Transcript Highlights:

• The cost of all-electric new construction is level and even less than fossil fuel construction.
• further minimize ...retirements with work on the electric grid, making us further minimize costs to
• 50% of costs on all bills.
• What we found is that energy efficiency and all-electric buildings don't cost any more than fossil fuel
• be constructed at lower costs than mixed-fuel buildings while locking in operational cost savings.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy

Summary: The hearing focused on several climate and utility-related bills, especially H. 3449/S. 2292 to expand the municipal fossil fuel-free building demonstration program from 10 to 20 communities and related home rule petitions for Somerville and other municipalities. Witnesses from Somerville, Salem, Worcester, Cambridge, Newton, Arlington, Wellesley, Watertown, and the Massachusetts Municipal Association argued that local governments should be allowed to opt into fossil fuel-free or net-zero building standards, citing climate goals, environmental justice concerns, housing production, and data showing all-electric construction can cost about the same as or less than mixed-fuel construction. Committee members repeatedly pressed witnesses for cost data and asked for written follow-up, while also discussing whether strong environmental standards affect housing supply; witnesses responded that the main housing constraints are financing and that they would provide more data from local projects and state studies. A second major topic was H. 3564, which would require gas companies to provide municipalities with detailed multi-year pipe replacement plans, allow local review and objections, and limit reimbursement for projects not previously disclosed except in emergencies. Municipal leaders and advocates said the bill would improve coordination of street work, reduce disruption and costs, and help cities plan for electrification, network geothermal, and non-pipeline alternatives. Testimony from Wellesley, Cambridge, Arlington, Newton, and others emphasized repeated problems with last-minute gas main work, the need for advance notice, and the value of municipal participation in planning gas system retirement and alternatives. The committee also heard testimony on the “tactical transition” bills, S. 2249/H. 3539, aimed at managing the gas-to-clean-energy transition. Supporters from Gas Transition Allies, Rewiring America, and 350 Mass said the bills would require joint gas-electric planning, create an advisory council, eliminate subsidies for new gas hookups, shift investment toward repairs and clean alternatives, protect workers through retraining, and make utility plans more transparent. They argued these changes would reduce ratepayer costs, avoid stranded gas assets, and support orderly decarbonization. In addition, HEET testified on H. 3541, which would update greenhouse gas accounting to better reflect methane’s short-term climate impact, and H. 3543, which would establish a framework for managing shared thermal resources and thermal energy networks; committee members asked several questions about the meaning, ownership, and consumer-cost implications of the proposed “thermal commons.” No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 2374 concerns electric-assisted bicycles, or e-bikes, and electric motorcycle regulation.
• Electric motorcycle is defined as a motorcycle that uses propulsion units powered solely by electricity
• and electric motorcycles.
• Electric-assisted bicycles and electric motorcycles.
• WSDOT says there are non-zero but indeterminate costs to implement this, and the costs associated with

Bills: HB2307 , HB2374 , HB2379 , HB1823 , HB2111

Committee: House Transportation

Keywords: commute trip reduction, definitions, transportation, environmental impact, urban planning, electric bicycles, electric motorcycles, regulation, vehicle classification, tolling, emergency suspension, public access, state highways, transportation improvement board, TIB, transportation improvement account, motor vehicle fund, arterial streets, local match, private match

Transcript Highlights:

• This change is functionally lowering the cost of this type of electrical permit by $3.
• This change is functionally lowering the cost of this type of electrical permit by $3.
• This change is functionally lowering the cost of this type of electrical permit by $3.
• This change is functionally lowering the cost of this type of electrical permit by $3.
• This change is functionally lowering the cost of this type of electrical permit by $3.

Committee: Senate Labor

Transcript Highlights:

• Need to expand the electric grid.
• It's much higher cost—the initial project development and installation costs versus conventional HVAC
• Costs for basic services like electricity are hardest on low-income Minnesotans, and electric cooperatives
• costs.
• We have seen those costs increase, and I think it's more because the cost of fuel has been going up.

Committee: House Energy Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• And we want to keep our design cost at about 15% of what our total construction cost is.
• electric utilities.
• </c><00:24:59.600><c> electric</c> stateowned distribution electric stateowned distribution electric
• </c><00:28:50.399><c> West</c> Rural Electric Cooperative. West Rural Electric Cooperative.
• </c> Rural Electric Cooperative. Rural Electric Cooperative.

Summary: The House Budget Review Subcommittee heard testimony from the Energy and Environment Cabinet on the state-owned dam repair program and Kentucky’s electric grid resilience program. On dams, Commissioner Tony Hatton explained the legal definition and hazard classifications for Kentucky dams, noting there are 975 regulated dams statewide, including 76 state-owned dams, and that hazard ratings are based on potential loss of life or property damage if a dam fails. He described the cabinet’s screening criteria, including inundation mapping, engineering condition, and compliance status, and said the cabinet uses a design-bid-build procurement process to manage public funds responsibly. Hatton outlined current and planned dam projects funded from the prior biennium, including Willisburg Lake in Washington County, where work will address hydraulic capacity, unstable downstream slopes, and likely require a coffer dam, flood wall, auxiliary spillway, and raw water line replacement. He also said Big Bone Lake State Park Dam will be decommissioned, Clemens Lake Dam at Morehead State University is in design for a major rehabilitation, and additional projects include Marion County Sportsman’s Dam, Chenoa Lake Creek/Canning Creek Dam, and a rehabilitation study for the Mud River at Lake Malone. The cabinet also requested $500,000 for routine repairs and maintenance. Members questioned cost estimates, inflation, and whether it would be better to fund design separately; cabinet officials said estimates are current best engineering estimates, costs have generally stayed within about 10%, and the current funding flow requires all funds to be available before bidding. The committee then received a status update on the electric grid resilience program, a five-year federal formula grant under Section 40101(d) of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. Officials said Kentucky has received years one through three of funding, which has been allocated to state park facilities and municipal electric utilities, while years four and five have not yet been received and would go to distribution cooperatives and remaining municipal utilities. Projects discussed included upgrades at Ken Lake State Park and Kentucky Dam Village, plus municipal projects in Owensboro, Princeton, Williamstown, and Hopkinsville. The cabinet said the selected projects focus on hardening infrastructure, replacing poles, wires, conductors, and transformers, improving vegetation management, and adding or upgrading outage management systems. Officials reported that all projects are under contract and moving into subcontracting and construction, while the Department of Parks is finalizing an agreement with Western Kentucky Rural Electric Cooperative for the park-related work.

Transcript Highlights:

• So electric vehicles mainly.
• So electric vehicles mainly.
• The problem is with electricity, right? We don't just use electricity for cars, right?
• There are costs associated with the hardware, costs with the administration.
• And when we—the electric vehicles already cost more. It's inconvenient as it is to try and charge.

Summary: The Assembly Transportation Committee first took up three highway naming resolutions on its consent calendar: ACR 109, SCR 78, and SCR 90. The committee approved the consent calendar with 11 aye votes and no no votes, then adjourned the bill-hearing portion. Members also recognized committee science fellow AJ Mendeola for his service, noting his contributions to bill analysis and staff support. The committee then held an informational hearing on alternatives to the gas tax, focused on the projected decline in fuel-tax revenue and the need for a more sustainable transportation funding model. The chair and invited experts described how inflation, improved fuel efficiency, and growth in electric and other alternative-fuel vehicles are eroding gas-tax revenues. Presenters from the National Conference of State Legislatures and the University of California discussed state options such as higher or indexed gas taxes, EV registration fees, road usage charges, delivery fees, public EV charging fees, transportation network company fees, and managed lanes, emphasizing tradeoffs among revenue adequacy, fairness, administrative cost, and public acceptance. Committee members raised concerns that mileage-based fees or EV fees could function as new taxes on commuters and lower-income drivers, especially if the gas tax is not repealed. Presenters responded that road usage charges are generally intended as replacements for the gas tax, not additions, and argued that mileage-based systems better preserve the user-pays principle while being less tied to vehicle fuel efficiency. They also noted that flat EV registration fees are easy to administer but can be less equitable because they are not linked to actual road use. Officials from Hawaii, Utah, and Oregon described their state programs and policy choices. Hawaii said its new road usage charge began July 1, 2025, for EVs, offers a choice between a per-mile charge and a flat annual fee through 2028, and will transition to mandatory EV participation before expanding to all light-duty vehicles by 2033. Utah described its voluntary EV road usage charge program, quarterly reporting, privacy protections, and legislative scenarios for removing the cap or making participation mandatory. Oregon outlined its constitutional cost-responsibility framework and broader transportation funding challenges, including reliance on user fees and limited use of general-fund support.

Transcript Highlights:

• Are you suggesting that if there are costs and delays and you have to bear the cost, everyone in the
• So how much could a delay cost the state? The same it would cost the contractor.
• Second, the bill imposes potentially unrecoverable costs on existing assets and increases customer costs
• It's actually cheap, cheaper, costing one-fourth of the cost of a non-hardened system. system by using
• HB 555 allows the use of the plan for cost recovery on hardening the electrical system, modernizing the

Bills: SB75 , SB715 , SB776 , SB1299 , SB1405 , SB1968 , SB2021 , SB2077 , SB2148 , SB2321 , SB2330 , SB2411

Committee: Senate Business & Commerce

Transcript Highlights:

• So how does the cost work? Does this affect the cost of ratepayers? So how does the cost work?
• But the main cost is that it costs a lot to maintain a system.
• SB 905 correctly recognizes that a significant and growing share of electricity costs are being driven
• Prematurely adding costs on electric vehicles and chargers without clear benefit to both the grid and
• Prematurely adding costs on electric vehicles and chargers without clear benefit to both the grid and

Summary: The committee heard several energy, water, and utility bills, with extensive testimony on cost, ratepayer impacts, and climate or reliability goals. SB 919 by Senator Grayson would extend the biomethane monetary incentive program through 2030 and support renewable natural gas development by reducing interconnection cost barriers. Supporters said RNG helps methane reduction and organic waste diversion, while opponents, including TURN and environmental groups, argued the bill could shift costs to ratepayers and subsidize combustion-based fuels, especially dairy digesters. The author said committee amendments removed the rate-basing provisions and instead urged the CPUC to act quickly on its pending decision; the bill was left for a later vote. SB 931 by Senator Laird would reauthorize the Diablo Canyon Community Impact Mitigation Program through 2030. Supporters said San Luis Obispo County and local schools rely on the funding for emergency preparedness and public safety, while TURN argued the extension would add about $47 million in statewide ratepayer costs and should instead be paid from existing PG&E deal revenues. Members discussed the bill as a continuation of the 2022 Diablo Canyon agreement, and the author said the measure simply restores the five years omitted from that deal. The committee also heard SB 1215 by Senator Cortese, which would direct the CPUC to set deployment targets for EV charging in multifamily housing. Supporters said renters and apartment residents are largely shut out of home charging, and that prior utility programs showed the model can be cost-effective and beneficial to ratepayers. The bill was amended to address affordability, ratepayer benefits, and limits on major system upgrades. SB 1295 by Senator Stern would create a framework for using distributed batteries and other local resources to solve grid constraints more cheaply than traditional infrastructure. Supporters said it could improve reliability and reduce costs by targeting batteries where they provide the most grid value, while utilities said they were open to continued discussion. SB 1359, also by Senator Stern, would require the CPUC to more carefully evaluate major gas infrastructure investments and alternatives such as electrification before approving new spending. Environmental groups supported the bill as a guardrail against stranded assets, while gas utilities opposed it, warning it could undermine the obligation to serve, create safety and reliability risks, and retroactively change the rules for approved investments. On water policy, SB 1125 by Senator Menjivar would create a statewide low-income water rate assistance program upon appropriation. Supporters said about 1.6 million households have water debt and that affordability is a statewide issue, not just a problem for disadvantaged communities. Some members raised concerns that the bill lacked a funding source and that state mandates, such as chromium-6 treatment requirements, already strain local water agencies; the author and supporters responded that the bill includes administrative caps and transparency measures and is intended to work alongside future funding. The committee then heard SB 1098 by Senator Pérez, which would restrict the use of utility memorandum and balancing accounts by requiring exceptional circumstances, adding sunset dates, and creating cost-sharing or lower-return rules for certain spending. TURN and other supporters said the accounts allow utilities to recover costs after the fact with too little discipline, while Edison and PG&E opposed the bill, arguing that some costs are unpredictable and that the CPUC already has a formal review process. SB 1125 was moved to Appropriations with a roll call, and the roll was left open for additional votes; the other measures were discussed with no final committee actions announced in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 2374 concerns electric-assisted bicycles, or e-bikes, and electric motorcycle regulation.
• Electric motorcycles as being distinct from electric-assisted bicycles, and we're in statute.
• and electric motorcycles.
• and electric motorcycles.
• Electric-assisted bicycles and electric motorcycles.

Summary: The Transportation Committee held public hearings on three bills. HB 2307 would update the commute trip reduction program by removing the current 6 a.m. to 9 a.m. arrival-time requirement from key definitions, so more employers and shift workers could qualify for CTR benefits. The bill sponsor and several supporters, including Microsoft, transit and transportation nonprofits, local transportation management groups, and city representatives, said the change would modernize the program, improve equity, reduce congestion, and help workers with transportation costs. No one testified in opposition. HB 2374 would distinguish electric-assisted bicycles from higher-powered electric motorcycles, clarify labeling and equipment rules, and direct DOL to convene a work group on enforcement and consumer protection. The sponsor and many supporters, including cities, trail and park organizations, Washington Bikes, and several students, said the bill would address unsafe high-powered vehicles being marketed as e-bikes, especially those used by younger riders, while preserving access to true e-bikes. Some testifiers asked for additional work group members and suggested civil enforcement options for underage riders. HB 2379 would require WSDOT to suspend tolling on facilities that serve as evacuation routes during emergencies such as wildfires or levee breaches. The sponsor said the bill was prompted by constituents facing evacuation while tolls were still being charged; staff noted the fiscal impact would be indeterminate and could reduce toll revenue during suspensions. After the hearings, the committee took executive action on two bills. It adopted proposed substitute H-2771 for HB 1823, which cleans up Transportation Improvement Board provisions and removes obsolete language while retaining remaining bond authority. It also passed HB 2111, which directs interest earned from toll revenues for the Interstate Bridge project to be credited to that project. Both actions were approved by voice vote, 27-0, with two members excused.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's cost based.
• The public utilities commission looks at what it costs to produce electrical service that determines
• It's cost based. regulating utilities. It's cost based.
• </c><00:31:40.960><c> to</c><00:31:41.200><c> produce</c><00:31:41.600><c> electrical</c> what it costs
• to produce electrical what it costs to produce electrical service<00:31:42.720><c> that</c><00:31:43.039

Summary: The Senate Commerce and Consumer Protection Committee held an informational briefing on the Public Utilities Commission’s performance-based regulation (PBR) framework and the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs’ whistleblower complaint process. Chair Jared Kohole opened the meeting, noted it was informational only with no public testimony, and explained that members would hear presentations and then have an opportunity for questions. The committee heard first from Ulupono Initiative, which provided background on why utilities are regulated, how Hawaii’s cost-of-service model and rate cases work, and why PBR was adopted to shift utility incentives away from a capital-investment bias and toward performance, efficiency, cost control, and policy goals such as renewable energy and reliability. Ulupono described Hawaii’s PBR structure as a five-year multi-year rate plan with annual revenue adjustments, a customer dividend, a Z factor for extraordinary exogenous events, and an exceptional project recovery mechanism for large projects. It also outlined performance incentive mechanisms tied to renewable portfolio standard progress, interconnection speed, reliability, and shared savings. The presentation said the current docket is evaluating a possible hybrid approach that would combine forward-looking forecasting with historical results, and Ulupono advocated for stronger incentives, arguing the current rewards are too small relative to utility revenues and should be more meaningful to better align utility behavior with legislative intent. The PUC then presented its own overview, emphasizing that the PBR docket is open and active and that the briefing was limited to the record to avoid ex parte concerns. The commission described the development of PBR in Hawaii through multiple phases beginning in 2018: an initial collaborative phase to set goals, a formal contested-case phase that produced the initial framework, later phases adding scorecards, reported metrics, and additional performance incentive mechanisms, and subsequent refinements including sunset of some mechanisms and adjustments after the August 2023 Maui wildfires. The PUC said the framework is intended to be customer-centric, administratively efficient, and protective of utility financial integrity, and that current work includes evaluating how to balance forward-looking and historical test-year approaches within the rebasing process. No votes or formal actions were taken at the briefing.

Transcript Highlights:

• project costs and whereas consumer<00:07:39.080><c> utility</c><00:07:39.520><c> costs</c><00:07:39.800
• </c> session relative to assessment of cost session relative to assessment of cost eff<00:10:50.000><
• :51.279><c> system</c> eff cost effectiveness of the system eff cost effectiveness of the system benefits
• </c> needed because the the cost needed because the the cost Effectiveness<00:16:26.680><c> piece</c>
• and the buyer of the electricity.

Committee: House Science, Technology and Energy

Transcript Highlights:

• Non-emitting electricity generation is generation of electricity without the production of greenhouse
• We’re running out of electricity.
• It’s also about adding costs to build.
• When we talk about the cost of housing, nobody ever talks about the health and ecological costs of housing
• We are all facing rising electricity costs, and common sense in light of the affordability crisis means

Bills: HB2103 , HB2388 , HB2316 , HB2006 , HB2224

Committee: House Local Government

Keywords: renewable energy, nonemitting generation, public entities, contracting, electric generation, distributed energy, agricultural land, energy generation, renewable resources, siting regulations, land use, urban development, vegetation management, shrubsteppe, environmental regulation, economic development, sales tax, rural counties, industrial land banks, growth management

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> volatile cost of oil as an advantage. volatile cost of oil as an advantage.
• </c> on top shows the cost, the fuel cost and on top shows the cost, the fuel cost and cents<00:33:28.559
• We cut the cost of electricity for televisions in half with our TV standard.
• Higher cost. a real challenge now. Higher cost.
• </c> cost because costs are high right now. cost because costs are high right now.

Bills: SCR48 , SCR28 , SCR74 , SCR62 , SCR60 , SCR89 , SCR147 , SCR179 , SCR182 , SCR59 , SCR54 , SCR180

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:13:54.079><c> costs</c> show some increase in electric costs show some increase in electric costs
• that is running on no fuel-cost electric sources much of the time.
• </c> lowering the cost of an of electricity lowering the cost of an of electricity here<00:35:22.119>
• </c> government to help keep electricity government to help keep electricity costs<00:36:05.119><c> lower
• c><00:36:36.000><c> since</c><00:36:36.200><c> we</c> electricity cost going up ever since we electricity

Committee: Senate Energy, Utilities, Environment, and Climate

Transcript Highlights:

• That matters because when customers save electricity, utilities avoid running higher-cost resources and
• do use more electricity, so more kilowatts than a non-all-electric house does.
• cost-effective.
• Less electricity.
• We want to ask the PRC to consider the cost increase to our rate for electricity that's produced for

Summary: The House Energy, Environment and Natural Resources Committee met on February 5 and heard three measures. House Bill 246 would provide state matching funds for local governments already approved for federal flood mitigation assistance to buy out and rehabilitate floodplain properties, especially in Lincoln County, to reduce repetitive flood damage and restore land to a more natural floodplain. Supporters included county officials, emergency management, and a racetrack lobbyist, all emphasizing public safety, reduced disaster costs, and community recovery. Some members raised concerns about pre-flood property valuation and anti-donation issues, but the bill passed on a do-pass motion. House Bill 271 would appropriate funds through the Office of Natural Resources Trustee for natural resource recovery and public land access, including disaster recovery projects and expansion of recreational opportunities. Supporters argued it would help restore watersheds, improve access to public lands, and support hunting, fishing, and local outdoor economies. Several members questioned whether the bill was too open-ended, whether it could affect grazing or other existing rights, and why the trustee’s office was the right vehicle; the sponsor and trustee said the office has a transparent public process and that the bill would not create new eminent domain authority or adverse changes to existing rights. The committee approved the bill 9-1, with one member explaining support but noting lingering concerns. House Bill 254 would allow investor-owned electric utilities to count avoided greenhouse gas emissions when evaluating the cost-effectiveness of energy efficiency programs under the utility cost test. The sponsor and utility witnesses said this would help expand programs such as heat pumps, HVAC upgrades, and all-electric development, while opponents worried it could function as a rate increase or “double dipping” because customers already pay fees supporting efficiency programs. The committee passed the bill 7-3. Finally, House Joint Memorial 3 would ask the Environment Department to study PFAS exemptions and report back during the interim as rulemaking on the PFAS Protection Act proceeds. The memorial drew both support and opposition, with critics saying it conflicted with existing statute and was unnecessary, while supporters said it would ensure a thorough review of federal changes and consumer-product exemptions. The memorial passed 8-2, and the committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• zero-carbon electricity objectives.
• The bill originally included language requiring large electrical corporations to cover the cost of wildfire
• mitigation without passing those costs onto consumers through higher electricity rates.
• The bill originally included language requiring large electrical corporations to cover the cost of wildfire
• mitigation without passing those costs onto consumers through higher electricity rates.

Committee: House Utilities and Energy

Summary: The committee heard a series of energy and utility bills, with most measures moving forward on party-line or near-party-line votes after extensive testimony. Early items included SB 613, which would direct state agencies to prioritize reducing methane emissions from imported fossil fuels, and SB 614, which would allow California to move ahead with safety rules for carbon dioxide pipelines and lift the current moratorium on new CO2 pipelines. Both bills drew support from industry and clean-energy advocates and no opposition testimony was offered at the hearing. A major portion of the hearing focused on SB 332, which would require a study of whether California should continue using investor-owned utilities, tie executive compensation to affordability metrics, and improve transparency around utility disconnections. Supporters argued the bill would put ratepayers first and examine safer, more affordable utility models, while opponents, including the Chamber of Commerce and major utilities, warned it would send a destabilizing signal to investors and was not a neutral study. Members raised concerns about the bill’s tone and market impacts, but the author said the study was intended to be even-handed; the bill later advanced on a 10-5 vote. The committee also approved SB 57, which creates a tariff framework for large energy users such as data centers to prevent cost shifts to other customers and to address stranded grid costs. Supporters said the bill would protect ratepayers and encourage clean energy use, while utilities and large energy users argued existing CPUC processes already address many of the issues and warned against overly rigid rules. SB 256, dealing with wildfire mitigation, emergency response coordination, undergrounding, and removal of abandoned lines, drew strong support from an Altadena community witness affected by the Eaton Fire, while utilities raised concerns about duplicative mandates and public disclosure of sensitive infrastructure information. SB 647, aimed at improving low-income energy program access and performance metrics, and SB 787, which would coordinate state clean-energy supply chain development for EVs, building decarbonization, and offshore wind, also advanced after supportive testimony from labor, environmental, and community groups. The committee later approved a consent calendar of additional bills and left several measures on call for absent members to add votes."}

Transcript Highlights:

• I saw anger about high electricity costs that I haven't seen in my time in energy.
• </c><01:25:08.400><c> costs</c> anger about um high electricity costs anger about um high electricity
• </c><01:54:18.960><c> Cost</c> at all about cost shifting. Cost at all about cost shifting.
• Meaning that the cost shift is a reverse cost shift.
• It expands the cost.

Committee: House Science, Technology and Energy

Transcript Highlights:

• non-emitting electric generation and electricity from renewable resources for the same end uses.
• non-emitting electric generation and electricity from renewable resources for the same end uses.
• about other costs as well.
• And those costs include the operating costs of potentially running and operating electrode boilers.
• For some of our members right now, PCA being one of them, it costs more to buy electricity than it does

Summary: The Environment and Energy Committee heard testimony on House Bill 2537, which would change how energy-intensive, trade-exposed facilities (EITEs) are treated under the Climate Commitment Act. Committee staff and the bill sponsor explained that the measure would require Ecology to update its post-2034 report to include proposed allowance-reduction methods, leakage-risk adjustments, and consignment recommendations, and would add new reporting and decarbonization-planning requirements for EITEs to continue receiving no-cost allowances. The committee also briefly took up House Bill 2245, a separate Clean Energy Transformation Act bill, and later voted the proposed substitute out of committee on an 11-8 vote with 2 excused, after debate over exemptions for certain utilities and market customers. Supporters of HB 2537, including The Nature Conservancy, NRDC, Washington Conservation Action, Climate Solutions, Clean and Prosperous Washington, Ecology, and some utility representatives, said the bill would provide needed clarity, better data, and a path for long-term industrial decarbonization while helping prevent emissions leakage. They argued that EITEs receive substantial public value through free allowances and should be required to document emissions sources, energy needs, and feasible reduction pathways so the state can design a post-2035 policy consistent with climate goals. Ecology said it generally supports the bill, though it recommended streamlining duplicative reporting and noted the work would require significant agency resources not included in the governor’s budget. Opponents, including the Association of Washington Business, the Northwest Pulp and Paper Association, the Association of Western Pulp and Paperworkers, WISPA, the Alliance of Western Energy Consumers, Food Northwest, Simplot, Kaiser Aluminum, and Newcor Steel, warned that the bill could increase compliance burdens, expose sensitive business information, and worsen leakage risks by making Washington less competitive. They said many facilities have already made major investments and face high capital costs, limited clean electricity supply, permitting delays, and technologies that are not yet commercially viable at scale. Several speakers pointed to recent plant closures and job losses in pulp and paper, food processing, and metals as evidence that leakage is already occurring, and urged the committee to preserve flexibility, protect confidentiality, and consider targeted funding or other incentives rather than new mandates alone.

Transcript Highlights:

• indices that reflect incentives to control costs if the commission resets an electric utility's allowed
• if the commission resets control costs if the commission resets an<01:12:43.120><c> electric</c><01:
• It authorizes the use of the Hawaii Electricity Reliability Surcharge for cost recovery of certain expenses
• </c> costs for that transition, lower costs costs for that transition, lower costs for<01:35:40.960><
• > electric</c><01:36:23.760><c> vehicle</c> relating to electrical electric vehicle relating to electrical

Bills: HB1617

Committee: House Energy & Environmental Protection

Summary: The committees heard testimony on HB 1949, which would create a public dashboard for the green fee to improve transparency and accountability. Testimony from the Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission, the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development, and many community and conservation groups was generally supportive, with several speakers urging that the governor’s project recommendations remain largely intact and that community-driven projects continue to guide spending. One amendment was suggested to place the dashboard at the Department of Budget and Finance for fiscal expertise, while other testimony favored keeping it with the commission. Members asked about procurement, ETS involvement, recurring hosting costs, and whether the dashboard could be funded from green fee revenues; the commission said it could work with ETS and that green fee funds could reasonably be used. The committees then voted to pass HB 1949 with amendments. The committees also heard HB 2618, which would require the governor to submit a separate bill for amounts tied to any increase in the transient accommodations tax and, in later discussion, was expanded into a broader restructuring of future green fee allocations. Testimony from the Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission, Hawaii Reef and Ocean Coalition, and others supported the bill and emphasized the value of more predictable, dedicated funding for conservation and climate-related work. During decision-making, the chair described amendments creating several special funds under DLNR, including a watershed biodiversity and wildfire risk reduction fund, an aquatic resources conservation fund, a coastal restoration fund, a cesspool conversion revolving loan fund, and a green fee special fund for remaining revenues, with recommended amounts discussed for some of the funds. The committees voted to pass HB 2618 with amendments. The hearing then moved to HB 1644, a consumer protection measure for residential solar sales that would require compliance with consumer protection laws, licensing or contractor affiliation for sellers, and a standardized disclosure form. Testimony in support came from the Hawaii Green Infrastructure Authority, DCCA’s Office of Consumer Protection, Kauai Island Utility Cooperative, the Hawaii Solar Energy Association, and several solar companies and individuals. Supporters said the bill would address complaints about third-party sales practices and improve disclosure, especially around financing. The committee then began hearing HB 2243, which would require electric utilities to provide public, electronic customer bill impact analyses and annual reports to the Public Utilities Commission; the Division of Consumer Advocacy and the PUC offered comments supporting the measure’s intent.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> what is the cost of fuel going to be? what is the cost of fuel going to be?
• It is electric vehicles, anything.
• You because it's going to cost right? You because it's going to cost money,<00:47:05.040><c> right?
• </c> cost that fuel cost is pretty much zero. cost that fuel cost is pretty much zero.
• </c> efficient than than gas or electricity. efficient than than gas or electricity.

Bills: HF4770

Committee: House Energy Finance and Policy

Summary: The committee approved the March 26 minutes and then took up House File 4770, as amended by an A1 technical amendment. The bill was presented as a proposal to help Liberty Diversified International and Liberty Paper in Becker plan for replacement steam and energy supply as the Shuro facility closure approaches in 2030. Testimony described Liberty Paper’s current closed-loop steam arrangement with Shuro, the need to study future fuel and technology options, and the potential use of anaerobic digestion, biomass, construction and demolition waste, and food waste to produce steam and possibly power. Members asked about feedstock availability, the need for a feasibility study, possible backup natural gas use, and whether waste heat or wastewater heat could be useful. The bill was laid over as amended. The committee then heard a presentation from CenterPoint Energy on Minnesota heating demand and electrification. CenterPoint staff said affordability and reliability are central concerns and outlined how the utility manages customer costs through energy efficiency, contracting, storage, peak shaving, and conservation. Dr. Joel Lynch presented research on peak heating with natural gas and the “missing piece” in Minnesota’s electrification puzzle, explaining that Minnesota’s cold climate makes winter heating demand especially challenging and that replacing natural gas would require substantial new electric capacity and renewable resources. He compared his work with prior national and state studies and said the analysis used Minnesota-specific gas throughput, COP assumptions across several electrification scenarios, and January renewable capacity data. Lynch summarized preliminary findings that Minnesota’s peak gas heating throughput could be up to 40 gigawatts, with electric resistance heating implying roughly 36 gigawatts of new demand, and lower but still substantial demand under heat-pump scenarios. The presentation was informational only; no vote was taken on the CenterPoint presentation. The meeting ended with House File 4770 laid over and the energy demand presentation continuing.