Engineers gave California's infrastructure a C-.
• My dad was a civil engineer. and worked on big government infrastructure projects.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So, any questions on IT infrastructure before I move on?
• Our third priority is the IT infrastructure systems for $1.7 million.
• Uh, those are really our infrastructure-heavy divisions.
• Many of these sites have caused damage to both our infrastructure and guest infrastructure when folks
• First, transit infrastructure FTA match. This particular fund is for...

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The hearing reconvened with testimony from several agencies on their capital budget requests. The Department of Environmental Services requested a little over $38 million, with major emphasis on dam repairs and design work for aging state-owned dams, including a $5.25 million match for possible FEMA BRIC funding at Pawtuckaway/Tuckaway and other projects such as Milton Three Ponds, Murphy Dam, and Lakeport Gates. DES also requested funding for state revolving loan fund matches, a Superfund match for the Savage Well site, IT and air-monitoring upgrades, and a new $750,000 cybersecurity request for water and wastewater systems. Committee members asked about FEMA eligibility, the distinction between design and construction money, and the timing and risk of banking funds if federal grants do not materialize. The University System of New Hampshire requested $20 million in state support, primarily $15 million for a major Diamond Library renovation at UNH to create a student support hub and reduce/repurpose collection space, plus $2.5 million each for deferred maintenance at Plymouth State and Keene State. The Community College System requested about $16.6 million across seven projects, led by critical maintenance, campus safety/security upgrades, IT infrastructure, parking and site improvements, HVAC replacement at White Mountains Community College in Littleton, a building management/energy system, and modernization of NHTI’s dental clinic and radiology spaces. The Department of Education requested $29.5 million, including a $4.9 million internal management platform to replace paper-based and siloed systems, plus career and technical education capital projects; Milford’s CTE project was described as being revised after repeated failed bond votes, while ConVal said its revised project would focus on modernizing existing CTE space and adding a security vestibule. Fish and Game requested $1.075 million for three facilities: Sewall Falls in Concord, the Lancaster Armory, and the Bunker Lane Barn in Durham, focusing on structural repairs, security, reconfiguration, and in one case replacement of a failing barn with a new 40-by-60 building. The department also said hatchery work is ongoing but that it is taking a cautious approach because of the planned New Hampton Hatchery and future capital needs. The Department of Natural and Cultural Resources requested $9.26 million for eight projects, including campground electrical upgrades at Ellacoya and Lake Francis, White Lake water system replacement, Mount Washington fuel tank and safety work, Odiorne Point visitor center work funded through parks revenue, roofing and parking lot repairs, Fox Forest office safety upgrades, and historic site repairs at White Island and Fort Constitution. Members asked about revenue-based capital, the stability of the parks fund, and flexibility in choosing projects as bids come in. The Department of Transportation began its presentation at the end of the transcript, but its detailed requests were not yet discussed.

Transcript Highlights:

• Fund to help finance critical infrastructure projects across California.
• California's infrastructure is under stress.
• California's infrastructure is under stress.
• And our infrastructure is woefully inadequate to meet the needs of these major events.
• to make both debt and equity-like investments in critical in-state infrastructure projects.

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Economic Development, Growth, and Household Impact met on July 11, 2025, and heard six measures focused on small business contracting, ports and trade, local economic development, clean energy transition, tariff impacts, and infrastructure finance. SB 70 would raise the Small Business Procurement and Contract Act contract cap from $250,000 to $350,000 and index it to inflation; supporters said it would reflect current economic conditions, while opponents argued it could reduce transparency, favor larger firms, and strain small businesses’ ability to carry inventory and wait for payment. The bill was approved 7-0 to Appropriations. AJR 14 urged federal agencies to consider the effects of tariff policy on California ports, with testimony emphasizing impacts on cargo volumes, jobs, supply chains, and infrastructure needs; it passed 7-0. SB 781 would require cities and counties to adopt small business utilization plans and strengthen the California Small Business Technical Assistance Program; chambers of commerce and committee members supported it as a way to expand procurement opportunities and technical assistance, and it passed 7-0 to Local Government. SB 227 would extend and expand the Green Empowerment Zone in Contra Costa County, add environmental justice representatives, and extend authorization to 2040; it passed 7-0 to the floor. SB 263 would direct the California Transportation Agency to study the statewide impacts of tariffs, with supporters from the ports, retail, and trucking sectors arguing that better data is needed to guide budgeting and policy responses; it passed 7-0 to Appropriations. SB 769 would create the Golden State Infrastructure Fund to finance major infrastructure projects through a revolving public-private investment model; supporters said it would help address long-term infrastructure needs and prepare for major events, and the bill passed 6-0 to Appropriations after opposition was withdrawn. All measures were reported out of committee, and the meeting adjourned at 10:39 a.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:04:10.879> and on hand uh aging infrastructure and on hand uh aging infrastructure and
• <00:04:33.160> to<00:04:33.320> steal cyber security infrastructure to steal cyber
• security infrastructure to steal their<00:04:34.320> defenses<00:04:35.320> uh<00:04:35.520
• Modernization increased cybersecurity tools and infrastructure benefit all Minnesotans and strengthen
• We do not have a whole lot of infrastructure in place presently to protect that sort of thing.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:02:56.480> of the sort of the infrastructure of the sort of the infrastructure of Kentucky
• <00:37:06.400> in water and wastewater infrastructure in water and wastewater infrastructure
• building out that water infrastructure building out that water infrastructure and<01:04:20.640><
• they're over the Kentucky Infrastructure they're over the Kentucky Infrastructure Authority.<01:
• I think we probably infrastructure.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Discussion of the KentuckyWired Network 00:00:55 Discussion of the Water Resource Information System 00:35.40 Discussion of Geographic Information Systems 00:52:30 Discussion of Committee Report to LRC 01:15:05, 958, all

Summary: The Information Technology Oversight Committee met with a quorum, approved the prior meeting minutes, and then heard a presentation from Leadcore representatives Jimmy Bird, Mike Murray, and Rebecca Moss on the Kentucky Wired network. Leadcore described its role as the design-builder and service provider under the KCNA contract, saying the network was built with roughly 13,200 feet of fiber, mostly aerial, and that the use of non-armored cable was a Kentucky-side decision made to reduce cost. They also said aerial construction and non-armored cable increase maintenance challenges, including storm damage and squirrel-related damage, and reported FY25 service activity of 104 break-fix events, 30 maintenance replacements, 64 storm-damage events, and nearly 13,000 feet of fiber replaced to date. Committee members questioned whether the original project anticipated this level of replacement and whether any forecast existed for maintenance under non-armored cable. Leadcore said it did not do a formal forecast and could not say whether the replacement rate was above or below norms, though it acknowledged the decision not to use armored cable came from the Kentucky side of the contract. Members also asked about whether replacements caused network degradation; Leadcore said it tries to replace cable at existing splice points to avoid degradation and, where needed, uses armored cable for replacement sections going forward. The committee then explored Leadcore’s relationship with Excel and KCNA. Leadcore said it has a service-level agreement for KCNA-related fibers but not for dark fibers used by Excel, and that Kentucky Wired fibers get priority on service requests. It said outages are reported through a 1-800 number and that it was not aware of any access problems to the huts. On the tech refresh, Leadcore said its understanding is that maintaining the network is its responsibility, but the technology refresh is not; it said only a very limited amount of refresh has occurred and that this did not match the original contract intent. Leadcore also said it had not been asked to defer maintenance. The chair closed by saying the testimony would inform a committee report and that he intended to recommend clawing back or withholding some previously authorized Kentucky Wired and refresh funding until an audit is complete, with the committee to vote on a report later.

Transcript Highlights:

• Which is an affordable housing infrastructure project.
• The quotes included things like the infrastructure.
• We heard interest in things like solar being part of this with the infrastructure.
• Improvements for infrastructure. We don't currently do that.
• Rounds, you made a comment earlier regarding maintenance infrastructure.

Transcript Highlights:

• . infrastructure. infrastructure.
• Um we're doing a lot on infrastructure. Um we're doing a lot on infrastructure.
• infrastructure and reducing the burden. infrastructure and reducing the burden.
• it probably will be for infrastructure. it probably will be for infrastructure.
• build infrastructure. build infrastructure.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• She said the Mass Ready Act improves infrastructure.
• infrastructure projects.
• And having flood- and drought-resilient infrastructure is critical to that effort.
• Massachusetts is facing a water infrastructure crisis.
• Becca lifted up for you the FSIG infrastructure grant, and I want to make it real to you.

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."}{

Transcript Highlights:

• Just like we need new infrastructure here. Mr.
• That involves the infrastructure that is to service the facility. Of course. Mr.
• You see data centers investing in local infrastructure and priorities.
• And that fits into the infrastructure providers plan.
• We are an active participant in energy infrastructure.

Summary: The Committee on State Affairs convened to discuss data centers and their impact on Texas's energy infrastructure. The meeting featured testimony from key representatives of the Public Utility Commission (PUC) and ERCOT, who outlined the evolving landscape of energy generation and the challenges posed by the rapid growth of data centers. Notably, ERCOT reported over 450,000 MW of generation resources planned for connection, with a significant portion attributed to data centers, which now represent around 87% of new large load interconnection requests. The committee explored proposed changes to the interconnection process, including a new 'batch study' approach aimed at streamlining the approval of multiple projects simultaneously. This change is intended to address the challenges of managing numerous simultaneous requests and to provide more certainty for developers regarding their energy needs. Testimonies emphasized the importance of ensuring that the costs of infrastructure upgrades are borne by the data centers rather than residential ratepayers, with discussions around the financial commitments required from developers. Several data center developers also provided testimony, highlighting the economic benefits of their projects, including job creation and increased local revenues. They expressed concerns about the potential for a moratorium on future growth due to the new interconnection rules and emphasized the need for a collaborative approach to address water usage and environmental impacts. The committee plans to continue discussions on these topics in future hearings, with a focus on balancing economic growth with energy reliability and resource management.

Transcript Highlights:

• Just like we need new infrastructure here.
• That involves the infrastructure that is to service the facility. Of course. Mr.
• And that fits into the infrastructure providers plan.
• AI infrastructure isn't just an economic asset, it's a national security asset.
• We are an active participant in energy infrastructure.

Transcript Highlights:

• Public health infrastructure is just that: infrastructure. It is not a one-time emergency response.
• We used it to build public health infrastructure and to upgrade lab equipment.
• That is a great public health infrastructure. That is what we should be protecting.
• As well as the state public health infrastructure is invested in.
• Support our public health infrastructure as it faces these cuts.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Infrastructure Fund, approximately $19 million.
• infrastructure fund.
• Madam Chair, Senator Lujan, there's an infrastructure fund.
• Prior for the priority for water and tribal infrastructure and land grant was that, um, in acequia infrastructure
• This is currently where the tribal infrastructure and the Housing Infrastructure Fund sit in the law.

Transcript Highlights:

• You have heard from the Colonia Infrastructure Board since its inception in 2011.
• The Colonias program covers many different infrastructures.
• That's what we talk about when professionalizing this infrastructure, the management of this infrastructure
• They're important pieces of infrastructure.
• But as we increase our infrastructure, we need to ensure that we're Investing in our infrastructure,

Transcript Highlights:

• So we basically finance public infrastructure.
• I'll, I'll count that in infrastructure for right now.
• Uh, the next page I will go to is Colonia Infrastructure.
• infrastructure has been delivered since 2020.
• Chair, yes, so workforce housing for vertical and infrastructure and low income only for infrastructure

Transcript Highlights:

• We will start with it. ...of the Kitchen Infrastructure and Training Grants Program.
• General investments in infrastructure take a while and are timely.
• Now I'll return to the Kitchen Infrastructure Grant Program.
• However, given infrastructure, staffing, and training for food service workers.
• Kitchen infrastructure and training.

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Education heard the Governor’s proposals for universal school meals, the Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELOP), and community schools. On universal meals, the Department of Education supported continued funding for the Universal School Meals Program and a fourth round of Kitchen Infrastructure and Training Grants, citing meal-count growth, improved meal service, and the need to offset federal uncertainty, inflation, and reduced direct certification tied to immigration-related policy changes. The LAO recommended rejecting another kitchen grant round, arguing prior rounds are still being spent and the state has not clearly defined unmet need. Members also raised concerns about the state’s ability to backfill federal meal funding and about how federal requirements affect programs like Summer EBT/SUN Bucks. Public commenters largely supported school meals and kitchen investments, with some urging support for plant-based milk options and continued infrastructure funding. For ELOP, the Department of Finance proposed $4.7 billion ongoing Proposition 98 funding, including $62.4 million to set a minimum Tier 2 rate of $1,800 per pupil. The LAO recommended going further and fully fixing the Tier 2 rate, saying rate uncertainty complicates district planning. CDE supported the proposal and said the program has improved attendance and academic outcomes, while noting new CalPADS reporting will provide more data soon. Senators discussed whether ELOP should remain a standalone program or be folded into LCFF, and whether the state should require stronger outcome reporting. Public testimony generally backed stabilizing Tier 2 funding, but some speakers urged more support for older youth and more timely, user-friendly reporting. On community schools, the administration proposed $1 billion ongoing Proposition 98 funding to expand the model to thousands more schools and to support existing grantees, along with stronger technical assistance, statewide alignment, and an accreditation/self-certification framework. The LAO recommended continuing the current one-time grant approach instead of creating a new ongoing categorical program, warning about reduced flexibility, administrative burden, and the state’s capacity to support a much larger cohort. CDE supported the ongoing investment but asked for additional county office and technical assistance funding. Senators and public commenters were broadly supportive of community schools, emphasizing improved attendance, graduation, and student engagement, while also debating accountability, accreditation, and whether non-classroom-based charter schools should be eligible. Public testimony strongly favored ongoing funding and highlighted community schools’ role in mental health, family engagement, and wraparound supports.

Transcript Highlights:

• have one item on this agenda that is House Bill 344 HD1, relating to electric vehicle charging infrastructure
• That's been our biggest challenge, right, with existing facilities is that the actual infrastructure
• That's been our biggest challenge, right, with existing facilities is that the actual infrastructure
• That's been our biggest challenge, right, with existing facilities is that the actual infrastructure
• to be um have those that infrastructure to be um have those that infrastructure installed.<00:04

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint committees heard House Bill 344 HD1, which would require new buildings to include electric vehicle charger-ready parking stalls. Testimony was overwhelmingly in support from the State Energy Office, Department of Accounting and General Services, the Disabilities and Communication Access Board, and others. Members asked about cost and infrastructure impacts; the State Energy Office said the added cost would likely be modest if planned from the start, but that electrical capacity remains a key challenge for expanding EV charging. The chairs proposed two amendments: extending the bill to cover on-grade parking lots and adding language for Level 1 or Level 3 charging when appropriate. After discussion, both committees voted to pass HB 344 HD1 with amendments. In the Energy and Intergovernmental Affairs committee, the chair voted aye, one member voted with reservation, and excused members were noted; the Government Operations committee also passed the measure, with one aye vote and one vote with reservations. The committees also heard House Bill 10001 HD1 SD1, relating to the Maui wildfire settlement trust fund. The Governor’s Office, Attorney General’s Office, Maui County, and the Tax Foundation testified in support. Members questioned Hawaii Electric Industries’ ability to fund its share of the settlement and whether the state should pay first or in tranches. The chair proposed amendments requiring all defendant parties to submit payment plans and proof of ability to pay, and requiring non-state defendants to fund their shares into escrow before the state releases its share. The committee adopted the amendments and passed the bill unanimously by the members present. Later, the committee deferred action on House Bill 229 HD1 until March 20 for clarification on amendments, then passed House Bill 860 HD1 with amendments addressing liability for limited resurfacing of disputed roads, and passed House Bill 1161 HD2 with amendments concerning highway fund use, formula calculations, and EV-related county fees.