Transcript Highlights:

• Second, it authorizes the court to impose an additional surcharge on the penalty assessment up to $50,000
• Fourth, it provides... ...that the CVPA and the additional surcharge may not be reduced, waived, or converted
• Fifth, it requires payment of the CVPA and any additional surcharge imposed as a condition to the suspension
• Fourth, it provides that the CVPA and the additional surcharge may not be reduced, waived, or converted
• Five, it requires payment of the CVPA and any additional surcharge imposed as a condition to the suspension

Summary: The House Community Safety Committee met in executive session on several bills previously heard, first reviewing proposed substitutes and amendments, then taking final action after a caucus recess. House Bill 1591, which provides sentencing, resentencing, and record-vacation relief for defendants who are survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, or human trafficking, was advanced on a 7-2 vote after adopting substitute H3302.1. Members supporting the bill emphasized the need for a close causal connection and documentary proof of victimization; opponents raised concerns about cases involving harm to third parties and wanted more refinement. The committee also advanced House Bill 2146 on sexual exploitation of a minor after adopting Amendment 348, which clarified that the offense covers causing a minor to view sexually explicit conduct when the minor’s viewing will be photographed or part of a live performance. House Bill 2220, dealing with oversight and hearings procedures for the Criminal Justice Training Commission, was reported out on a 7-2 vote under substitute H3305.3, which dropped a higher burden of proof, adjusted hearing panel size, and allowed an administrative law judge to issue an initial order if the panel deadlocks. House Bill 2430, concerning the crime victim penalty assessment, was also reported out unanimously; its substitute increased assessment amounts, added a surcharge for defendants with substantial resources, tightened indigency exemptions, and restored an indigency exception for certain offenses. House Bill 2526 on prostitution generated the most debate. The committee withdrew one proposed substitute, then adopted substitute H3308.1 and Amendment Whale 275, which shifted the bill toward a model that increases penalties for buyers while requiring referrals to services for the first two investigative detentions of a person engaged in prostitution and limiting arrest until a third detention. Supporters said the changes would reduce criminalization of survivors and improve access to services, while opponents argued the bill and amendment would weaken enforcement and fail to protect trafficking victims. The committee reported the bill out 5-4. House Bill 2641 was deferred. Finally, House Bill 2648, addressing state and local law enforcement interactions with federal immigration enforcement, was amended with Lang 185 to require body cameras and reporting when officers encounter federal agents conducting immigration enforcement, remove a proposed Attorney General representation requirement, and require indemnification by the employing government. Supporters framed the bill as protecting civil rights and clarifying officers’ duties; opponents said it could hinder cooperation with federal partners and create operational problems. The committee approved the bill 6-3 and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• And and the authority to impose surcharges on TWAIA policy holders. is backed by TWIA premiums, surcharges
• on our policy holders, as well as surcharges. charges on all policies insuring property and automobiles
• There is a very real possibility that TWIA will have to impose a surcharge. on its policyholders for
• immediate infusion of financial resources to avoid a crisis. avoid the possibility of issuing bonds and surcharging

Committee: House Insurance

Transcript Highlights:

• It could be funded through a $7 monthly surcharge instead of the $8.50.
• So the $7 surcharge on the right-hand side is comparable to the $8.50 on the left-hand side.
• It could be funded through a $7 month surcharge instead of the $8.50.
• So the $7 surcharge on the right-hand side is comparable to the $8.50 on the left-hand side.
• The non-bypassable surcharges, though, go from 2035 to 2045. There's another 10 years.

Summary: The hearing focused on the SB 254 Natural Catastrophe Resiliency Study and its recommendations for addressing California’s wildfire risk, utility liability, and the financing of catastrophic losses. Committee members and presenters discussed the history of the wildfire fund created after the 2018 fire crisis and PG&E bankruptcy, the role of the California Earthquake Authority as fund administrator, and the report’s three broad policy pathways: continuing mitigation investments, more equitably allocating catastrophe costs, and considering expanded state involvement in catastrophe financing. Presenters emphasized that the report was intended as a neutral, stakeholder-informed analysis rather than an advocacy document, and that the status quo is not working well for survivors, ratepayers, insurers, or utilities. CEA, CPUC, and the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety each described their contributions and recommendations. CEA outlined options such as risk-tolerance standards for utilities, preserving safety certificate accountability, tying executive compensation more directly to safety, confidential near-miss reporting, liability reforms, and a fast-pay facility for survivors. CPUC stressed that wildfire mitigation and liability costs are a major driver of electricity affordability problems, and said the state should broaden how wildfire recovery and mitigation are funded beyond ratepayers alone. Energy Safety highlighted its wildfire mitigation plan oversight and recommended stronger safety reporting and stronger safety weighting in utility executive compensation. The modeling portion of the report estimated that a more durable wildfire fund could require about $36 billion in capitalization, with lower initial capital needs if risk transfer or liability reforms are used, but potentially higher ongoing premium or assessment costs. The report also examined state-backed insurer or backstop models, post-event funding mechanisms, and targeted community wildfire mitigation, which could reduce overall funding needs. Members raised concerns about the cost burden on ratepayers, the financial stability of utilities, the fairness of asking communities outside high-risk areas to pay, the role of local governments and home hardening, and whether broader climate-related liability or insurance reforms should be considered. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational and ended with plans for further committee hearings and stakeholder discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• reinforces the conclusion that the measure is not a neutral tax on digital commerce, but a targeted surcharge
• on commerce, but a targeted surcharge on a particular category of activity.
• physical or digital, and subsequent in-game purchases, but would also be subject to an additional 5% surcharge

Transcript Highlights:

• And, of course, if you decide to leave, make sure you bring your ticket so you can get back in.
• This bill literally blanks off the hospital surcharge for 1 year.
• It's a hospital surcharge for 1 year.
• </c><00:32:06.640><c> It's</c><00:32:06.960><c> a</c> hospital surcharge for 1 year.
• It's a hospital surcharge for 1 year.

Bills: HF4493 , HF3133 , HF4595 , HF4143 , HF4142 , HF3756 , HF4289 , HF1724 , HF2291 , HF4568 , HF4547

Committee: House Health Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• to be mindful that expanding subsidies does increase the state costs that are ultimately paid on surcharges
• Ultimately paid on surcharges on telephone bills.
• And I would like to know when we could expect to see more analysis on the surcharge impacts of the Lifeline
• We can definitely follow up with you with the amount of funding in the surcharge that ultimately goes
• And I think information, including the cost and impact on the surcharge, would certainly be relevant

Summary: The Communications and Conveyance Committee held an oversight hearing on the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), focused on telecommunications, broadband deployment, resiliency, and the California Teleconnect Fund. Chair Tasha Boerner said the hearing was intended to examine structural issues at the CPUC, including whether telecommunications oversight should remain within the commission, while also reviewing major programs such as Last Mile, BEAD, carrier of last resort, and emergency preparedness. CPUC President John Reynolds and Deputy Executive Director Anna Maria Johnson described the commission’s work on public safety, universal service, broadband grants, Lifeline modernization, and network resiliency, including the 72-hour backup power requirement and merger review. Members questioned CPUC officials about the pace and metrics for Last Mile and BEAD projects, the relationship between middle-mile and last-mile buildout, and how the commission balances carrier obligations with the risk of driving providers out of high-cost areas. They also pressed the CPUC on the California Lifeline home broadband pilot, asking when enrollment would be available, which providers were participating, how much of the state would be covered, and what the surcharge impact would be. CPUC said 15 providers had been approved, one was already serving customers, and the rest were still onboarding, and it committed to provide follow-up information on timelines, coverage, and costs. A major portion of the hearing centered on the California Teleconnect Fund and proposed changes to how schools would access the program. Superintendent Tony Thurmond argued strongly against shifting administration from county offices of education and districts to individual schools, saying it would add burden, worsen inequities, and risk underuse of a valuable broadband subsidy. Committee members echoed concerns that smaller schools and districts may lack the staff to manage direct applications and reporting. In public comment, the Los Angeles County Office of Education supported the CDE’s position and urged changes that would align the program more closely with E-Rate and reduce administrative burdens. No formal vote was taken, and Chair Boerner closed by saying she remained committed to pursuing reforms to the CPUC and referenced her bills AB 2289 and ACA 9.

Transcript Highlights:

• is a simple semantic change to the insurance code to reclassify the three maintenance taxes as a surcharge
• Surcharges, by virtue of the structure, name, and the manner in which they are collected, are not included
• Other states, such as California, would not consider these new surcharges when calculating their retaliatory
• Other states, such as California, would not consider these new surcharges when calculating their retaliatory
• Other states, such as California, would not consider these new surcharges when calculating their retaliatory

Bills: HB875 , HB1667 , HB2369 , HB3844 , HB4415 , HB4479 , HB4483 , HB4676 , HB5118 , HB5400 , HB5545

Committee: House S/C on Workforce

Keywords: workers' compensation, municipal construction, bidding requirements, small municipalities, contracting policies, first responders, PTSD, mental health, emergency services, medical expenses, injury claims, insurance carriers, opportunity youth, workforce development, employment, education, federal funds, employment discrimination, immunity waiver, public employees

Summary: The subcommittee heard testimony on a broad agenda of workforce, labor, and workers’ compensation bills. HB 4676 would require political subdivision workers’ compensation networks to follow the same notice, access, and complaint rules as certified TDI networks; supporters said public employees and first responders deserve equal access to care, while municipal risk pool representatives opposed added regulation and said existing 504 networks already perform well. HB 4479 would create a rural workforce development grant program at TWC to support college-and-career readiness and local workforce alignment, and HB 3844 would define “opportunity youth” in state law to improve data, coordination, and access to services for disconnected young Texans; both drew strong support from rural, education, and chamber witnesses. HB 5545 would clarify federal tax treatment for wage-replacement benefits in non-subscriber injury benefit plans, with proponents calling it a win for employers and injured workers. HB 5118 would direct TWC and DIR to study AI and automated employment decision tools in hiring, including bias and oversight concerns. HB 1667 would move existing PTSD workers’ compensation language into a broader Labor Code chapter so more first responders, including state and campus officers, could qualify for benefits; supporters called it a technical fix to extend coverage more evenly across agencies. The committee also heard several first-responder and workers’ compensation bills. HB 2369 would speed up claims handling for injured first responders by allowing a single medical evaluation, giving carriers 60 days to accept or deny a claim, and letting workers seek treatment while disputes proceed; law enforcement supporters said it would help injured officers return to work faster, while opponents warned it would revive extent-of-injury waiver problems and increase litigation. HB 4483 would reclassify certain workers’ compensation maintenance taxes as surcharges to reduce retaliatory taxes imposed by other states on Texas-domiciled carriers, and HB 875, as revised by committee substitute, would create a small-project exception to municipal workers’ compensation and bonding requirements for certain low-value construction contracts in small cities; both were presented as cost-saving measures for Texas employers and local governments. HB 4415 would extend anti-retaliation protections for workers’ compensation claimants from first responders to all public employees and expressly waive sovereign immunity for those claims, with supporters describing it as closing a loophole that leaves public workers without the same remedy available in the private sector. The committee also took testimony on HB 5400, which would expand remedies for sexual harassment victims by removing the requirement to first file an administrative charge, extending the filing deadline from 300 days to two years, clarifying retaliation, and eliminating current damages caps. Supporters, including employment lawyers and a parent of a victim, said the current deadlines and caps prevent many survivors from obtaining counsel or full relief, especially younger workers and those in small workplaces or franchises. Across the agenda, witnesses repeatedly emphasized access to care, fair treatment for injured workers, rural workforce development, and stronger protections for vulnerable employees. After each bill was laid out and testimony heard, the chair generally closed the public hearing and left the bill pending; no final votes were taken, and the subcommittee adjourned after completing the agenda.

Transcript Highlights:

• It is a fund into which providers who choose to participate pay a surcharge, and that surcharge is intended
• The surcharges were probably set too low, and as a result, there was a concern.
• That the surcharges were probably set too low.
• But there is not the same concern there was that the hospitals were not paying the adequate surcharges
• to, but there is not the same concern there was that the hospitals were not paying the adequate surcharges

Bills: HB99 , HJR5 , HM39 , HB206 , HB213 , SB41 , SB153 , SB165 , SB261 , SB264

Committee: House House Judiciary

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 99, a medical malpractice reform measure. Sponsor Chair Chandler and Minority Leader Armstrong described months of stakeholder negotiations aimed at balancing patient compensation with concerns from physicians, hospitals, and insurers about litigation costs, punitive damages, and access to care. The committee substitute kept the existing monetary damage caps but changed several provisions, including definitions of “occurrence” and “value of medical care,” treatment of future medical expenses, a higher clear-and-convincing standard for punitive damages, a two-step process before punitive damages can be pled, and a lower punitive-damages cap for smaller providers versus a higher cap for large hospital systems. Supporters said the bill would help recruit and retain doctors and stabilize the malpractice market; opponents argued it weakens accountability, especially for corporate and out-of-state hospital systems, and several speakers urged a stronger amendment to preserve patient rights. After debate, the committee voted 10-0 to give the House Judiciary Committee substitute for HB 99 a do-pass recommendation. The committee then heard House Joint Resolution 5, which would amend the state constitution to allow legislative compensation. Sponsors and supporters said paying legislators would make service more accessible to working people, parents, rural residents, and others without independent wealth, and would broaden representation. Several advocacy groups and individual commenters backed the proposal, while members raised questions about the pay formula, with the resolution tying compensation to the state median income. Some members supported the idea but preferred a salary commission or a different mechanism. The committee approved HJR 5 on a 7-3 vote. Finally, the committee began hearing House Memorial 39, which calls for a task force to study the current state of sexual assault examination kits and report on backlog progress. Sponsor Rep. Ferrari and the New Mexico Coalition of Sexual Assault Programs explained that a prior task force a decade ago found more than 5,000 untested kits and led to policy changes, including the Sexual Assault Survivors Bill of Rights and a statewide tracking system. The memorial is intended to reassess whether backlogs remain and recommend further fixes.

Transcript Highlights:

• small business credit, and the doubling of the small business credit, and the money to end the B&O surcharge
• Can somebody talk a little bit about the thinking behind ending the 0.5% surcharge on large companies
• that we don't currently have today and enables us to rely less heavily on B&O taxes, including that surcharge
• So as we look at structural change, we have to give a nod to businesses that reducing that surcharge

Summary: House and Senate Democratic leaders, joined by Speaker Laurie Jinkins and House Finance Chair April Berg, introduced a “Millionaire’s Tax” proposal and framed it as a way to reduce Washington’s reliance on sales tax and B&O tax while raising revenue from the state’s highest earners. They said the bill is a starting point and will continue to change through negotiations with the governor, business groups, local governments, and lawmakers. The leaders also said the proposal is intended to support education, health care, public safety, and tax relief measures such as sales tax exemptions on hygiene products, an expanded working families tax credit, a larger small business tax credit, and an early end to the B&O surcharge. The governor had already said he could not support the bill in its current form, which the sponsors said surprised them because they had spoken positively with him the day before. They said the bill will not be the same by the time it reaches his desk and that they expect continued talks to address his concerns, including more money for small business relief and the working families tax credit. They also defended the bill’s structure, saying it mirrors the state capital gains tax, uses Washington’s capital gains definition, and includes credits intended to prevent double taxation for pass-through businesses and others already paying B&O or related taxes. Much of the discussion focused on criticism from Republicans and outside groups that the proposal amounts to a marriage penalty or could drive away high earners and tech businesses. Democratic leaders rejected those concerns, saying the tax applies only to income above $1 million, that the first million is taxed at zero, and that the state would still compare favorably with other income-tax states. They said about 30,000 taxpayers would be affected and estimated the bill would raise roughly $3.5 billion, with about 5% dedicated to county public defense costs. They also said the bill is not subject to cutoff because it affects state revenue, and that the Senate public hearing is scheduled for Friday afternoon in Ways and Means, with the House expected to hear the Senate version later in the process.

Transcript Highlights:

• , which I know Senator Warnick and some other committee members serve on, as well as the actual surcharges
• , which I know Senator Warnick and some other committee members serve on, as well as the actual surcharges
• The second source of revenue is what we call an advanced computing surcharge, and that's applied to businesses
• multiplier on gross income, and then they can pay up to $75 million a year into WIA through this extra surcharge
• multiplier on gross income, and then they can pay up to $75 million a year into WIA through this extra surcharge

Committee: Joint Joint Higher Education Committee

Summary: The Joint Higher Education Committee met with introductions from members and then held a work session on higher education and statewide accounting practices. OFM Deputy Director Sarah Rupp explained how state and university accounting/reporting differ, including current AFRS/SAM requirements and the transition to Workday/WAM, and described what higher education data are currently included in state reporting versus what will remain excluded, such as transaction-level detail and vendor payment information. University of Washington and Washington State University officials then described the complexity of their institutions’ financial structures, including multiple campuses, auxiliary enterprises, component units, hospitals, clinics, bonds, and other reporting obligations, and how they submit summarized data to the state while maintaining more detailed local accounting systems. The Education Research and Data Center also presented the public four-year finance dashboard created under Senate Bill 5512, emphasizing that the metrics are best used to examine trends within institutions rather than direct comparisons across schools; members asked about data availability and federal reporting delays, and ERDC said it was on track to update the dashboard with newer data and additional metrics. The committee then heard a presentation from the Washington Student Achievement Council on the Workforce Education Investment Account (WIA). Joel Anderson reviewed WIA’s creation under House Bill 2158, its revenue sources, and its intended purpose of supporting postsecondary attainment, high-demand fields, student aid, and workforce education. He said WIA revenue has grown substantially, especially after recent tax changes, and noted that most current appropriations go to higher education, including the Washington College Grant, community and four-year institutions, and some workforce-related programs. Members asked whether WIA supports apprenticeships and trades, and Anderson said it has in some cases, though nearly all current appropriations are now within higher education. Anderson also highlighted a major policy shift in the 2025-27 budget: WIA is now being used to supplant some general-fund higher education spending, especially a large transfer for University of Washington general operations. He said this has reduced the general fund share of higher education funding and increased the share from WIA, raising concerns about whether the account is still being used as originally intended. He also described how WIA is increasingly covering Washington College Grant caseload growth and faculty compensation costs, and said WSAC is working to improve public documentation of ongoing and carry-forward appropriations. The committee did not take any substantive votes on the presentation topics and then moved toward executive session and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• The surcharge to fund the program would be capped at the highest rate charged over the past four years
• Currently it's being funded on the back of wireless consumers through a surcharge tax for everyone to
• I just want to add also that again this is voluntary but also there is a cap on the surcharge so that
• In January 1st, 2025, the surcharge for just the UTLS portion was 60 cents.
• mechanism for the long term in the Lifeline program and it relies heavily on telephone customer surcharges

Committee: House Communications and Conveyance

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you, Madam Speaker. these surcharges have changed over the these surcharges have changed over the
• ,</c><01:27:31.280><c> the</c> the rate rider, the surcharges, the the rate rider, the surcharges, the
• It starts a empower surcharge.
• First of all, the Empower surcharge will show up on that transparency report.
• , electrical universal surcharge.

Transcript Highlights:

• intended to do is prevent local government entities from imposing, whether it's a tax, a fee, or a surcharge
• intended to do is prevent local government entities from imposing, whether it's a tax, a fee, or a surcharge
• Those initiatives are not a tax, and they're not a surcharge on the United States.
• They're not a tax and they're not a surcharge on the residents.
• It's not an additional fee or surcharge.

Bills: S0558 , S1294 , S1468 , S1474 , S1682 , S1628

Committee: Senate Environment and Natural Resources

Summary: The committee took up several environmental bills, beginning with SB 1682 on local administration of vessel restrictions. Senator Trumbull said the bill would give cities and counties tools to address abandoned, derelict, and long-term anchored vessels while following state standards and FWC guidance. Members from affected areas spoke in support, citing recurring derelict vessel problems and the difficulty and cost of removal once vessels sink. The bill was reported favorably. The committee then heard SB 1468 on advanced wastewater treatment, which would require DEP to compile a detailed statewide report on wastewater treatment plants, including construction age, treatment levels, contaminant data, spill history, flood risk, and receiving waterbody impairment information. Florida Rural Water Association testified that any move to require advanced treatment for all plants over one MGD could create major financial burdens without dedicated funding. The bill was reported favorably. The committee also considered CS/SB 1294 on biosolids management, with a strike-all amendment adopted. Senator Bradley said the revised bill would require bulk Class AA biosolids fertilizer and compost products to be land applied only at agronomic rates and, absent a bona fide sale, only at permitted DEP-approved sites, with a transition date moved to July 1, 2028. Supporters said it would protect water quality and legitimate fertilizer and compost markets, while rural utilities asked for funding and flexibility. The committee reported the bill favorably. Next, the committee took up CS/SB 1628 on net zero policies by governmental entities. Senator Avila said the bill would prohibit local governments and other governmental entities from adopting or funding net zero policies, imposing related fees or taxes, or operating cap-and-trade or carbon trading programs. The committee adopted an amendment clarifying the definition of carbon dioxide. The bill drew extensive debate: supporters argued it would protect residents and businesses from higher costs and preserve predictability, while opponents said it would block local climate and clean-energy policies, including electric buses, energy-efficiency measures, and climate resilience planning. After public testimony on both sides, the bill was reported favorably. The committee also approved CS/SB 1474 on biosolids management, which Senator Gates said would require biosolids and septage to be treated at the highest practical level when wastewater treatment facilities are reasonably accessible and would bar Class B land application within 50 miles of a permitted wastewater facility. An amendment applying the statutory definition of septage was adopted, and the bill was reported favorably. Finally, the committee heard SB 558 on stormwater system standards. Senator Burgess said it would create statewide standards for municipal and county stormwater systems using FDOT guidelines and third-party inspections, with an amendment making technical changes and broadening who may perform inspections. Supporters said uniform standards could improve safety and reduce failures, while contractors, engineers, and industry groups warned it could raise costs, delay projects, and preempt stronger local standards. The bill remained under discussion as the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• provide proof of all forms of income prior to sentencing, and the court may impose an additional surcharge
• The court is advised to impose the surcharge that is proportionate to the severity of the offense and
• The court must require payment of any penalty assessment and surcharge imposed as a condition to the
• The assessment and surcharge imposed as a condition to the suspension of a sentence or of probation,
• And then this concept of a surcharge, I think... ...there's been a lot of interest, at least on my side

Summary: The committee heard public hearings on several bills, with testimony limited because of the large number of sign-ups. House Bill 2146 would expand the crime of sexual exploitation of a minor to include causing a minor to view sexually explicit conduct that is being photographed or shown in a live performance. The prime sponsor, Olympia police, and Pierce County prosecutors described cases involving adults masturbating in front of children and argued the current law leaves a gap by treating such conduct as only misdemeanor indecent exposure or communication with a minor. Committee members asked about comparisons to other states, forensic interviews, and whether related offenses could be enhanced. House Bill 2349 would expand notice requirements for sexually violent predator releases, conditional releases, address changes, discharges, and escapes to include local elected officials such as sheriffs, county executives, city officials, and legislators. The sponsor said the bill would codify a practice already occurring in some cases and help officials respond to community concerns with accurate information. DSHS supported increased communication but requested technical amendments. Several city officials testified in support, saying they had not always been notified in advance of placements in their communities. Defense advocates opposed the bill, warning that broader notification could fuel public pressure, vigilante responses, and constitutional problems for the civil commitment system. The hearing on the bill was left open for amendments. House Bill 2532 would make it a gross misdemeanor to sell or distribute nitrous oxide canisters or similar containers, with exemptions for medical, dental, food, industrial, and automotive uses. The sponsor and supporters described rising misuse among youth and young adults, public health harms, and incidents involving impaired driving and overdose deaths. Tribal representatives, the Attorney General’s Office, the Washington Poison Center, and public health officials supported the bill, while veterinary representatives asked for clarification or an amendment to preserve veterinary use. The committee also heard testimony on House Bills 2430 and 2457, which both concern the crime victim penalty assessment. Representative Barno’s bill would restore the assessment for certain offenses involving victims, while Representative Davis’s bill would increase the assessment and add a surcharge for defendants with substantial financial resources. Victim advocates, prosecutors, and sheriffs supported the bills as needed to restore funding for victim services, while defense groups opposed them as burdensome fees on indigent defendants. The chair directed the two sponsors to work together on a single proposal, and the hearings were held open.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we'll get the tickets cost more? I guess we'll find out. It's okay. I guess we'll find out.
• Its tourism revenues consist of monies from a hotel bed tax and a car rental surcharge in Maricopa County
• beverage, but we get all the sales tax recapture off of every transaction at that building, including ticket

Committee: Senate Senate Regulatory Affairs & Government Efficiency Committee of Reference

Summary: The committee first heard the Arizona Auditor General’s 2025 sunset review of the Arizona Barbering and Cosmetology Board. The audit found the board generally processed licenses and complaints timely and had adopted required school curriculum rules, but it also identified inconsistent disciplinary actions, gaps in required infection-prevention and law education for some reciprocity and instructor applicants, weak application review controls, and noncompliance issues involving open meeting law, public records, and conflicts of interest. Auditors also recommended statutory changes on esthetics scope of practice, cease-and-desist authority, and eyelash technician training standards. The board’s executive director said the agency agreed with the findings, had already implemented some changes including updated disciplinary parameters, conflict-of-interest training, lawful presence verification, and revised cash-handling procedures, and was working through the remaining recommendations. After questions, the committee voted 7-0 to recommend the board implement the audit recommendations and be continued for six years, until July 1, 2032. The committee then took up the combined sunset review and performance audit of the Arizona Department of Gaming, the Arizona Racing Commission, and the Arizona Boxing and Mixed Martial Arts Commission. The Auditor General reported that while the department distributed tribal gaming funds and issued some licenses appropriately, it failed to consistently obtain and review required independent audit reports for event wagering and fantasy sports operators, did not fully comply with conflict-of-interest disclosure requirements, lacked comprehensive complaint-handling processes, and had delayed some compact trust fund distributions. Additional issues included IT security documentation, horse-racing suitability checks, fee-setting reviews, rulemaking, and public records procedures; the Boxing and MMA Commission also had licensing and fee-setting deficiencies. The department and commissions agreed to implement the recommendations, and the department director said the agency was already making changes, including updated guidance to operators, a new complaint-tracking process, conflict-of-interest training, and work on trust fund distributions and rule changes. Committee members pressed both the auditor and the department on why fantasy sports audit reviews had not been completed, whether underpayments would be recovered, and why no distributions had yet been made to certain Category 3 tribes under the 2021 compact trust fund. The director said the department was now doing a look-back review, would seek any owed fees, penalties, and interest, and was helping tribes resolve the baseline-revenue formula needed for distributions. Members also asked about conflict-of-interest practices, problem gambling, and whether prediction markets fall under gaming regulation. The discussion continued into the department’s broader presentation, with the director describing the agency’s regulatory role and ongoing modernization efforts.

Transcript Highlights:

• Examples include collection, transportation, processing, disposal, and administrative fees, fuel surcharges
• Examples include collection, transportation, processing, disposal, and administrative fees, fuel surcharges
• Examples include collection, transportation, processing, disposal, and administrative fees, fuel surcharges
• Examples include collection, transportation, processing, disposal, and administrative fees, fuel surcharges
• Examples include collection, transportation, processing, disposal, and administrative fees, fuel surcharges

Committee: Senate Taxes

Transcript Highlights:

• Utilities could cover the cost of the annual contribution through a surcharge on their customers.
• Of the annual contribution through a surcharge on their customers.
• The other $10.5 billion was on a yearly basis with the $2 to $3 a month surcharge.
• He said House Bill 2275 authorizes both a one-time utility contribution and an ongoing wildfire surcharge
• Housekeeper said the surcharge structure relies heavily on the number of high-risk customers and requires

Summary: The House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee held a public hearing on House Bill 2275, which would create a Wildfire Prevention and Protection Fund and a new council to oversee utility wildfire mitigation, claims payments, and related administration. Staff explained that investor-owned utilities would be required to participate, consumer-owned utilities could opt in, and utilities would pay annual contributions and maintain approved wildfire mitigation plans to qualify for claims coverage. The prime sponsor, Rep. Christine Reeves, said the bill was intended to address wildfire liability, support prevention, and create a more comprehensive statewide approach to wildfire risk. Members asked about retroactivity to July 1, 2021, utility contribution limits, and whether the bill would lower rates or improve mitigation funding. Public testimony was split. Supporters included the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, the Department of Natural Resources, wildfire survivors, and several wildfire and insurance advocates, who emphasized the need for compensation, stable funding, prevention, and better resilience planning. Opponents included several utilities, utility associations, business groups, and public utility district representatives, who argued the bill would shift uncapped costs to ratepayers, lacked clear liability reform and solvency protections, and could be vulnerable to future fund sweeps. Some witnesses cited California’s wildfire fund as a model, while others said Washington needed a broader, more holistic solution focused on prevention and liability reform. No vote was taken on HB 2275; the public hearing was closed after testimony. The committee then moved to executive session on House Bill 2238, which directs the Department of Agriculture to develop a statewide food security strategy and adds food security coordination and food system performance monitoring to the department’s duties. Four amendments were adopted: L-061, requiring consideration of regulatory cost metrics and periodic competitiveness reporting; L-062, directing the strategy to recommend legislative actions to make food more affordable and reduce food assistance need; L-060, adding people with lived experience of food insecurity and BIPOC small farmers to consultation requirements and focusing on root causes of hunger; and L-063, adding fuel and labor cost tracking to agricultural viability metrics. Amendment L-064, which would have required a consultant study on proposed agricultural labor legislation, failed on a 5-6 roll call vote. The committee then adopted the amended substitute and reported Substitute House Bill 2238 out of committee with a due pass recommendation by an 11-0 vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• Costs for the program are financed primarily by surcharges on license renewals and issuances.
• In addition to the $70 surcharge, the bill would also result in a $17 surcharge for license fees for
• surcharges are already applied on every license type that we regulate.
• same surcharges are already applied on every license type that we regulate.
• Yes, I am asking if it's okay to surcharge these licenses.

Bills: SB5420 , SB5877 , SB5868 , SB5109 , SB5832 , SB5922 , SB5944 , SB5988 , SB6065 , SB6103 , SB6151

Committee: House Appropriations

Keywords: veterans, military spouses, service members, uniformed services, National Guard, reservists, active duty, qualifying discharge, veterans preference, hiring preference, public employment, state benefits, license renewal, professional licensing, retirement service credit, pension, public retirement system, Washington RCW, military leave, reemployment rights

Transcript Highlights:

• . >> We would refund the difference between the new assessment and what we had assessed each ticket.
• 02:08:02.880><c> had</c><02:08:03.040><c> assessed</c><02:08:03.440><c> each</c><02:08:03.679><c> ticket
• </c><02:08:04.000><c> It</c> and what we had assessed each ticket.
• It and what we had assessed each ticket.
• This is for people who speed, get tickets, get their license suspended, and yet they're still going to

Summary: The committee first heard HB 2021, a transportation measure creating a framework for electric bicycle and micromobility regulation. The bill would define electric bicycle and electric micromobility device, set age and helmet rules, restrict class 3 e-bikes from sidewalks, allow limited sidewalk use for class 1 and 2 bikes, prohibit high-speed electric devices and certain nonconforming devices in specified locations, update county tax definitions, and change related terminology. Testimony was largely supportive from DOT, police, Honolulu officials, Hawaii Bicycling League, AAA Hawaii, the Hawaii State Teachers Association, and several individuals, while DCCA’s Insurance Division asked for clarity on whether insurance would be required. Committee discussion focused on safety, enforcement, and the fact that no insurance market currently exists for these e-bike classes; members also discussed the need to target bad actors rather than ordinary riders. The chair then proposed and the committee adopted amendments to HB 2021, including clarifying that road-legal, permitted, classified electric bicycles are not subject to insurance requirements at this time; allowing properly classified electric bicycles on sidewalks at 10 mph or less subject to county restrictions; barring high-speed electric devices and other nonconforming devices from public roadways; authorizing impoundment of non-road-legal or improperly registered devices; and requiring direct parental supervision for riders under 16 on class 2 or 3 e-bikes. The committee also made technical and effective-date changes. The recommendation to pass HB 2021 with amendments was adopted unanimously by the members present. The committee next took up HB 1641, a related transportation bill addressing high-speed electric devices. The chair explained that the measure would prohibit the sale, lease, rental, distribution, possession, or operation of high-speed electric devices and establish penalties, but the committee’s version would narrow the focus to devices covered by HB 2021. The amended bill would prohibit offering high-speed electric devices for lease or rent, require sellers to comply with the new regulatory framework, ban operation on bicycle lanes, highways, roadways, and streets, and set a civil penalty of $250 to $1,000 per violation. After no further questions, the committee voted to pass HB 1641 with amendments, and the recommendation was adopted. The meeting then moved to HB 1709, which would transfer regulation of the Hawaii Water Carrier Act from the Public Utilities Commission to the Department of Transportation and make conforming changes with an appropriation. DOT testified in support, while the PUC and DCCA’s Consumer Advocacy Division raised concerns about preserving consumer protections and the complexity of moving the regulatory framework. Young Brothers supported the bill and said the current system is outdated, but the discussion remained ongoing; the transcript cuts off before any final action on HB 1709 is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• Under decoupling, there's an annual true-up that either triggers a credit to ratepayers or a surcharge
• Under decoupling, there's an annual true-up that either triggers a credit to ratepayers or a surcharge
• The true-ups led to surcharges that were greater than what was originally charged to the customers.
• The billion dollars, so that is just those extra surcharges that occurred from the RAM versus CART over
• and then a surcharge applied.

Committee: House Utilities and Energy

Summary: The committee heard a series of energy and utility bills focused largely on affordability, reliability, wildfire costs, grid flexibility, and water rates. SB 254 by Senator Becker drew the most extensive discussion. Becker described it as a broad affordability package that would provide customer credits, create a Power Fund to move certain costs out of rates, tighten scrutiny of utility spending and profits, expand wildfire cost review, and use securitization and public financing to lower long-term costs. TURN and many environmental and public power groups supported the bill, while investor-owned utilities, labor, business groups, counties, and others opposed or opposed unless amended, arguing it did not adequately address underlying cost drivers and needed more analysis. The committee passed SB 254 on a 6-3 vote, with the bill held on call. SB 541, also by Senator Becker, focused on load flexibility and better use of existing grid capacity. Becker and economist Ryan Hledick said the bill would increase transparency on load-shifting progress and direct the CPUC to develop a strategy to capture distribution-level savings by shifting demand away from peak hours. Support came from labor, environmental, solar, storage, and demand-management groups, while CCAs, utilities, and public power agencies raised concerns that the bill could be read as a mandate and needed clearer amendments. After the author described amendments to remove language dividing the state goal among suppliers and to add cost-effectiveness and lessons learned from prior programs, the committee passed the bill 9-1 on call. The committee also approved SB 453 by Senator Stern, which would help return unspent ratepayer-funded microgrid money and support keeping the lights on in at-risk communities. PG&E expressed a concern about timing but no opposition, and local government and environmental groups supported the measure; it passed 12-0. SB 292 by Senator Svantes focused on PSPS and outage data reporting at the census-tract level to better target resilience investments. Supporters said more granular data would improve planning and equity, while utilities sought to avoid duplicative reporting; the bill passed 12-0. Finally, SB 473 by Senator Padilla addressed water affordability and conservation by requiring the CPUC to allow water utility decoupling. Supporters, including water utilities, labor, cities, and business and environmental groups, argued decoupling promotes conservation and can lower bills for low-use customers. The Public Advocates Office and the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District opposed, saying prior CPUC studies found no conservation benefit and higher costs under the full RAM mechanism. Members debated the evidence and rate-setting process, and the bill was moved out on a 12-0 vote.