Keywords: HI Senate YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjRaKMwDk4g, 2026-07-02T01:23:03+00:00, 2.2.24, Data collected via generic collector engine, Briefing Notice: https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/sessions/Session2023/hearingnotices/, 912, senate, all, 2.2.42, 2.1.47

Keywords: NH House of Representatives Committee Streaming, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q47JArpS8Z8, 2026-07-02T03:39:36+00:00, 2.2.24, Data collected via generic collector engine, Fiscal Years 2024-2025, 928, house, all, 2.2.42, 2.1.47

Keywords: NH House of Representatives Committee Streaming, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjuUxwTXQDs, 2026-07-02T03:39:36+00:00, 2.2.24, Data collected via generic collector engine, Fiscal Years 2024-2025, 928, house, all, 2.2.42, 2.1.47

Keywords: HI Senate YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NdaZYGzbe7E, 2026-07-02T01:23:03+00:00, 2.2.24, Data collected via generic collector engine, Agenda: https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/splsession2022b/Hearing_JDC_08-22-22_DEFER.pdf, 912, senate, all, 2.2.42, 2.1.47

Keywords: NH House of Representatives Committee Streaming, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvfV4vQpVcc, 2026-07-02T03:39:34+00:00, 2.2.24, Data collected via generic collector engine, Fiscal Years 2024-2025, 928, house, all, 2.2.42, 2.1.47

Keywords: NH House of Representatives Committee Streaming, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVugyXaoz1M, 2026-07-02T03:39:34+00:00, 2.2.24, Data collected via generic collector engine, Fiscal Years 2024-2025, 928, house, all, 2.2.42, 2.1.47

Keywords: NH House of Representatives Committee Streaming, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cTbCChrQps, 2026-07-02T03:39:34+00:00, 2.2.24, Data collected via generic collector engine, HB 1299 HB 1476, 928, house, all, 2.2.42, 2.1.47

Keywords: NH House of Representatives Committee Streaming, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CsXC58kIEgo, 2026-07-02T03:39:34+00:00, 2.2.24, Data collected via generic collector engine, HB 1466 HB 1487, 928, house, all, 2.2.42, 2.1.47

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there any data on how that's working to the extent that customers have chosen to participate and retail
• That will save customers about $16 a year, allowing them to participate the way C&I customers do. customers
• Breda Wallace, the article said 87% coming from data centers. Eighty-seven data centers, okay.
• Do you have any data on that? I have some data here in Texas.
• To go on your own land, build a power plant for the data center, the one customer.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• data centers that protect non-participating customers, ensure a fair sharing of system costs to all
• It establishes an obligation for data center customers to pre-fund a 10-year contract through a load-serving
• customers.
• brings on to the data center customer itself, consistent with their promises, the industry’s promises
• And so, as we've seen data center clusters, data centers have traditionally attracted more data centers

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• All the companies that we talk to, the data centers, their customers are looking for ways to pay their
• And in a lot of those instances, the customer - so the data center - is not only co-locating with an
• And with that big customer base, we've been focused on affordability since the beginning of the data
• data centers?
• These data centers are the perfect customers for new gas plants because they need load 24/7.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Bills: HB97, HB407, HB435, SB361, HB97, HB407, HB435

Keywords: absentee ballot, voting, elections, voter registration, electoral process, defective affidavit, voting rights, local redevelopment, tax payments, transient occupancy, state revenue, authority powers, economic development, tax abatement, incentives, Alabama Jobs Act, Accelerate Alabama, NAICS, North American Industry Classification System, 2022 NAICS codes

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator, I don't know that the data is the right term. I've seen it firsthand.
• So just to, you could take that data with you now. Thank you. Thank you.
• So just to, you could take that data with you now. Thank you. Thank you.
• So I'm not sure why the data matters.
• Madam Chair, I'd be more than happy to ask the opposition about data as well.

Bills: HB2020, HB2032, HB2033, HB2249, HB2313, HB2318, HB2378, HCR2003

Keywords: interference, disruption, educational institutions, public order, conduct rules, statewide assessment, student testing, academic standards, third grade reading, reading retention, promotion and retention, school accountability, assessment window, testing window, test scores, school report cards, nontest data, graduation rates, dropout rates, education data privacy

Transcript Highlights:

• Chairman: So all the companies that we talk to, the data centers, their customers are Chairman: looking
• of data center capacity.
• And with that big customer base, we've been focused on affordability since the beginning of the data
• These data centers are the perfect customers for new gas plants because they need load 24/7.
• The good news about these data centers, like our customers, they're bringing 100% backup gen and they

Transcript Highlights:

• Chairman: So all the companies that we talk to, the data centers, their customers are Chairman: looking
• And in a lot of those instances, the customer— Chairman Gleason: So the data center is not only co-locating
• of data center capacity.
• These data centers are the perfect customers for new gas plants because they need load 24/7.
• The good news about these data centers, like our customers, they're bringing 100% backup generation and

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:

• This hurts not just the customers under contract, but all ratepayers who are subsidizing these customers
• And looking at not just low-income customers, but moderate-income customers.
• We also support the new provisions for data collection that both safeguard customer data while ensuring
• an MLP customer.
• data.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on H. 4144, the Governor’s Energy Affordability, Independence, and Innovation Act, with the administration arguing the bill would lower bills in the short and long term while expanding clean energy supply and innovation. The Governor and Secretary said the bill would reduce or restructure charges on customer bills, reform Mass Save, expand securitization as a financing tool, speed interconnection, create energy-ready zones, strengthen consumer protections in competitive supply, and allow broader state procurement of energy resources. They said the package could save consumers billions over time and would help address high energy costs, especially during extreme heat and winter spikes. Committee members pressed the administration on several provisions, especially securitization, asking whether the bill requires an apples-to-apples comparison of total costs over time, including interest and lost tax revenue, versus paying through rates. Administration witnesses said DPU review and public comment would be required and said they would work to clarify the language if needed. Members also questioned the bill’s solar and procurement provisions, including reduced net metering compensation for some large facilities, the scope of all-resource procurements, and whether hydro, solar, and nuclear would be included; the administration said those resources were contemplated and that procurement would still be reviewed by DPU. Other questions focused on the short-term relief from bill changes, the treatment of low- and moderate-income discounts, and whether the bill’s heat pump and Mass Save reforms would help customers who cannot afford upfront costs. Several witnesses and committee members discussed Mass Save reforms, including securitization of program costs, on-bill financing, pre-approval of rebates, and shifting program administration away from gas utilities. Administration witnesses said the changes were intended to reduce volatility, lower administrative costs, and better align costs with long-term savings. Questions also touched on geothermal permitting, municipal participation in offshore wind procurement, and the proposed repeal of the ballot requirement for nuclear power, which the administration defended as preserving future options under heavy review. No votes were taken during the hearing portion described. Supportive testimony came from labor, environmental, business, planning, and development groups. The AFL-CIO, NECA, and the Environmental League of Massachusetts backed the bill, emphasizing lower bills, job creation, labor standards, just transition protections, and cleaner energy. NAIOP, the Massachusetts Business Roundtable, and MAPC supported provisions on energy-ready zones, interconnection reform, microgrids, extreme-heat shutoff protections, and Mass Save improvements. A HEET representative praised the bill’s use of securitization, geothermal, and utility financing tools but urged guardrails and workforce protections. Overall, testimony was broadly favorable, with most witnesses calling for refinements rather than opposing the bill outright.

Transcript Highlights:

• utility customers. utility customers.
• 04.559> charged by that customer class and not charged by that customer class and not charged
• by any other to any other customers. by any other to any other customers.
• customers and non-data center customers.
• to meet the needs of their customers to meet the needs of their customers through<00:32:29.519><

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• 12 million customers.
• It's like data centers. Data centers are coming. We might as well get ready.
• Customer voices—this is big for me.
• In terms of customer, you said you get the customer data on their experience and that's calculated.
• In terms of customer, you said you get the customer data on their experience and that's calculated.

Summary: The Joint Committee on Public Counsel Oversight met to receive an overview from Public Counsel Walt Trierweiler on the work of his office. He described the office’s role in representing Florida utility customers in rate and service cases, including investor-owned electric, water, and wastewater matters, storm cost recovery, fuel clauses, storm protection plans, and specialized dockets. He emphasized the office’s use of depositions, expert witnesses, customer correspondence, and service-hearing testimony to challenge unsupported utility costs and seek “fair, just, reasonable, and affordable” outcomes for customers. Trierweiler highlighted several current issues, including affordability, data centers, and the growing use of AI in reviewing large utility filings. He said the office has begun using affordability experts and data center witnesses, and that data center-related utility proposals raise concerns about energy demand, water use, and community impacts. He also expressed caution about AI and machine learning because of confidential utility information, while acknowledging that utilities, regulators, and his office are increasingly using such tools. Members asked questions about how customer input is gathered, how profit is evaluated in rate cases, the role of settlement agreements, and whether the office is considering water consumption impacts from data centers. Trierweiler said customer feedback largely comes in through hearings, correspondence, and direct calls rather than office-led canvassing, and that his office seeks to limit imprudent costs while allowing utilities a fair return. He also explained that the office may file motions for reconsideration and appeals after PSC orders, and that it sometimes submits alternative settlement proposals even when approval is unlikely, to present a different option for the commission’s consideration. No votes were taken, and the committee adjourned after concluding its agenda.

Transcript Highlights:

• customers, 110% for PG&E customers.
• for SoCal Edison customers, 110% for PG&E customers.
• Those customers could be housing developments, EV charging hubs, advanced manufacturing, or data centers
• Here's what the data on implementing RAM has shown, and this is 10 years' worth of well-documented data
• But the preponderance of the data trying to pick winners and losers about whose data is best.

Summary: The committee heard several energy and water affordability bills, with extensive testimony on SB 254 by Senator Becker, SB 541 by Senator Becker, SB 453 by Senator Stern, SB 292 by Senator Caballero, and SB 473 by Senator Padilla. SB 254 was presented as a broad utility affordability package addressing short-term climate credits, a Power Fund, tighter scrutiny of rate increases and utility profits, wildfire spending, securitization of future utility costs, and streamlining. Supporters, including TURN and several environmental and public power groups, said it could lower bills and reduce long-term costs; opponents from investor-owned utilities, labor, business, and local government raised concerns about market impacts, insufficient analysis, and the breadth of the bill. The committee approved SB 254 on a 6-3 vote and placed it on call. SB 541 focused on load flexibility and using existing grid capacity more efficiently. Senator Becker described it as a transparency and planning measure to identify cost-effective load shifting and reduce peak demand, while supporters said it could improve resiliency and save money. Several CCAs and utilities opposed the bill in print or unless amended, arguing that some language implied a mandate and that the concept needed more cost-effectiveness analysis; the author said amendments would remove language dividing the state goal among retail suppliers and clarify that the bill is not a procurement mandate. The committee passed SB 541 as amended to Appropriations on a 9-1 vote and left it on call. SB 453 by Senator Stern would return unspent ratepayer-funded microgrid program dollars and was described as a way to keep the lights on and redirect unused funds. It drew support from local government and environmental groups, with PG&E expressing concern about how the bill would affect its ability to spend awarded funds. The committee passed SB 453 as amended to Appropriations on a 12-0 vote. SB 292 by Senator Caballero would require more granular outage and reliability reporting, including census-tract-level data, to better inform resilience planning after PSPS events; utilities opposed unless amended, citing duplicative reporting and regulatory overlap, but the bill passed 12-0 to Appropriations. SB 473 by Senator Padilla would require or expand water utility decoupling to promote conservation and affordability. Supporters, including water utilities, labor, business, and local government groups, argued decoupling stabilizes revenue, supports conservation, and can keep rates lower for low-use customers. The Public Advocates Office opposed, saying prior pilot data showed no conservation benefit and about $1 billion in added costs, and that the CPUC had already rejected similar requests. Committee members questioned the conservation and capital-investment effects of the different rate structures; the author and supporters argued decoupling helps utilities fund infrastructure while allowing lower fixed charges for low-use customers. The transcript ends during that discussion, before a final vote on SB 473 is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• their customers as hard as they can, even if it puts customers into debt, which they cannot pay off.
• That's less than 1% of customers. That's less than 1% of customers enrolled with a supplier.
• customers purchase.
• customers purchase.
• Utilities, industries, shareholders are not the customers. We are. Are not the customers. We are.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several energy-related bills, with the main focus on H. 3534/S. 2255, which would ban or sharply restrict residential third-party electric suppliers, and on related reform proposals. Supporters included the Attorney General’s office, municipal and regional planning officials, environmental justice groups, consumer advocates, and city officials from Boston and Chelsea. They argued that the residential competitive supply market has produced higher bills, deceptive sales tactics, auto-renewals into higher rates, and disproportionate harm to low-income residents, seniors, communities of color, and people with limited English. Witnesses cited AG reports estimating hundreds of millions of dollars in overcharges over time, described door-to-door and storefront marketing abuses, and said municipal aggregation programs have saved residents money while offering more stable rates. Several supporters said the Legislature should either ban residential competitive supply or adopt strong guardrails such as ending automatic renewals, banning incentive-based commissions, and capping rates relative to basic service. Opponents or industry representatives from the Retail Energy Advancement League, Vistra, and Constellation argued that the market can provide savings, longer-term price stability, and value-added products such as renewable options and time-of-use offerings. They said Massachusetts has already improved consumer protections through DPU proceedings, that complaints are relatively few compared with the size of the market, and that a ban would eliminate consumer choice. They also defended direct sales and commissions as normal features of a retail market, while saying they would support additional protections, licensing, bonding, and stronger oversight of bad actors. Committee members pressed both sides on whether the market truly saves money, whether automatic renewals should be banned, and whether the AG’s proposed reforms would be enough. The committee also heard testimony on H. 3972, a bill to extend utility shutoff protections during extreme heat, with Rep. Mindy Domb arguing that Massachusetts should treat extreme heat like extreme cold and protect customers facing financial hardship. Rep. Barrett also testified for H. 3450, a municipal broadband/right-of-way bill, arguing that communities need easier and cheaper access to utility poles and public rights of way to build municipal broadband. In addition, Senate Majority Leader Creem testified for S. 2239, which would bar utilities from recovering ratepayer funds for lobbying, promotions, trade association dues, and similar expenses. No votes were taken during the hearing.