Transcript Highlights:

• Number one, to review the progress that California has made in recent years.
• number of rate-paid programs.
• The resource adequacy program is a reliability-based procurement program, so it assigns capacity requirements
• We made a recent change to the resource adequacy program.
• We have a number of programs, and... Yeah, we have a number of programs.

Summary: The committee first heard AB 1026 by Assembly Member Wilson, which would require investor-owned utilities to provide clearer front-end information and follow more consistent timelines for post-entitlement energization applications tied to housing projects. The author and supporters from the Housing Action Coalition and Mission Housing said utility delays can hold up approved housing, add costs, and create uncertainty, and they argued the bill would align utility processes with recent state efforts to streamline local permitting. PG&E and Southern California Edison opposed the bill, saying existing CPUC timelines and the ongoing energization rulemaking already address the issue, that the bill could be duplicative or premature, and that some proposed timelines were too short. The committee discussed the bill’s relationship to the CPUC’s September 2024 decision, and AB 1026 was ultimately approved on a 15-0 vote, with the consent calendar also passing. The second half of the hearing was the committee’s annual oversight hearing on electric reliability. Representatives from the CPUC, CEC, CAISO, and DWR reviewed lessons from the 2020 and 2022 heat emergencies, emphasizing that California has since added significant resources, improved planning, and created backstop programs such as the strategic reliability reserve. They said the summer 2025 outlook is cautiously optimistic, with no expected shortfalls under traditional planning conditions and a projected surplus, though wildfire and extreme heat remain risks. The agencies also described major changes in planning and operations, including more battery storage, updated resource adequacy rules, expanded transmission planning, and reforms to the interconnection queue. Members asked about data center load, Diablo Canyon’s future, the strategic reliability reserve, demand response, wildfire mitigation costs, affordability, and regional market expansion. Witnesses said data center demand is a major variable but can be managed through better forecasting, flexible service arrangements, and siting in areas with existing capacity; they also said firm clean resources remain valuable while planning continues around Diablo Canyon’s scheduled retirement. On affordability, they said the agencies try to balance reliability with least-cost procurement, and that new resources can lower market prices even as they require upfront investment. CAISO also highlighted the value of the Western Energy Imbalance Market and the planned day-ahead market, saying regional coordination improves both reliability and cost savings.

Transcript Highlights:

• , the special housing incentive program, it really is an incentive program.
• It really is a disciplinary program, and in that program inmates are broken down into three phases, each
• misinformation about the ship program misinformation about the ship program the<00:25:57.000>
• we should get rid of the ship program we should get rid of the ship program I'm<00:28:49.480>
• The Act 57 program was a unique program because of the moratorium.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs heard SB 104, which would restrict the use of restrictive housing or solitary confinement in state-operated and state-contracted correctional facilities, with specified exceptions. The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation strongly opposed the bill, saying its existing policy already meets or exceeds ACA and National Institute of Corrections standards, and objecting to language they said would give the oversight commission operational decision-making authority. The Hawaii Correctional System Oversight Commission supported the bill, but also said it was not intended to run operations and described concerns about restrictive housing practices, including CoreCivic’s SHIP program at Saguaro. Supporters included the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, the Office of the Public Defender, the Disability Rights Center, ACLU Hawaii, Easter Seals Hawaii, and individual testifiers. They argued that Native Hawaiians are disproportionately impacted by incarceration, that solitary confinement is harmful and linked to depression, anxiety, suicidality, and poor reentry outcomes, and that confinement beyond 15 days is widely condemned under international standards. Several testifiers cited suicides and deaths in custody as reasons to codify limits in statute rather than rely on policy alone. The department responded that it already has 24/7 medical care, though not 24/7 mental health coverage at one facility, and explained that it uses four custody categories: disciplinary segregation, administrative segregation, protective custody, and placements for inmates seeking separation for safety reasons. Members questioned the department and commission about the SHIP program, whether the bill was based on other states’ laws, and how current policies compare with national standards. The director said the bill was too ambiguous in places and that the department was willing to work with the commission on policy changes, but still opposed the measure as written. The committee took testimony and questions; no vote or final action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• , also known as the IDD pilot program, that was established in 2023.
• You have to stay on the program, on the pilot, for one year.
• So share of cost is actually not a full Medicaid program.
• They have to go on a full Medicaid program, which is MWA or MTD. MTD.
• I'm excited about the adult pathways program.

Summary: The committee heard and advanced several bills related to children, families, elder affairs, mental health, disability services, and child care. SB 1050 on the Agency for Persons with Disabilities was amended and reported favorably after discussion of expanding the voluntary IDD managed care pilot statewide, improving transparency on the APD wait list, creating a statewide family care council, addressing transition services for youth leaving foster care, and seeking federal approval for an adult pathways waiver. Testimony from providers and a parent emphasized workforce capacity, county-level identification of clients, Medicaid delays, and the importance of keeping the pilot voluntary; the bill passed with support and some discussion about possible future clarifications on services and Medicaid eligibility. The committee also passed SB 1310, which directs OPPAGA to evaluate student mental health outcomes tied to school mental health assistance funding, and members discussed the need for better data, coordination with managing entities, and avoiding duplication of services. SB 976 on court-appointed social investigators was amended and approved, with the sponsor describing due process protections and fee-shifting provisions for parents challenging court-appointed psychologists. SB 886, creating a crisis care coordination team pilot in Volusia and Polk counties to reduce Baker Act recidivism and improve follow-up care, was reported favorably after the sponsor described its law enforcement and community provider partnerships and an independent evaluation requirement. Later, SB 614 on child care facility and program background screening requirements was amended and passed; the bill requires a public educational webpage explaining Level 2 screening, the clearinghouse, disqualifying offenses, exemptions, and related job listings and timelines. Finally, SB 276 on sheltering or aiding unmarried minors was approved; it increases the offense from a first-degree misdemeanor to a third-degree felony, creates a presumption regarding knowledge of the minor’s age, and adds a defense when the conduct was necessary to protect the minor from danger. All bills considered were reported favorably, and the committee adjourned at the end of the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• They have submitted their proposals, and we are reviewing them.
• One of my office's responsibilities is to review the authority's reports.
• My office has reviewed the draft business plan and has found that it falls...
• This is the fourth annual report of the authority I have reviewed.
• ...passed this program?

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Transportation Committee held an informational hearing on the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s 2026 draft business plan, with testimony from the authority, the Legislative Analyst’s Office, and the High-Speed Rail Inspector General. Chair Cortese framed the hearing around major changes since the 2024 plan, including a new CEO, revised scope for the Merced-to-Bakersfield initial operating segment, the loss of about $4 billion in federal funds, and the authority’s push for private investment, value capture, and public-private partnerships. The authority’s CEO said the project is now in a more disciplined phase, with most major structures in the Central Valley underway or complete, track procurement moving forward, and an updated target of revenue service for the initial operating segment by early 2033. He also highlighted cost-saving “optimization,” direct procurement of materials, and plans to pursue ancillary revenues from real estate, energy, broadband, and logistics. Committee members pressed the authority on several issues, including proposed station relocations in Merced and Bakersfield, reduced double-tracking, the need for tax increment or other value-capture tools, utility relocation authority, permitting delays, transparency, and whether the project can still qualify as true high-speed rail. The CEO said the station locations are still under discussion with local governments, that the project will still be built to high-speed standards, and that the authority is seeking legislative changes to reduce delays and enable financing. Senators also questioned the loss of federal funds, the use of future cap-and-invest revenues, and the feasibility of private financing; the authority said the project can proceed without the withdrawn federal money but that it will keep applying for grants and exploring ways to bring future revenue forward. LAO and the Inspector General were sharply critical of the draft plan. They said it does not fully comply with newer statutory requirements in SB 198 and AB 377, especially because it assumes a different Merced station location and a largely single-track segment without clearly identifying those as scope changes. They also said the plan omits key funding details, including borrowing costs that could total billions, and relies on assumptions about future legislative changes, financing, and project savings that may not materialize. The Inspector General said the draft plan falls short on required business-plan elements, including comparable cost estimates, a complete funding plan, and projected procurement milestones. In response, the authority committed to address the OIG’s findings in the final business plan and to provide a written response on compliance before the plan is finalized.

Transcript Highlights:

• parameters that each program has. parameters that each program has.
• the program, reviews how things are working, reviews enrollment, benefits, any needs, and any adjustments
• Uh, there are program budgets that are submitted each year that are reviewed, as I said, for efficiency
• assistance program.
• of any such program. of any such program.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• However, the California Birth Defects Monitoring Program has limited resources and is only funded to
• We appreciate the committee's thoughtful review of AB 1056 and respectfully urge your aye vote.
• with the prior diversion program.
• to the program because they harmed a patient or committed malpractice.
• This would require a detailed review by the PUC in a proceeding to work out tricky details.

Summary: The Assembly Appropriations Committee met on May 21, 2025, with 86 bills on the agenda. The committee first approved two consent motions covering a group of bills eligible for the Assembly floor consent calendar and another group of unanimous bills not eligible for floor consent. Several bills were then heard individually, with authors and supporters emphasizing that many had no or minimal state costs and were aimed at climate, health, or regulatory improvements. Among the bills discussed were AB 39 on local planning for electrification and EV charging infrastructure; AB 1129 allowing local health jurisdictions to opt into reporting birth defects and early-life health conditions; AB 1332 to allow narrow direct shipment of medicinal cannabis to seriously ill patients; AB 1056 phasing out transfer of certain gillnet permits except for a one-time family transfer; AB 408 creating a new Medical Board health and wellness program for physicians; AB 546 requiring health plans to cover portable HEPA air purifiers for vulnerable people during wildfire emergencies; AB 942 revising rooftop solar subsidy rules to reduce costs for non-solar ratepayers; and AB 967 expediting licensure for out-of-state physicians. Supporters generally framed these bills as improving access, equity, public health, or affordability, while opponents on AB 942 and AB 967 raised concerns about implementation, workload, contract issues, and impacts on existing programs. The committee took action on each bill after testimony and questions. AB 39, AB 1129, AB 1332, AB 1056, AB 408, AB 546, AB 942, and AB 967 were all moved out of committee on roll call votes, with some members voting no or not voting on certain measures. The suspense calendar was then read and deemed approved, and the committee opened general public comment, where speakers voiced support for bills including AB 715, AB 1138, AB 782, AB 98, AB 53, AB 258, AB 330, AB 650, AB 649, AB 1048, and AB 425. The meeting adjourned after public comment.

Transcript Highlights:

• AND YOU HAVE IN YOUR PACKET LADIES AND GENTLEMEN A REVIEW OF THE VARIOUS OBJECTIONS AND IF I CAN GRAB
• THIS INCLUDES ITEMS AND PROJECTS SUBJECT TO REVIEW. THERE ARE CERTIFICATES OF NEED EXEMPTIONS.
• AGAIN THE SHORT ANSWER IS WE ARE REVIEWING THESE RULES.
• WE JUST SIMPLY HAD COMPLETED THAT REVIEW TO ENSURE THEY DON'T.
• THE NEW RULE IS MORE LIKE A CAP AND TRADE PROGRAM.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• from our review schedule.
• JLARC review if there was one.
• You can filter by tax type or select those reviews that were reviewed by JLARC.
• That’s a review of the working families tax credit, which is a remittance program for low-income families
• in Washington, as well as a review of the motion picture competitiveness program, which also has a relatively

Summary: The Citizen Commission for Performance Measurement of Tax Preferences met on May 6, 2026, with quorum present and unanimously approved the October 21, 2025 minutes. The Attorney General’s Office then provided its annual open government refresher, covering key points of the Public Records Act and Open Public Meetings Act, including broad disclosure requirements, records retention, response timelines for public records requests, and rules for meetings, special meetings, emergency meetings, and executive sessions. JLARC staff gave a 2026 legislative session update on tax preference bills. They highlighted 20 bills affecting tax preferences, including repeal of the coal-related sales and use tax exemption, changes to data center exemptions, new property tax exemptions for renewable energy facilities and land bank authorities, and a broad tax package in engrossed substitute Senate Bill 6346 that created multiple credits, deductions, and exemptions. Staff also presented the 2026 expedited tax preference review report covering 64 preferences, noting it is based on prior JLARC reviews and Department of Revenue studies and is now available in an interactive searchable format. The commission approved the 2026 public testimony questions without changes and then adopted the 2027–2036 tax preference review schedule, along with a new rolling 10-year schedule that will be updated each May. During discussion, commissioners raised concerns about how preferences are prioritized for full review versus expedited review, especially for older or high-revenue preferences without performance statements, and staff explained that legislative mandates, expiration dates, and workload constraints drive the schedule. The meeting also included a public and staff recognition of Commissioner Grant Forsyth’s 13 years of service and leadership, with remarks praising his collaborative approach and long tenure; the next meeting was set for August 4, 2026.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our office last conducted the board sunset review in 1997, and the board's most recent sunset review
• was a self-review conducted in 2017.
• for a veterinary loan assistance program.
• Our sunset review included two reports.
• This led the Governor's Regulatory Review Council to mandate five-year rule reviews and rulemaking in

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The Joint Natural Resources and House Natural Resources, Energy and Water Committees of Reference heard the Arizona Auditor General’s sunset review of the Arizona State Veterinary Medical Examining Board. The audit found the board generally met some licensing requirements, but it did not timely investigate and resolve 49 of 159 complaints in fiscal year 2024, and it did not fully comply with conflict-of-interest disclosure and filing requirements. The Auditor General also identified weaknesses in continuing-education verification and other sunset-factor areas, and the board agreed to implement all 21 recommendations. Board staff said complaint volume has risen sharply since the pandemic, that the board’s process is slower because every case goes through an investigative committee and then the full board, and that it has already corrected some conflict-of-interest issues and is adding tools to improve continuing-education audits. The committee then heard testimony from the board’s executive director and from the Arizona Veterinary Medical Association. The executive director emphasized the board’s public-protection mission, described the shortage of veterinarians and veterinary technicians, and said the board is working to improve efficiency through a new e-licensing system and staff training. Members asked about the shortage of large-animal veterinarians, complaint backlogs, and whether the board could do more to recruit rural practitioners; the board said it lacks direct recruiting authority but supports multiple licensure pathways and loan-assistance efforts. The veterinary association supported the board’s oversight and said it is also working on rural and large-animal workforce issues through partnerships and advocacy. The committee then voted to recommend continuing the board for eight years, until July 1, 2034. The committee next took up the Arizona State Land Department, beginning with the Auditor General’s presentation on the department’s sunset review and prior special audit. The audit found the department had not updated its required five-year disposition plan since 2011, had sold more than 48,000 acres without an active plan, had allowed agricultural rental rates to go unchanged since 2006 despite market increases, and had not consistently inspected mineral-related leases or properly managed reclamation bonds. The Auditor General said these issues created risks of lost revenue, reduced transparency, and public-safety hazards, and recommended 18 corrective actions in the main review plus 34 additional recommendations on other issues; the department agreed to most recommendations but declined to adopt a written policy for commissioner-initiated land sales. Commissioner Robin Sahid said the department is working through audit recommendations, has created a rules team, improved its customer portal, and is pursuing new policies on water use, transportation-basin leases, and disposition planning. Members questioned the department about agricultural leases, groundwater valuation, the Fondomonte leases and reimbursement for improvements, the canceled Coyotes land auction, backlog and processing times, and the use of consultants and administrative funds. The commissioner said the department had over 2,000 applications in queue when she arrived, that it has made progress reducing the backlog, and that it is conducting stakeholder outreach on water-efficiency standards and lease addenda. No final vote on the land department continuation was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Give today to secure the longevity of balanced, unfiltered civic programming.
• our system change review process, and we've... ...critical incidents, how they review our system change
• We will then review our data on critical incidents, the information we've learned from that review process
• the reviewed lens.
• So when teams are doing these reviews, they're rating an item...

Keywords: 970, all

Transcript Highlights:

• from our review schedule.
• JLARC review if there was one.
• You can filter by tax type or select those reviews that were reviewed by JLARC.
• That's a review of the Working Families Tax Credit, which is a remittance program for low-income families
• in Washington, as well as a review of the motion picture competitiveness program, which also has a relatively

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: The Citizen Commission for Performance Measurement of Tax Preferences met on May 6, 2026, with quorum present and unanimously approved the October 21, 2025 minutes. The Attorney General’s Office then provided its annual refresher on Washington’s Public Records Act and Open Public Meetings Act, emphasizing broad disclosure requirements, records retention, prompt routing of records requests to staff, and OPMA rules for meetings, conference calls, emails, special meetings, and executive sessions. JLARC staff next reviewed 2026 tax preference legislation, noting 20 bills affecting tax preferences. Examples included repeal of the coal sales tax exemption, changes to data center exemptions, new property tax exemptions for renewable energy facilities and land bank authorities, and a broad tax package in Senate Bill 6346 that created credits and deductions, expanded the working families tax credit, and exempted items such as diapers and hygiene products. Staff also presented the 2026 expedited review report covering 64 tax preferences and explained that it is based on prior JLARC reviews and Department of Revenue studies rather than full new reviews. The commission approved unchanged 2026 public testimony questions and then adopted the draft 2027–2036 tax preference review schedule, along with a new rolling 10-year schedule format that will be updated each May. During discussion, Representative Pollitt questioned how preferences are prioritized for full review versus expedited or no review, especially for large preferences without performance statements, and staff explained that legislative mandates, expiration timing, and staff capacity drive the schedule. The commission agreed staff would meet with members to discuss possible future adjustments. The meeting concluded with public and staff recognition of Commissioner Grant Forsyth, who is leaving the commission after 13 years of service. Speakers praised his leadership, consensus-building, and long tenure as both commissioner and chair. The next commission meeting was announced for August 4, 2026.

Transcript Highlights:

• chance to review the minutes? chance to review the minutes?
• <00:09:49.440> This steal from our public programs. This steal from our public programs.
• <00:15:34.639> the had plenty of chances to review the had plenty of chances to review the
• fraud um on fraud on public programs. fraud um on fraud on public programs.
• be able to be in the Medicaid program. be able to be in the Medicaid program.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we have a very comprehensive program. We are prepared.
• Are they frequently reviewed and updated and tested?
• I do appreciate. frequently reviewed and updated and tested.
• As I mentioned, the TEMS program, some counties have very robust TEMS programs where there are a lot
• I mean, Cal OES is always available to review. We review all sorts of emergency plans.

Summary: The committee held a hearing on active and mass shootings in California, focusing on prevention, response, training, communications, and gaps in preparedness across law enforcement, schools, campuses, fire, EMS, and state agencies. Opening remarks emphasized the frequency and impact of gun violence, the need for faster coordinated response, and the importance of learning from recent tragedies such as the Stockton-area mass shooting described by Sheriff Patrick Withrow. The first panel included representatives from police, sheriff, and campus public safety agencies, who discussed incident command, interoperable communications, next-generation 911, threat assessment, emergency notification systems, and the value of joint drills and cross-agency planning. Witnesses also highlighted differences in training and authority across jurisdictions, especially for private university public safety departments versus public campus police. Campus representatives said they rely heavily on municipal law enforcement for armed response, while also using run-hide-fight protocols, text alerts, surveillance, and threat assessment teams. Members raised concerns about standardized training, after-action reviews, mental health resources, school resource officers, and whether campus safety plans and drills are sufficiently consistent or workable. Sheriff Withrow argued that early intervention and accountability are being weakened by well-intentioned laws, while other witnesses stressed prevention through relationships, diversion, and coordinated support services. The second panel from Cal OES, the Department of Education, POST, and EMSA described statewide systems and standards. Cal OES outlined its Reduce the Risk initiative, gun violence restraining orders, mutual aid, unified command, after-action reporting, and nonprofit security grants. The Department of Education explained California’s statutory school safety framework, annual safety plans, regulated armed assailant drills, and local flexibility, while acknowledging compliance gaps and the need for more mental health support. POST described the new requirement for 16 hours of standardized active shooter training for recruits and ongoing local training options. EMSA explained its role in medical response and terrorism training standards. No votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• CRAAS under the Congressional Review CRAAS under the Congressional Review Act.<02:29:09.280>
• c> resolutions Congressional Review Act resolutions Congressional Review Act resolutions that<02:
• This week's Congressional Review Act.
• <03:10:10.880> that Medicaid and SNAP, programs that Medicaid and SNAP, programs that hundreds
• And Americans that rely on this program.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Tuesday, April 29, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• products program.
• There's no peer-reviewed evidence to the contrary that's been conducted.
• Peer-reviewed research papers on all of these toxicity endpoints.
• I mean, they were reviewing one chemical every three years.
• I mean, it was really shameful the amount that they review.

Summary: The Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee met to adopt its rules, establish quorum, and approve a consent calendar of five bills, all sent to the Committee on Appropriations. The committee then heard three measures: AB 638 by Assembly Member Rodriguez on stormwater capture for irrigation of urban public lands; AB 60 by Assembly Member Papin on banning synthetic nitro musks in cosmetics and personal care products; and AB 916 by Assembly Member Lee on restricting certain antibacterial soap ingredients in consumer hand soaps and body washes. AB 638 was presented as a climate and water-supply measure directing the State Water Resources Control Board to develop guidelines for capturing and safely reusing stormwater for irrigation. Supporters, including NRDC and several environmental groups, argued it would reduce potable water use and help move stalled projects forward. The bill drew no opposition and received strong support from committee members, including requests to coauthor. It passed the committee on a due pass motion to Appropriations. AB 60 would ban synthetic nitro musks in cosmetics and personal care products due to health and environmental concerns. Supporters cited endocrine disruption, reproductive harms, persistence in waterways, and international restrictions. The bill passed on a due pass motion to the floor, with one member not voting. AB 916 generated the most debate: supporters said the three targeted antimicrobials offer no added benefit over plain soap, may contribute to health harms and antibiotic resistance, and should be banned in consumer products while exempting health care settings. Opponents argued the ingredients are already under FDA and DTSC review, raised preemption concerns, and warned of costs and impacts on food handling and other uses. After extensive discussion, the committee approved AB 916 on a due pass motion to the Committee on Health, with several no votes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, first order of business, review the minutes.
• Thank to f to give the run the program.
• Um, for me to say to run the program.
• to allow these programs to run. to allow these programs to run.
• statute um I had a little time to review statute um I had a little time to review it<00:19:20.559

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes and adopted the consent calendar without objection. It then took up Department of Safety Rule 25161 on administrative license suspension forms. After discussion of a staff concern that the rule text should expressly require a defendant’s signature or refusal to sign, and the officer’s witness signature, the agency agreed to revised language. The committee voted to grant conditional approval with those edits. The committee next considered Department of Agriculture rule 192, concerning importation of bovines and domestic animals. Staff identified several issues, including an overly broad federal citation, an unclear definition of infection, a possible conflict between provisions on telephone-issued permits and documents that must be carried, and missing struck-through repeal language. Because the department had not proposed written fixes, members moved to postpone the item until next month, and the motion passed. A second Agriculture item, 25207, was discussed as a long-expired set of rules that the agency said were still needed to run its programs; the committee granted conditional approval. The Public Utilities Commission’s competitive natural gas supplier and aggregator rules prompted the most extensive debate. Staff argued the cited statutes did not clearly authorize the commission to impose fines on natural gas suppliers, while the agency responded that authority could be read from related Department of Energy transition language and general rulemaking provisions. Members discussed whether the issue reflected a statutory gap created when responsibilities were split between the Department of Energy and the commission. The committee ultimately voted to waive and postpone the item to next month so the attorneys could work out the authority question. The committee also postponed Department of Energy items 219 and 220 at the agency’s request, and it noted that the Liquor Commission’s emergency rule had been revised to reduce reporting from monthly to quarterly before being reissued, with the item also postponed.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:25:09.919> Um of pool mur management programs. Um of pool mur management programs.
• management programs are not insurers? management programs are not insurers?
• > is<00:36:54.800> no management programs, there is no management programs, there is no
• <00:58:54.480> there be able to review that with them. there be able to review that with them
• > a premiums and they rep review them for a premiums and they rep review them for a couple<01:

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee took up the pooled risk management program bill and reviewed a new amendment drafted with input from the Insurance Department and Legislative Services. Department witnesses explained that the proposal would move oversight of pooled risk management programs from the Secretary of State’s office to the Insurance Department, add a licensure requirement, preserve the programs’ non-insurer status, and exempt them from third-party administrator licensure. They also described a series of solvency tools in the draft, including financial reporting, risk-based capital standards, minimum capitalization, investment limits, commissioner examination and enforcement authority, rulemaking authority, merger and affiliate-transaction review, confidentiality protections, and a separability clause. A major theme of the discussion was that pooled risk management programs differ from commercial insurers because the risk remains with the member local governments rather than being backed by a state guarantee fund. Witnesses said the bill is designed to emphasize solvency over return of premium and to give the Insurance Department a regulatory “toolbox” to prevent insolvency, including a proposed $5 million excess or stop-loss coverage benchmark, optional accessible policies, and a requirement that boards vote on dividends or premium returns when capital exceeds 600% of risk-based capital. Members questioned how this approach differed from the original Secretary of State bill and whether assessments on towns would still be possible; the department responded that the new framework would allow more flexible oversight and alternatives to immediate court action. The committee also discussed why the statute should continue to say the programs are not insurers, with the department explaining that this preserves their autonomy and avoids applying unrelated insurance laws and premium taxes. Members asked about the department’s workload and were told the department believed it could absorb the new duties without additional funding. No vote or final committee action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• A student may be placed in a non-public program if it is authorized by the child's Admission Review and
• So we see them getting left in our programs with no transition.
• They weren't aware of a non-public program.
• And so that's reviewed based on this student.
• how the ESA program is initially administered.

Summary: The Committee on Education K-16 heard several bills focused largely on special education transparency, school safety, and student support services. Senate Bill 1908, by Senator Zaffirini, would direct the Higher Education Coordinating Board to study the feasibility of a statewide system for coordinating clinical training placements, including regional portals for healthcare clinical slots, with a report due by December 1, 2026. A representative of the Texas Nurses Association and the Nursing Legislative Agenda Coalition testified in support. The bill was left pending subject to the call of the chair. The committee then took up Senate Bill 111, by Senator Hall, which in its committee substitute was narrowed to a reporting bill requiring school districts to disclose legal proceedings involving special education due process complaints when legal fees exceed $10,000, rather than capping spending. Several parents and advocates testified that districts spend large sums on litigation against families of children with disabilities and that greater transparency is needed; some senators raised concerns about unintended consequences, including possible pressure to settle cases. The committee adopted the substitute and left the bill pending. The committee also heard Senate Bill 1551 on automated external defibrillators in public schools, Senate Bill 865 on CPR instruction requirements for certain volunteers, Senate Bill 1032 on the Governor’s University Research Initiative, and Senate Bill 571 on school employee misconduct reporting and access to the Do Not Hire Registry; each was reported favorably after committee substitute adoption and roll-call votes. Additional bills discussed included Senate Bill 1884, which would formalize and expand dedicated staff support for the State Board of Education and give the board chair hiring authority over that staff; members questioned whether it duplicated TEA functions, while a witness argued the workload increase justified the change, and the bill was left pending. Senate Bill 625 would replace the current half-credit economics requirement with a half-credit in personal financial literacy; educators and advocates strongly supported making the course required, and the bill was left pending. Senate Bill 582 would make TEA settlement agreements in special investigations publicly available when sanctions are imposed, and Senate Bill 2600 would bar transportation fees for students living within two miles of campus unless districts do not receive state transportation funding; both were left pending. The committee also heard Senate Bill 2751, which would require TEA inspections of non-public special education programs to consider medical standards of care and crisis-prevention training; testimony from a program operator described severe student behaviors and the need for more flexibility, and the bill was left pending after the substitute was adopted.

Transcript Highlights:

• They reviewed Century Code. They reviewed the history of the governance for the three systems.
• How our program looks at affordability.
• So making sure projects are eligible for the program, that we do the environmental reviews, we review
• the drinking water program.
• through their cost share program.

Summary: The Water Topics Overview Committee met to review several interim studies and receive updates from the Department of Water Resources. The committee approved the March 26, 2026 minutes, observed a moment of silence for the late Representative Conmy, and welcomed Representative Hansen to the committee. Staff then reported that the watershed management study and the stormwater/wastewater study had both satisfied the presentation requirements in their study directives, with no further required testimony unless members wanted additional information. The department’s main presentation focused on major water projects and agency operations. Reese Haas and staff updated members on the NAWS project, the Southwest Pipeline Project, Devils Lake outlet operations, low-head dam safety work, floodplain management repository implementation, data center water use, and the 2027 Water Development Plan. Members asked detailed questions about NAWS funding sources, remaining project costs, capacity concerns for All Seasons and other users, and whether current construction is being designed for future demand. The department said NAWS remains on track for substantial completion by October, that remaining NAWS funding will come from a mix of federal, state, and local sources, and that current construction is designed for ultimate capacity while some future components will be adjusted for increased demand. A large portion of the meeting was devoted to the department’s cash management, Resources Trust Fund revenues, carryover balances, and the State Water Commission’s cost-share program. The department reported $340.6 million in carryover remaining, explained that much of it is already obligated to long-term projects, and noted that oil price forecasts and stripper-well exemptions will affect future revenues. Members raised concerns about large carryovers, affordability for local sponsors, and whether the state should continue obligating money multiple bienniums ahead. The department said it is working with the commission on a revised prioritization framework, including high/moderate/low project categories and a two-tier pre-construction/construction approach, to better manage obligations and affordability. The committee also reviewed Deloitte’s finalized studies on regional governance/finance and cost-share policy. Deloitte presented options for Southwest, NAWS, and Red River governance, with stakeholders generally favoring keeping NAWS largely as is, using the current Southwest model with improvements, and pursuing a more structured governance option for Red River. On cost share, the department said Deloitte’s recommended package would cover projected needs through the 2030s, but would require policy changes such as lower percentages for some project types, a 25% replacement-project rate with a cap, and possible bonding or delayed reimbursement strategies. No votes were taken on these policy questions, and the chair indicated the committee would continue the discussion at future basin meetings and the September Water Topics meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• You have in your packet, ladies and gentlemen, a review of the various objections.
• So, again, the short answer is that we're reviewing these rules.
• It's also premature because we're reviewing these rules.
• We just simply haven't completed that review to say for sure that they don't.
• change, or repeal of the rule, based on the review results.

Summary: The Joint Administrative Procedures Committee met on February 3, 2025, with a quorum present and took up three main items. First, the committee considered a large set of recommended objections to Agency for Health Care Administration rules, all centered on sunset provisions stating the rules would expire after five years. AHCA asked for another deferral while it reviewed the rules, arguing the sunset language was a form of self-restraint rather than an invalid exercise of rulemaking authority. Committee leadership disagreed that further delay would resolve the issue and moved to a single vote covering all objections. The motion passed by roll call, and the committee informed AHCA that an objection would be filed unless the agency amended the rules within 30 days. The committee then heard an informational briefing from the Department of Environmental Protection on its Outstanding Florida Springs rule and stormwater rule. DEP explained that it did not prepare a statement of estimated regulatory cost for the springs rule because the proposed standards largely mirror existing water management district rules and the Central Florida Water Initiative framework, so DEP said there was no new regulatory burden. Members asked about permit authority, costs, and whether the rules were functionally different from prior rules. DEP maintained the rules set minimum standards and did not add costs beyond what regulated parties were already doing. DEP also described implementation of the stormwater rule adopted under the 2020 Clean Waterways Act and later ratified by the Legislature in 2024. DEP said the rule was the product of years of workshops and technical advisory committee meetings, and that the final version included lower-cost alternatives, grandfathering, and phased implementation. DEP estimated the rule’s cost at about $2,600 per acre in the revised CERC, while industry witnesses said the real cost could be much higher, especially if land costs are included. A home builders representative argued the estimate understated impacts, while a stormwater engineer said the rule gives more flexible, performance-based tools and could become more cost-effective over time. Finally, Senator Graal presented proposed Chapter 120 changes in SB 108, aimed at tightening and modernizing rulemaking. The proposal would require five-year rule reviews, annual agency reporting, faster notice of proposed rulemaking after authorizing legislation, electronic filing, public access to incorporated materials, clearer tracking of technical changes, and limits on how long rules can remain pending ratification. Members discussed whether the Legislature should be more specific in statutes about rulemaking deadlines and whether agencies should be more accountable when rules stall. No formal action was taken on the Chapter 120 proposals, and the committee adjourned after discussion.