Transcript Highlights:

• There will be a two-minute time limit per testifier because morning hearings must adjourn prior to floor
• , you know, the limitation on liability for those who reject from the fund.
• , you know, the limitation on liability for those who reject from the fund.
• or those low uh lowcost debt low income or those low uh lowcost debt providers<00:45:20.200><c> such
• This limits the recovery amount to 50%. I'm wondering why it's 50% and not 100%.

Summary: The joint committees heard testimony on HB 982 HD1, a wildfire-related measure aimed at creating a wildfire recovery fund and a financing structure to address future catastrophic wildfire liability. The Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs, the Division of Consumer Advocacy, and the Public Utilities Commission submitted comments and were available for questions. Supporters included IBW Local 1260, Kauai Island Utility Cooperative, Clearway Energy Group, Hawaiian Electric, Par Hawaii, and others, while Charter Communications and the Hawaii Association for Justice opposed or raised concerns. Life of the Land supported the bill but urged changes to the definition of a catastrophic wildfire and noted concerns about prudency review language. IBW Local 1260 asked to restore language from the original draft, and Charter warned the bill could impair existing contract and indemnity rights unless amended. A major focus of the hearing was Hawaiian Electric’s position on the HD1 version. Hawaiian Electric strongly supported the original bill but objected to the HD1 requirement for an additional $500 million shareholder contribution, arguing it was not feasible and could delay or prevent the fund from operating. The company said the bill would help protect customers and improve credit ratings by creating a dedicated revenue stream and a bankruptcy-remote financing structure, which it said would lower borrowing costs over time. Members questioned how the $1 billion securitization amount was chosen, whether credit rating agencies had indicated it was sufficient, and how the bill would work in bankruptcy; Hawaiian Electric said the amount was a balance among interests, not based on a specific agency directive, and that it would follow up on bankruptcy questions. Opponents and skeptics raised concerns about liability caps, the new claims process, and unclear language on damages above the fund’s limits. The Hawaii Association for Justice argued the bill limits victims’ remedies and gives too much authority to the new entity without clear guardrails. Committee members also pressed Hawaiian Electric on comparisons to California, the feasibility of the shareholder contribution, and whether alternative capital-raising or divestiture options had been considered. No vote or final action was taken in the portion of the hearing provided; testimony and questioning continued with follow-up information requested from Hawaiian Electric and others.

Transcript Highlights:

• DUMB AND DUMBER QUESTION BUT IS YOUR EXPLANATION OF THE BILL, MY UNDERSTANDING IS YOU ARE PLACING LIMITS
• OF 2000 FT.², FOR EXAMPLE COULD YOU EXPLAIN TO ME WHY YOU WOULD WANT TO LIMIT OUR REBUILD 2000 FT.²
• REALLY I DON'T THINK WE ARE LIMITING, IF ANYTHING GETTING THE FLEXIBILITY BECAUSE WHEN YOU MAKE THIS
• INCREASED BUT FOR THIS CYCLE SALES TAX AND EARNINGS FROM INVESTMENTS WERE INCREASED AND CORPORATE INCOME
• ONES THAT FEED INTO GENERAL REVENUE AND YOU WILL SEE MINOR REDUCTIONS WERE MADE TO THE CORPORATE INCOME

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill exempts a limited equity cooperative from the WAC.
• I am not sure I fully understand the question, but the bill exempts a limited equity cooperative from
• It's a general exemption unless the limited equity cooperative specifically elects to be subject to the
• The limited equity co-ops are for people who are somewhere below area median income or meet some standards
• because they are selling within the rules of what the limited equity co-op allows.

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 2640, which would create procedures for dealing with unauthorized UCC financing statement filings. The bill would allow the Department of Licensing to refuse certain filings believed to be intended to harass or defraud, create an affidavit-based process for debtors to seek termination of wrongfully filed records, permit administrative review and court challenges by secured parties, and establish criminal penalties for intentional unauthorized filings. Department of Licensing testimony supported the bill as a narrow remedy for harmful filings that can affect credit, housing, banking, and reputation, while members questioned whether the department should be making legitimacy determinations and whether existing court remedies were sufficient. No vote was taken on HB 2640 during the hearing. The committee then moved to executive action on several bills. Substitute House Bill 2161, authorizing the Attorney General to issue civil investigative demands in certain civil rights and labor-related investigations, was reported out on a 7-5 vote after debate over due process concerns and the need for stronger enforcement tools. House Bill 2304, extending condominium warranty coverage to four-story buildings, passed unanimously. House Bill 2445, revising probate law and related protections, passed 10-2, with some members supporting the anti-fraud reforms and others worried about added complexity. House Bill 2590, exempting limited equity cooperatives from the Washington Uniform Common Interest Ownership Act, was amended with a technical change to the definition of limited equity cooperative and then reported out 8-4. Members described the bill as expanding affordable homeownership opportunities, though some raised broader policy concerns about the model. Finally, House Bill 2412, increasing the number of Superior Court judges in Yakima County from 8 to 9, passed unanimously after members cited access-to-justice needs and support from local funding and space resources.

Transcript Highlights:

• that tabor limit then it's we're below that tabor limit then it's going<00:39:13.520><c> to</c><00:39
• </c> prioritize that with our income tax. prioritize that with our income tax.
• </c> this was only a diversion of the income this was only a diversion of the income tax<00:42:11.680
• the three-year limitation. Madame the three-year limitation.
• </c> most vulnerable citizens, low-income most vulnerable citizens, low-income people,<03:54:40.479><

Transcript Highlights:

• Very important, just a reminder that when you come up to testify, we do have to limit you to a maximum
• Especially for low-income families who rely on them for half of their daily calories, sourcing local
• Especially for low-income families who rely on them for half of their daily calories, sourcing local
• It is dangerous to think that adults who have limited information about a child's past medical history
• We're talking about post-secondary engagement among youth of color and low-income youth; it addresses

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Education

Summary: The Joint Committee on Education held a public hearing on a large slate of bills, with the chairs emphasizing time limits, written testimony, and grouping similar measures together. Early testimony focused on opioid use disorder education in schools (S.382), with Senator Keenan arguing that students should be taught about the risks of substance use disorder and naloxone use as part of health curricula. Representative DeCost also briefly introduced H.551, a narrow bill concerning parent rights for children in third grade and younger. Several bills were then closed without testimony, including measures on type 1 diabetes informational materials and other diabetes-related proposals. A major portion of the hearing centered on school health and emergency response bills. Supporters of H.652/S.342 on diabetes management in schools described inconsistent district practices and urged clearer standards so students can receive care in classrooms rather than being sent out of instruction. Bills on epinephrine access and seizure disorders drew extensive testimony: advocates for stock epinephrine in schools argued that unassigned epinephrine can save lives and should be funded in a cost-neutral way, while a pediatrician opposed one version as an unfunded mandate. For seizure-safe schools (S.422/H.635), students, parents, educators, and advocates described missed or delayed responses to seizures, stigma, and the need for staff training, seizure action plans, and emergency medication protocols. A separate bill, H.645, allowing anti-seizure medication on school buses, was supported by a parent and student who said current law forces costly and restrictive transportation arrangements. The committee also heard testimony on youth skin health bills (S.334/H.600/H.619), which would let students carry and apply sunscreen at school and camp without a physician’s note. Supporters from melanoma prevention, dermatology, and industry groups said the bills would remove unnecessary barriers and promote sun-safe habits, while one witness cautioned about drafting details and unintended consequences. The hearing then moved to CPR/AED education for graduation (S.456), where Senator Tarr, a student advocate, and the Red Cross all supported requiring hands-on CPR certification for high school students. Finally, the committee took testimony on healthy school lunches (H.539/S.401): supporters from the Healthy School Lunch Coalition and school food directors backed stronger nutrition standards and a standing advisory council, while Consumer Brands Association witnesses opposed the bill as too vague and potentially disruptive. A nutrition scientist also warned about unintended restrictions on medically necessary or innovative foods. The chairs closed the hearing on the healthy lunch bills and then opened testimony on universal school meals for virtual schools (H.700), with Superintendent Patrick Latuka supporting access for students in Commonwealth virtual schools who currently receive no meal support.

Transcript Highlights:

• In order to facilitate the goal of hearing as much from the public within the time limits that we have
• This can disproportionately impact students with less generational wealth, like low-income students,
• Institutional debts have ballooned, affecting more than 750,000 low-income students.
• Institutional debts have ballooned, affecting more than 750,000 low-income students.
• So this is due to the systems limitations and variations in payroll software.

Summary: The committee hearing covered several higher education bills, with extensive testimony on student aid, affordability, and institutional debt. AB 587 would add veteran representation to the California Student Aid Commission; the author said the change would bring lived experience from the veteran community to student aid policy, and members raised a concern about keeping the commission’s membership odd-numbered, which the author said would be addressed by amendment. AB 791 would standardize cost-of-attendance housing calculations using objective data and improve notice of the adjustment process; supporters said current budgets often underestimate students’ real living costs, while UC, CSU, and independent colleges opposed or had concerns about the bill’s prescribed methodology, fiscal impact, and a 14-day turnaround for adjustments. AB 850 would create a one-term grace period for students with institutional debt to re-enroll while arranging repayment, bar reporting that debt to credit agencies, and require more transparency; proponents described students being blocked from continuing school over debts, while CSU, UC, and private-college representatives said they already use holds and payment plans and worried about added liabilities and budget pressures. AB 537 would extend the California College Promise Program to part-time community college students; supporters said most community college students attend part-time and should not be excluded from fee waivers, while the committee noted fiscal concerns but ultimately advanced the bill. AB 7 would allow universities to consider whether an applicant is a descendant of American chattel slavery in admissions as a reparative measure; supporters framed it as lineage-based reparative justice, while opponents argued it would function as a racial proxy and conflict with Proposition 209 and equal-protection principles. The committee took roll-call votes on the measures, advancing AB 587, AB 791, AB 850, and AB 537 to Appropriations, with AB 850 and AB 537 receiving fewer votes and the roll left open for additional members.

Transcript Highlights:

• So they don't have any of the limits like Prop. 218 or 96. They don't have anything.
• They don't have any limits.
• “Utilities have some limits because the state law and the Constitution even impose that.
• And I know that we're talking low income; they wouldn't have the resources to do that.
• Renters to have options, and lower-income individuals to have options.

Committee: Senate Energy, Utilities and Communications

Summary: The committee heard a long agenda of energy, water, and utility bills. SB 952, SB 1417, SB 924, SB 925, SB 1011, SB 1168, SB 1196, and SB 1350 were all discussed, along with consent items SB 1008 and SB 1245. SB 952 would give the Department of Water Resources more flexibility in meeting clean energy procurement goals for the State Water Project; it drew support from the State Water Contractors and California Municipal Utilities Association and no opposition. SB 1417 would extend transparency and notice requirements to mutual water companies, especially in response to wildfire-related rate increases in Altadena; supporters described lack of notice, meeting access, and public accountability, while the California Association of Mutual Water Companies opposed the bill as overly prescriptive and potentially conflicting with existing law. SB 924 would modernize low-income energy assistance and weatherization programs to better measure affordability outcomes and tenant benefits, and it passed with broad support. SB 925 would direct the Energy Commission to develop a statewide roadmap for fusion energy; it was supported by industry and clean energy groups and passed without opposition. SB 1011 would require CPUC standards for human review of utility AI systems and labor consultation; supporters framed it as a safety and workforce protection measure, while utilities and business groups warned about cost, duplication, and overbroad regulation. SB 1168, now a study bill, would have the CPUC examine how data centers pay for load growth and rate impacts; it drew mixed reactions, with some industry opposition and some labor support after amendments. SB 1196 would speed utility hookups for ADUs and JADUs by allowing earlier applications and setting timelines; housing advocates supported it and it passed. SB 1350 would allow renewable portfolio standard credit for power plants using green hydrogen, with strong support from hydrogen, labor, and utility interests, but TURN opposed it unless amended, arguing it lacked safeguards against greenwashing and resource shuffling. The committee also approved the consent calendar and several bills were reported out on recorded votes, with most measures advancing on strong bipartisan support and a few no votes from Senators Strickland and Dahle on selected items.

Transcript Highlights:

• As background, Washington law allows qualifying patients to use limited amounts of cannabis for medical
• If such a relationship has not been established, allowable telehealth services are limited to teleadvice
• Certain limitations apply to prescriptions provided through telehealth.
• When we place critically ill patients in a moving ambulance with limited space and no safety net, we
• Nonprofits like ours are now able to provide critically needed veterinary care to low-income families

Summary: The Senate Health and Long-Term Care Committee held public hearings on several House bills and later took executive action on two others. The committee heard testimony on House Bill 2242, which would let the Department of Health issue immunization recommendations and tie preventive-service coverage to federal recommendations as of June 30, 2025, while preserving access to vaccines and other preventive services. Supporters, including the Governor’s office and the Insurance Commissioner, said the bill would protect access, affordability, and stable vaccine purchasing; opponents argued it politicizes vaccine policy and gives too much influence to state agencies and outside groups. The committee also heard testimony on House Bill 2152, allowing terminally ill patients in hospitals, nursing homes, and hospice facilities to use medical cannabis under facility policies, with supporters emphasizing dignity, symptom relief, and safeguards, and House Bill 2088, joining the dietitian licensure compact, which supporters said would help military spouses, telehealth, and workforce shortages. House Bill 2110, on ambulance inter-facility specialty care transports, drew support from rural hospitals seeking more staffing flexibility and opposition from nurses and EMS personnel concerned about training, accountability, and patient safety. House Bill 2247, on veterinarian-client-patient relationships and telemedicine, drew support from the sponsor and some stakeholders as a workforce and access measure, but also criticism from the state veterinarian and others who said it could conflict with federal VCPR requirements and public health protections. House Bill 2340, expanding substance use disorder monitoring program eligibility to nursing assistants and stipend support, was presented as a way to help low-wage health workers stay in the workforce; there were no in-person testifiers against it. In executive session, the committee considered House Bill 2155, concerning the use of nursing titles, and House Bill 2531, aligning the ambulance transport fund quality assurance fee with federal regulations. Both bills received do-pass recommendations and were sent to the Rules Committee. For the public hearings, no final committee votes were taken on the other bills in this transcript, and testimony concluded on each measure after the committee heard from sponsors, agency officials, advocates, and opponents.

Transcript Highlights:

• And as far as eligibility to apply for these funds, are you looking at particular limitations on what
• I've heard from a number of water districts that there's a frustration with the current limit on the
• I'd be caught frustration with the current limit on the amount receivable per project from the revolving
• So if you are a low-income person selling your home to a first-time home buyer, you waive the entire
• But if you are not low-income, if you are not a first-time home buyer, you're paying a full amount, and

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Bonding, Capital Expenditures and State Assets

Summary: The Joint Committee on Bonding, Capital Expenditures and State Assets held a hearing on S. 2542, the Mass Ready Act, the Healey-Driscoll administration’s environmental bond bill. Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs Rebecca Tepper and Undersecretary Jen Sullivan described the bill as a $3 billion resilience package to protect drinking water, farms, fisheries, roads, bridges, parks, and communities from flooding, heat, drought, wildfires, and other climate impacts. They highlighted major authorizations for flood and coastal resilience, DCR infrastructure, drinking water and wastewater upgrades, PFAS remediation, open space and land protection, food security infrastructure, and a new Resilience Revolving Fund for low-cost loans to municipalities, tribes, and water districts. Committee members asked about project lifespans, flood and salt marsh permitting, wastewater and combined sewer overflow funding, parkway maintenance, land acquisition priorities, Quabbin stewardship, and how the revolving fund would be capitalized and administered. The administration said the fund would be modeled on the Clean Water Trust, use existing trust resources rather than new fees, and could later support special obligation bonds; they also said the bill would streamline certain permitting and improve flood-risk disclosure and climate-related building standards. Many witnesses urged the committee to strengthen the bill’s funding levels or add related policy provisions. Labor, contractor, and plumbing groups supported creating a water reuse and graywater recycling commission, saying it could conserve water, reduce stormwater and sewer burdens, and create skilled jobs. Boston Harbor Now asked for higher authorizations for the Municipal Vulnerability Preparedness program and resilient coast work, plus permitting reforms for nature-based and waterfront projects. The Massachusetts Rivers Alliance backed the bill but also urged inclusion of drought-management legislation, a water reuse commission, a statewide flood buyout program, and more support for community resiliency. Environmental justice advocates from Green Roots called for dedicated funding for outdoor and indoor air quality monitoring and indoor air quality improvements in schools and public housing, while conservation and tree advocates sought larger investments in urban forestry, local nurseries, and workforce training, along with clearer language to ensure municipal reforestation funds go to cities and towns. Agricultural and food system witnesses emphasized the importance of the bill’s food security and farmland provisions. The Southeastern Massachusetts Agricultural Partnership and the Mass Food System Collaborative supported the $125 million food security infrastructure grant program, saying it has funded critical facilities and equipment for farmers, fishers, processors, and food access organizations, but warned that without the bill there could be a funding gap in fiscal year 2027. They also supported farmland protection and asked for more funding for agricultural capital programs, used-equipment eligibility in grant programs, and a next-generation farmer fund. Water utility representatives said the bill still falls short of the state’s long-term drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater needs, citing EPA estimates of nearly $37 billion in needed investments over 20 years and urging dedicated recurring funding and broader eligibility for climate resilience grants. No votes were taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• There are other rulemaking limitations on rulemaking authority.
• Yeah, within limits, of course.
• In addition to the limitations that are in statute, there's also limitations on rulemaking authority
• More limitations on rulemaking authority. This is a big one.
• The pension benefits are funded through employee and employer contributions and investment income.

Summary: The committee held an orientation for new and returning members of the House committee on agencies and administration, with introductions from members and staff. Chair Carol Maguire outlined her expectations for hearings: keep questions focused on the bill, be respectful to witnesses, and use the committee’s orientation opportunities to learn about the jail staff, retirement system, and Office of Professional Licensure. Members also discussed related assignments on other bodies, including the Joint Legislative Committee on Administrative Rules and the Joint Committee on Employee Classification, and noted that some members already serve on those panels. A substantial portion of the meeting focused on the State Building Code and the committee’s upcoming workload. Members explained how the state code is intended to provide a common baseline while allowing limited local options, and why municipalities must formally adopt and publish any local amendments. They reviewed several anticipated bills: a consolidation bill to gather building-code enforcement materials in one place, a bill to update the state energy code, a bill to restrict municipal adoption of building-code changes, and a bill to update the electrical code. Members also discussed how building codes apply to older homes and commercial buildings, and why code updates are important for safety and clarity. The chair said the committee had 36 bills currently scheduled, including many early bills that must move by March 6 because they will be heard by two committees. She said the committee would use subcommittees for harder bills, with three subcommittees this year: pensions, licensing, and likely state building code. She also outlined the hearing schedule, including lighter bills on February 12 and the expectation of executive sessions later in the month. No votes were taken during the orientation, but members were told that public hearings do not require a quorum and that hard copies of bills would be distributed by committee staff.

Transcript Highlights:

• potential life-and-death prognoses, prescribe medications, perform life-ending euthanasias, and perform limited
• This bill, as written, creates an unlicensed, limited-education, limited-experience position in the highly
• we going to provide affordable veterinary care where we’re graduating veterinarians with debt-to-income
• ratios, meaning the debt that they have versus their first-year income is two or two and a half times
• Veterinary professional associates will be trained to manage much of that routine care at a debt-to-income

Summary: The Committee on Regulated Industries met with a quorum and took up two bills. First, it considered SB 754 on heated tobacco products. The sponsor said the bill would define heated tobacco products and exempt them from the cigarette tax, arguing they are a less harmful alternative for nicotine users. Senators asked about youth access and regulation, and the sponsor said he would research those issues further. A representative of the Florida Retail Federation appeared in support, and the committee voted the bill favorably. The committee then heard SB 796 on veterinary medicine, after adopting a delete-everything amendment. The amended bill would create a Veterinary Professional Associate (VPA) role, allowing individuals with a master’s degree and national competency exam to perform certain delegated veterinary tasks under a licensed veterinarian’s responsible supervision. It also expanded the allowable period for telehealth prescriptions for flea and tick products and other medications. Supporters said the bill would expand access to care, reduce costs, and help address veterinary shortages, while opponents from the Florida Veterinary Medical Association argued the proposal was unnecessary, could create safety and federal-law concerns, and that existing veterinary technicians and other workforce measures were a better solution. After testimony and debate, the amendment was adopted and the bill was reported favorably. During final debate, several senators said the VPA proposal was more limited and better balanced than earlier versions, with the veterinarian retaining liability and control over delegated duties. The sponsor closed by emphasizing rising veterinary costs, shortages of care, and the need for more affordable access for pet owners. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• and run a fair and efficient hearing, with the goal of hearing as much from the public within the limits
• All testimony comments are limited to the bill at hand.
• Current law puts outdated limits on what these providers can do, regardless of their training or their
• But I think the overall, over many years, just limiting the growth, we're seeing people really, really
• This is especially important for low-income Californians and Medi-Cal enrollees.

Committee: House Health

Transcript Highlights:

• pay in premiums at roughly 8.5% of their income.
• </c> income on premiums. income on premiums.
• So there is a gap, there's income.
• </c><01:11:53.280><c> resources</c> limited income or don't have resources limited income or don't have
• </c><01:28:44.480><c> to</c> do the math, our SPRA fund is limited to do the math, our SPRA fund is limited

Committee: House Commerce Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there a limit? You said it's not a business model or distribution model, is there a limit?
• A lot of us are lawyers, said prohibited the agency from limiting the ability, or limiting the coordinator
• Limit what the coordinator can do.
• Because there's no limit that I can see on what they can do.
• The $50,000 limit, because I just do it to supplement my income, but I know that there are bakers out

Bills: HB3000 , HB2622 , HB2283 , HB541 , HB1776 , HB1803 , HB1669 , HB2588 , HB220 , HB3415 , HB50 , HB1314 , HB 107 , HB220 , HB50 , HB107

Committee: House Public Health

Keywords: ambulance service, rural healthcare, grants, financial assistance, qualified counties, mental health, patient transport, female attendants, security measures, healthcare regulation, epinephrine, anaphylaxis, health care, school safety, training, emergency response, direct patient care, healthcare, physicians, medical services

Transcript Highlights:

• The one limitation, and I believe you're probably talking about HR1 and some of the work requirements
• As a result, the ability of the WCAB to act on petitions within 60 days was substantially limited.
• Additionally, we have been able to limit the number of cases that we grant for study because we have
• Current grant levels underutilize available funds and limit training capacity.
• Please limit your comments to one minute. And thank you very much. Cesar. Madam Chair. Thank you.

Summary: The subcommittee heard a series of budget and trailer bill presentations focused on labor and public employment programs. The first item covered EDD Next modernization, where EDD described progress on customer service improvements, fraud prevention, language access, and the Integrated Claims Management System. The LAO urged stronger legislative oversight as the project enters its most difficult phase, and members questioned the revised schedule, total cost, change orders, stress testing, SB 1090 implementation, and how race and ethnicity data will be protected. EDD said the overall project cost remains about $1.2 billion, that the work is being phased with disability insurance and paid family leave first, and that fraud has been greatly reduced since pandemic-era programs ended. Members also asked for follow-up information on SB 590 outreach and equity impacts. The committee then reviewed the California Workforce Development Board’s request to reduce staffing as one-time grant workloads wind down, along with trailer bill language to streamline reporting requirements. The board and Department of Finance said the staffing reductions reflect the end of surge funding and that the proposal would consolidate roughly 10 to 12 reports into one annual report, with additional reporting only if new funds are appropriated for certain programs. Senator Durazo questioned the policy direction of reducing workforce staffing, while the administration said the positions were tied to temporary grant programs and that current staffing is sufficient for ongoing duties. Members also asked about the board’s role in AI-related workforce planning and the rationale for using state funds for the High Road Construction Careers Program. A major portion of the hearing focused on the Subsequent Injury Benefits Trust Fund reforms and related staffing request at DIR. The administration and LAO described rapid growth in applications, backlog, and liabilities, saying the program’s eligibility has expanded beyond its original intent and that liabilities could reach about $30 billion by 2030 without reform. The trailer bill would tighten eligibility, apply the changes to open cases, and use the QME process and contemporaneous evidence to document preexisting disabilities. Members raised concerns about fairness to pending claimants, evaluator capacity, and the relationship to other SIBTF legislation, while the LAO said the proposal largely aligns with its prior recommendations. DIR also presented a request to eliminate vacant positions under a statewide vacancy sweep, which drew criticism from members who argued the cuts could weaken enforcement and backlog reduction efforts; the committee asked DIR to return with more detail on impacts and on its use of temporary-help authority. The final items addressed a request for additional Cal/OSHA investigative staff and a trailer bill to make permanent the revised Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board petition timeline. DIR said the BOI staffing would help investigate fatalities and serious injuries more quickly, while members emphasized the importance of family contact and timely investigations. For the WCAB item, the chair explained that the 2024 change to Labor Code section 5909, which starts the 60-day decision clock when a case is transmitted rather than when a petition is filed, has reduced pending cases and should be made permanent; the remaining backlog was reported at 460 cases, down from 637 before the change.

Transcript Highlights:

• The department has one income tax proposal this year, so I can be brief.
• Under this amendment, income tax return.
• </c> subdivision 19 which defines net income subdivision 19 which defines net income and<00:05:33.680
• I'd get a sheet that says, do you want to report income to Georgia?
• </c> find out why our limitations are here. find out why our limitations are here.

Committee: Senate Taxes

Transcript Highlights:

• These gaps grow because of factors such as limited access to quality early care and education, which
• Families in all groups are paying large shares of their income toward early care and education.
• There's one: high costs in relation to income and other expenses, obviously, of raising a family.
• In relation to income and other expenses, obviously, of raising a family.
• Without this appropriation, our providers will be forced to limit work experience placements.

Bills: HF2582 , HF2266 , HF2518 , HF2039 , HF1941

Committee: House Workforce, Labor, and Economic Development Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• So calling something a crisis has limited value, right?
• If you force insurers to increase their limits, they're going to charge for it, and we're already kind
• To raise income, we continue with a sustainable insurance strategy. Communities.
• To raise income, we continue with a sustainable insurance strategy and allow the insurers to justify
• I think both of these recommendations to cut expenses and raise income are in the SB 254 report, but

Summary: The Senate Committee on Insurance held an information hearing on the impacts of climate change and catastrophic wildfire on California’s insurance market, with opening remarks focused on the state’s affordability, availability, and stability problems. Chair and members discussed the role of SB 254’s report, the Sustainable Insurance Strategy, the growth of the FAIR Plan, and the need to better align insurance regulation, mitigation, and land-use decisions. The Vice Chair noted the importance of hearing from industry as well as consumer and academic experts, and Senator Becker said the report would inform further committee work. Amy Bach of United Policyholders described how climate-driven wildfire and flood risk, combined with inflation, insurtech, and risk modeling, have reduced competition and pushed more homeowners into the FAIR Plan and non-admitted surplus lines coverage. She said availability is improving somewhat, but affordability will depend on mitigation, insurer competition, and fair rate regulation. In response to questions, she emphasized underinsurance as a long-running problem, supported stronger insurer responsibility for replacement-cost estimates, and suggested a public reinsurance backstop and more mitigation funding rather than removing wildfire coverage from basic policies. Nancy Watkins of Milliman and Michael Wara of Stanford argued that the market problem is fundamentally that expected claims and expenses now exceed premiums because too many homes are burning. They said California needs both risk reduction and actuarially sound pricing, along with a state mitigation framework that targets the highest-risk communities and prioritizes home hardening, defensible space, and community-scale mitigation over broad acreage-based spending. They also discussed the role of non-admitted carriers as a gap-filler, the need for better data on reconstruction costs and mitigation effectiveness, and the importance of sustained funding rather than one-time grants. A later panel with Frank Freebalt of Cal Poly and Michael Golnar of UC Berkeley focused on modeling and mitigation science. They said wildfire policy should treat the issue as a structure-ignition and urban conflagration problem, not just a wildland fire problem, and stressed integrated land-use, utility, and community mitigation. Members asked about zoning, building codes, utility hardening, and who should pay for mitigation; witnesses said older, denser neighborhoods are the highest priority, that utilities must improve operational safety measures, and that targeted mitigation in the highest-risk areas offers the best return. No votes or formal actions were taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> You'd have to be in the highest income You'd have to be in the highest income tax<00:09:35.400><
• </c> in individual income tax that came in. in individual income tax that came in.
• </c> billion in US income in just 2025. billion in US income in just 2025.
• federal income tax last year.
• </c> of its Minnesota income? of its Minnesota income?

Committee: House Taxes

Transcript Highlights:

• Please wait to be recognized by Vice Chair Macri before speaking, and the testimony will be limited to
• But also, if my client came to me and said, we have a significant limited partner called the University
• of Washington, they want to ...came to me and said, we have a significant limited partner called the
• are areas with high concentrations of individuals that rely on beverage containers as a source of income
• Income, including encampments.

Summary: The House Appropriations Committee held a public hearing on House Bill 2565, which would require University of Washington gifts, grants, and similar funds to be invested through the Washington State Investment Board instead of UW’s internal investment office. Staff and the prime sponsor argued the change would lower fees and improve returns, while UW’s representatives opposed the bill, citing concerns about donor intent, legal restrictions on thousands of individual endowments, and differences in portfolio management and liquidity needs. No questions were raised in the hearing, and no action was taken on the bill at that time. The committee then moved into executive session on several bills. On Third Substitute House Bill 1607, related to recycling and waste reduction, members adopted a technical amendment but rejected amendments that would have directed unredeemed deposits to the Working Families Tax Credit and litter programs, added accountability requirements for grants, or created a SNAP-related benefit. The bill was then reported out of committee with a do pass recommendation on a 17-13 vote. On Second Substitute House Bill 1622, concerning bargaining over public employers’ use of artificial intelligence, members adopted one amendment updating the AI definition and rejected three others that would have narrowed bargaining triggers or limited the bill to technologies with demonstrable material impacts. The bill was reported out with a do pass recommendation on a 19-11 vote. The committee also advanced House Bill 2254, which would cover administrative costs for the Partnership Access Line assessment, and House Bill 2385, which extends timelines for the Medicaid access program after federal changes affected implementation; both were reported out with do pass recommendations. House Bill 2531, continuing and adjusting the ground transportation quality assurance fee structure, also passed out of committee. Finally, House Bill 2543, allowing county clerks to increase certain fees to cover court-related costs, was reported out with a do pass recommendation on a 22-6 vote. The committee adjourned after completing its business.