Transcript Highlights:

• -Mexico border, is referred to the Committee on Transportation.
• -Mexico border, is referred to the Committee on Transportation.
• -Mexico border, is referred to the Committee on Transportation.
• of Transportation and is referred to the Committee on Transportation.
• Trump Highway for the Committee on Transportation. transportation.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Welcome to the committee. Representative Allen, uh, we do have a technical amendment.
• Good afternoon, Chair, and fellow members of the Transportation Finance and Policy Committee.
• <00:02:42.680> the<00:02:42.840> transportation point for transport the transportation
• point for transport the transportation of<00:02:43.959> our<00:02:44.159> Commodities<
• to the committee.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• He is also the chair of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, and he is the representative
• He's also the chair of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, and he's the representative for
• However, the same opportunity is missed when it comes to the transportation funding.
• That, by contrast, is just 1.2% of all transportation funding in this bill.
• The Joint Committee on Transportation will take up this very subject tomorrow when it hears the governor's

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The House opened with the Pledge of Allegiance and adopted two ceremonial resolutions: one commemorating the dedication of the Woburn Battle Road Memorial as part of the Massachusetts 250th celebration, and another recognizing May 1-7 as Elks National Youth Week. The chamber then took up House Bill 4005, a fiscal year 2025 supplemental appropriations bill using FY24 Fair Share surtax surplus funds, and ordered it to a third reading before later considering it for passage to be engrossed. During debate on the bill, the House heard a lengthy presentation in support of the proposal, which would direct about $828 million to transportation and $353 million to education. The transportation spending was described as primarily supporting the MBTA, including workforce and safety funding, reserve replenishment, station and infrastructure improvements, reduced fares, and reimbursement for tunnel closure costs, along with smaller amounts for regional transit authorities and unpaved roads. The education side included additional special education circuit breaker funding, vocational school capital, early education workforce supports, early literacy, universal school meals, higher education endowment matches, Green School Works, and ESOL waitlist reduction, with the Inspector General directed to review circuit breaker cost controls. Members then debated several amendments. One amendment related to a school athletics policy was modified by a further amendment calling for DESE analysis before implementation; both the further amendment and the underlying amendment as amended were adopted. A transportation amendment to shift $50 million from MBTA funding to Chapter 90 municipal roads was supported by members emphasizing rural road needs but was rejected on a roll call, 25-120. Another transportation amendment adding at least $300,000 for Route 93 mitigation costs in Medford was adopted, 133-20. The bill itself then passed to be engrossed on a roll call, 140-14. The House also observed moments of silence for former First Lady Kitty Dukakis and for victims of the Santo Domingo nightclub collapse, and later adopted an order to meet the next day at 11 a.m. before adjourning in memory of former Representative Philip W. Johnston.

Transcript Highlights:

• So upon returning... ...back to the Transportation Committee where I spent 6 years in the first part
• Chair and members of the committee. My name is Joe Macpherson.
• Chair and committee members.
• He and 17% of the metro sales tax for transportation Issues.
• I just remind the committee kind of a lot of the testimony.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up House File 748, a bill revising Minnesota’s transportation greenhouse gas and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) impact assessment requirements for trunk highway projects. The chair first moved and adopted the A2 author’s amendment and then the A3 amendment, which was described as adding implementation time and project exemptions when federal dollars are available. The bill author explained that the measure responds to concerns from stakeholders that the current law can force costly mitigation, delay or stop safety and capacity projects, and create uncertainty because key implementation details are still being developed by a technical advisory committee. Testimony was split. County and city engineers, county commissioners, the Minnesota Transportation Alliance, and the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities generally supported the bill, arguing that the current requirements can add 20% to 40% or more to project costs, are difficult to administer, and could jeopardize critical safety improvements, congestion relief, and federal funding. They cited examples such as Scott County and Trunk Highway 65, and said VMT mitigation is especially hard to quantify and fund. Opponents, including Move Minnesota and Sierra Club, argued that safety and climate goals are not in conflict, that reducing driving can save lives and reduce pollution, and that the bill would weaken an important tool for cutting transportation emissions. Members also asked about how GHG and VMT are measured, whether the required assessment was ready, and who would be responsible for mitigation assets and costs. After discussion, the committee held a roll call vote. The bill, as amended, passed 8-7 and was moved to the General Register.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Select Committee on the Transportation Costs and Impact of the Low Carbon Fuel Standard is called
• LCFS is only about transportation fuels, LCFS is only about transportation fuels, whereas cap-and-trade
• And to your point, the staff that has been involved from both of our offices, Transportation Committee
• And to your point, the staff that has been involved from both of our offices, Transportation Committee
• its clean transportation future.

Summary: The hearing was a select committee discussion on the transportation costs and impacts of California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), with opening remarks from the co-chairs and members emphasizing affordability, climate goals, and the need to explain the program’s benefits to the public. The first panel from CARB and the California Energy Commission described how LCFS works as a market-based, declining carbon-intensity program that rewards lower-carbon fuels, supports zero-emission vehicle infrastructure, and is intended to reduce greenhouse gases and local air pollution. They argued the program has driven billions in private investment, increased alternative fuel use, and that LCFS credit prices are not the main driver of retail gasoline prices, which they said are dominated by crude oil, refining, and distribution costs. Members questioned the panel on the gap between the regulatory target and actual carbon-intensity performance, the role of credit banking, which fuels are generating the most credits, how the 2025 amendments affected the program, and whether LCFS credits are truly additional. CARB explained that banking helps cost-effectiveness and investment certainty, that ethanol, renewable diesel, and biodiesel currently provide the largest volumes while electricity is expected to grow, and that the updated targets were informed by the state’s 2045 carbon-neutrality goals and the 2030 scoping plan. The Energy Commission said its data show environmental programs add some cost to gasoline but do not drive price volatility, which is mainly tied to crude oil and refinery margins. The second panel, featuring academic and research experts, focused on program design, out-of-state credit generation, and broader economic effects. Speakers said LCFS is successful because it ties incentives to emissions benefit, uses life-cycle analysis, and allows flexible compliance that lowers costs compared with more direct regulation. They also said the program’s benefits generally outweigh costs, that it can reduce air pollution disparities and support equity, but that some issues—especially indirect land use change, additionality, and older program assumptions—need more research and may warrant future rulemaking. One researcher noted that while LCFS likely raises gasoline prices somewhat, the effect is uncertain by design and usually smaller than normal market fluctuations, and another warned that limiting credit generation too narrowly could create legal and efficiency problems.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Assembly Transportation Committee is called to order. Welcome, everyone.
• go to our committee.
• It is the Transportation Committee, so asking for transport.
• It is the Transportation Committee, so asking for transport to our committee.
• I am asking members of the Transportation Committee to find your way back to your chairs before her testimony

Summary: The Assembly Transportation Committee heard a series of bills focused on transportation safety, climate resilience, wildlife connectivity, parking enforcement, and EV charging reliability. AB 605 would create a pilot program allowing certain hydrogen internal combustion cargo-handling equipment at ports; supporters said it could help ports stay competitive while reducing emissions, while South Coast AQMD raised concerns about possible nitrogen oxide emissions and limits on future regulation. The bill passed on an 11-0 vote to the Natural Resources Committee. AB 1132 would require Caltrans to incorporate community resilience indicators, including socioeconomic factors, into climate vulnerability assessments; supporters from Greenlining, AARP, and others said it would better protect seniors, people with disabilities, and transit users during heat waves and disasters, while some members questioned the cost during a tight budget year. It passed 9-0 to Appropriations, with some members not voting. AB 382 would lower school-zone speed limits to 20 mph and give local agencies more flexibility in how the limit is posted and enforced; supporters cited child pedestrian deaths and safety research, and the bill passed 11-0 to Appropriations. AB 902, as amended, would require transportation projects in wildlife connectivity areas to include wildlife passage features where feasible; supporters emphasized reduced collisions and habitat fragmentation, while the California Building Industry Association and COGs moved from opposition to neutral after amendments. It passed 9-1 to Local Government. AB 1014 would give Caltrans more discretion to lower speed limits on state highways based on local conditions rather than the 85th percentile rule; supporters said it would improve safety in rural and tourist areas, and the bill passed 13-0 to Appropriations. AB 1022 would end towing or booting vehicles solely for unpaid parking tickets, with supporters describing the practice as punitive and harmful to low-income drivers, while cities and parking groups argued it would weaken enforcement and create problems for out-of-state vehicles. The bill passed 9-3 to Appropriations. AB 1423 would require publicly funded EV chargers to meet reliability standards and allow enforcement of uptime requirements; supporters said taxpayers need functioning chargers, while charging-industry opponents objected to retroactive standards and possible conflicts with existing agreements. The bill passed 14-0 to Utilities and Energy. The committee also approved a consent calendar of five bills by voice vote and held roll calls open for additional members to add on.

Transcript Highlights:

• House File Number 14, an act relating to transportation, establishing a budget for transportation.
• transportation services in the area. transportation services in the area.
• transportation that's very important. transportation that's very important.
• It received a hearing in the transportation committee.
• <00:15:18.320> The transportation committee. The transportation committee.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• For Agency Code 805, the Department of Transportation. Yes, Mr. Chair, members of the committee.
• Committee meet, go over revenue estimates for the Department of Transportation.
• Committee members, I am presenting for your consideration House Bill 3, the Department of Transportation
• Adopting the technical consensus and the bill as passed by our House Transportation Committee.
• Passed by House Transportation and Public Works Committee, or adopt the House Transportation and Public

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• transportation cabinet. transportation cabinet.
• <00:05:00.320> delivery<00:05:00.720> transportation transportation delivery transportation
• transportation delivery transportation cabinet. cabinet. cabinet.
• They conduct random rider surveys and phone surveys and conduct coordinated transportation advisory committee
• <00:09:55.839> advisory<00:09:56.320> committee transportation advisory committee transportation

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Budget Review Subcommittee on Health and Family Services met in person, approved the October 15 minutes, and began with a moment of silence following a Louisville UPS plane explosion that was described as a local tragedy affecting many families and first responders. The main presentation was an overview of Kentucky’s Medicaid non-emergency medical transportation (NMT) program from the Department for Medicaid Services and the Transportation Cabinet. Witnesses explained that NMT is a federally required Medicaid benefit, administered by the Transportation Cabinet under a risk-based capitated model, with eligibility limited to Medicaid members traveling to medically necessary, Medicaid-covered services and who lack access to other transportation. They also described exclusions, including certain KCHIP, QMB, and PACE members, and outlined the brokered regional structure, call center operations, scheduling rules, vehicle and driver oversight, complaint handling, and rider surveys. The presenters reported that NMT handled more than 3.1 million trips in state fiscal year 2024, with over 1.38 million trips already recorded in October, and said customer satisfaction surveys were high. They said the FY 2025-26 contract total is about $360.6 million, with monthly per-member capitation rates set by region through an actuarial process and approved by CMS. They emphasized that payments are tied to monthly Medicaid enrollment and that the state draws down federal funds for the exact amount paid, with no leftover balance. They also said most NMT use comes from adult day centers and rehabilitative care such as dialysis. Members questioned the witnesses about how quality metrics and contract standards are set, whether the state had explored alternatives such as Uber Health or other integrated models, and how utilization was calculated. The witnesses said contract requirements are developed collaboratively by Medicaid Services, the Transportation Cabinet, and other agencies, and that studies of other models generally found higher costs and lower approval ratings, with additional research on a hybrid model expected by the end of the year. They clarified that one figure reflected the share of Medicaid members with registered vehicles, while another reflected actual NMT users, and they defended the capitated structure as shifting financial risk to brokers rather than the state. Representative Fleming also raised concerns about oversight, reporting, and the apparent gap between budgeted and contracted amounts, asking whether any unused funds would return to general funds; the discussion ended before a final answer was given.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is the Joint Transportation Committee meeting, and it is so weird to have so many members here that
• Good afternoon, members of the Joint Transportation Committee.
• Good afternoon, members of the Joint Transportation Committee for the record, Allison Cumming, staff
• And we should note that WSDOT has a transportation mandate, but transportation planning also WSDOT is
• The Department of Transportation served on our steering committee and provided valuable comments many

Summary: The committee first heard a presentation from WSDOT on balancing uncertainty in capital program estimates and cash flow management. WSDOT explained the differences between design-bid-build and design-build delivery, its tiered risk-assessment process by project size, and how it uses base estimates, inflation, and risk modeling to set budgets. Staff said design-bid-build estimates are generally accurate within about 1% across the program, while design-build projects carry much wider uncertainty and are better communicated as ranges; they cited a P85 budget approach and noted that large, complex projects can be affected by market competition and long procurement timelines. Members asked about the Columbia River Bridge cost growth and about value engineering, and WSDOT said it uses value engineering but has limited scope to cut costs because of project requirements and policy mandates. Troy Swing also discussed cash flow, noting that a few large projects can significantly affect biennial funding needs, and said a risk pool would not reduce overall program risk but could help manage timing if paired with appropriation and cash-flow controls. The committee then received the final presentation in the WSDOT Project Delivery and Innovative Practices study from HKA Global. The consultant said WSDOT’s estimating practices are generally robust and recommended improving transparency by presenting budget authorizations as ranges or estimate classes, better tracking estimate growth over time, and adjusting advertisement timing to avoid competing lettings. The report also discussed surety bonding, suggesting the legislature consider restoring authority for reduced bonding on select large design-build projects or using phased bonding and alternative securities. On indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contracting, the consultant said current job order contract rules are restrictive and recommended legislative changes to make such tools more usable, especially for smaller tasks and to help use unspent funds more flexibly. The committee also heard a follow-up presentation on transit-oriented development policy recommendations tied to HB 1491. The Urban Institute’s Yona Freemark said Washington has been a national leader on TOD but that housing construction, especially in the Puget Sound, has slowed sharply since 2022. He said rising construction costs, high financing costs, and local tax and rent conditions are making many TOD projects infeasible, and recommended that the state fill infrastructure funding gaps around stations, revisit MFTE affordability requirements, consider minimum rather than average density requirements near transit, and create a statewide system to track TOD outcomes such as affordability, gentrification, and transit access. Members questioned the study’s developer interviews, the role of rent control and crime, property tax assumptions, and parking needs; the presenter said the study included five private developers, that rent control was not part of the study scope, and that parking was included in the model assumptions. Finally, the committee began a presentation on regulating emissions from ocean-going vessels at berth. Staff and consultants described California-style at-berth rules, which require shore power or equivalent emissions controls so ships can shut off diesel auxiliary engines while docked. The study is examining vessel traffic, emissions reductions, implementation costs, labor and operational needs, and possible effects on port competitiveness and cargo diversion. No votes or formal actions were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Assembly Transportation Committee is called to order.
• The Assembly Transportation Committee is called to order. Good afternoon and welcome, everyone.
• Good afternoon to the Vice Chair and the members of the Transportation Committee on Time Caucus.
• Good afternoon, Chair and committee members. Kevin with the Sacramento Transportation Authority.
• way to the committee room.

Summary: The committee heard and advanced several transportation-related bills, beginning with AB 431 on advanced air mobility. The author and supporters from AUVSI, Joby Aviation, United Airlines, Wisk Aero, the City of Long Beach, and Archer said the bill would create a statewide plan and technical framework for eVTOL/advanced air mobility infrastructure, public outreach, and local implementation. No opposition testified, and the bill passed the committee as amended to Appropriations on a unanimous roll call. Members then took up AB 630 on abandoned or hazardous RVs. The author and supporters, including Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass’s office, argued the bill would curb a cycle in which inoperable RVs are towed, auctioned cheaply, and returned to the streets by predatory buyers, while adding notice, recovery, and reporting requirements. Opponents from Western Center on Law and Poverty and ACLU California Action warned the bill would destroy RVs that serve as shelter for unhoused residents and could worsen homelessness. After discussion about the bill’s focus on dismantling rather than towing, the committee passed AB 630 as amended to Appropriations. The committee also approved AB 314, which would support transit-oriented development around planned and existing high-speed rail stations; AB 1223, which gives Sacramento County communities more flexibility to use local transportation revenues for related infrastructure supporting infill development; AB 1111, which adds flexibility to the zero-emission school bus transition for rural and disadvantaged districts; AB 1190, which caps fees charged by DMV business partners and requires clearer disclosure of the official DMV site; AB 987, which limits unreasonable towing fees and related charges; and AB 911, which creates a narrow exemption from Advanced Clean Fleets rules for telecommunications bucket trucks and sail-on-wheels used in emergencies. Most bills drew support from local governments, industry, or consumer groups, while AB 1111 and AB 911 drew opposition from clean transportation and environmental advocates concerned about weakening emissions goals. All of the bills were reported out as amended to the Committee on Appropriations, with recorded roll-call votes and several members adding their names as co-authors or supporters.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're convening the joint Committees on Transportation and Culture and the Arts, and the Committee on
• > culture committee on transportation and culture committee on transportation and culture and<00:
• on Transportation and for the Committee on Transportation, Culture and the Arts, the chair's recommendation
• For the Committee on Transportation and Culture and the Arts, SCR 23 is to pass unamended.
• on transportation and sure the committee on transportation and culture<00:50:41.520> and<00:50

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint committees heard testimony on House Bill 1064, which would implement recommendations from the Fire Safety Research Institute’s Maui wildfire report, clarify the role of the State Fire Marshal, and appropriate funds. Testimony was generally supportive from DLNR, the Climate Advisory Team, the State Fire Council, Hawaiʻi Electric, the Attorney General’s office, the Honu Fire Department, AARP, the Hawaiʻi Insurance Council, and others. Governor Green’s office said it supported the bill but wanted the office of the State Fire Marshal placed under the Department of Defense rather than the governor’s office, citing constitutional and administrative concerns. Members also questioned the State Fire Council about the selection process for the fire marshal and about defensible space and wildfire resilience in different communities. After discussion, the committees deferred decision-making on HB 1064 to Friday, March 14, at 3:00 p.m. in Room 225 for the Committee on Public Safety and Military Affairs, with the same recommendation from the other committee. The hearing then moved to House Bill 697, which would expand who may review automated speed enforcement images. HDOT supported the bill but said it would prefer funding from the Highway Special Fund or the automated speed enforcement special fund rather than general revenues. Opposition testimony from the ACLU raised privacy concerns, argued the bill blurs the line between law enforcement and infrastructure management, and said DOT staff lack the mandate and expertise for the task. Judiciary said it would need additional capacity to process citations and hearings, and noted the program’s likely workload and costs were still uncertain. The committees then took up House Bill 277 on vehicular pursuit policy. The Attorney General and the Law Enforcement Standards Board urged the committees to defer the bill and let the board develop policy first, while Hawaii County Police opposed the measure as unnecessary, confusing, and too restrictive of officer discretion. Honolulu Police Department and the Policing Project supported the bill, arguing that clearer statewide standards and transparency are needed because pursuits can cause serious injuries or deaths and existing policies are inconsistent or not public. The Policing Project said the bill could be improved with amendments on serious crimes, but supported legislative action to set statewide standards while still involving the board. No final vote or action on HB 277 was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm your LFC analyst for the Department of Transportation.
• I appreciate the Legislative Finance Committee.
• Secretary, would you share with the committee that the Transportation Commission recently was awarded
• The last committee I went to was in front of the LFC.
• of the Transportation Committee endorsed.

Transcript Highlights:

• Welcome back to the transportation committee.
• Yes, good afternoon, members of the Transportation Policy Committee.
• name transportation policy committee my name transportation policy committee my name is<00:43:11.520
• I ask the Transportation Committee to support that by rejecting this bill. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
• I ask the Transportation Committee to support that by rejecting this bill.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• How many years did you chair the Transportation Committee? It was a lot, so. Okay. Thank you, Mr.
• Because currently the flexible transportation fund only applies to the transportation portion, and only
• or in conference committee.
• Two sessions ago, I believe, Transportation Committee, we figured up on pure electric vehicles, so not
• Anything else, committee? All right. We're done talking about the transportation 2012. Thank you.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The House Appropriations Government Operations section reconvened and first took up an amendment for the Industrial Commission related to a proposed west-to-east natural gas pipeline. Members discussed increasing the state’s capacity commitment from $60 million to $120 million so the project could move forward and support a future FERC permit, with supporters citing growing demand from data centers, agricultural users, and oilfield gas capture needs. The committee also discussed a separate motion to exempt the mill and elevator from the vacant FTE pool; that motion failed on a roll call vote. The committee then reviewed other Industrial Commission items, including housing authority funding, the abandoned well fund, Bank of North Dakota-related changes, and a decision not to add more to litigation funding. The discussion then shifted to the Department of Transportation budget and a major transportation funding framework. Speaker Weiss explained a proposal to consolidate and rework transportation funding into fewer buckets, including moving Prairie Dog-style funding into the flexible transportation fund, adding $370 million to that fund, and providing $171.3 million for federal match needs. The plan also included $50 million for statewide discretionary projects, $50 million for bridges, and grant flexibility for cities, counties, and townships, with some debate over eligibility thresholds and how much discretion DOT should have in awarding grants. Members also discussed whether small communities could realistically apply for grants and how the new structure would coordinate statewide transportation investments. Additional DOT topics included a proposed gas tax increase, changes to distribution percentages among DOT, cities/counties, townships, and transit, and the treatment of electric vehicle registration fees. The committee noted that transit funding would rise under the formula and that EV registration fees would continue to flow into the highway distribution fund. No final action was taken on the broader DOT package during this portion of the meeting, but members agreed to continue work on the amendment and revisit the issue the next day, with a suggestion to brief the caucus before floor action.