Transcript Highlights:

• I support the town of Worthington solar moratorium.
• to large-scale solar application currently underway in Worthington.
• You can have solar panels in a field. You can also have battery storage without a solar panel.
• The SMART program that funds solar... ...hearing after hearing. The SMART program that funds solar.
• Nobody wants to eat cattle that grazed underneath solar panels.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Municipalities and Regional Government

Summary: The Joint Committee on Municipalities and Regional Government held a hybrid hearing on late-filed bills and formal petitions, with testimony focused mainly on Senate Bill 3026 and House Bill 5294. The committee heard from legislators and local officials about S. 3026, which would give equal voting access in a six-town regional school district process. Testifiers from the Sixth Town Regional Planning Board and local select boards said the current voting setup is unfair because one town can vote during normal polling hours while others have a narrower voting window, and they argued the bill would ensure equal voter opportunity for a major regional school decision amid declining enrollment and financial pressure on the districts. The committee also heard extensive testimony on H. 5294, a Worthington home rule petition seeking a one-year solar moratorium. Worthington officials, residents, and advocates said the town is facing multiple large-scale solar and battery storage proposals and lacks the staff, legal resources, emergency response capacity, and technical expertise to evaluate them. Witnesses raised concerns about fire risk, groundwater and drinking water impacts, forest and wildlife impacts, decommissioning, and the effect on rural character and farmland, while emphasizing that the moratorium was framed as a planning tool rather than opposition to clean energy. Several speakers said the state’s solar siting and approval process is too complex and top-down for small rural towns, and that volunteer boards are being asked to manage industrial-scale projects without adequate support. One witness from a statewide group said Worthington’s situation reflects broader problems across western Massachusetts and urged the committee to address solar siting more broadly in a future session. The hearing concluded after testimony and committee questions, with no votes or final actions taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• , industrial host solar, and other forms of solar energy.
• </c> Granite State Solar. Granite State Solar.
• State Solar.
• This is not killing solar. It's not changing how solar operates.
• </c> solar class uh one RECs are. solar class uh one RECs are.

Committee: Senate Energy and Natural Resources

Transcript Highlights:

• somebody else's rooftop solar.
• Closa said, how many non-solar folks are subsidizing those with solar.
• The reality is 10 million non-solar customers are subsidizing 2 million solar customers.
• Colosa said about how many non-solar folks are subsidizing those with non-solar.
• The reality is 10 million non-solar customers are subsidizing 2 million solar customers.

Summary: The Assembly Appropriations Committee met on May 21, 2025, with 86 bills on the agenda. The committee first approved two consent motions covering a group of bills eligible for the Assembly floor consent calendar and another group of unanimous bills not eligible for floor consent. Several bills were then heard individually, with authors and supporters emphasizing that many had no or minimal state costs and were aimed at climate, health, or regulatory improvements. Among the bills discussed were AB 39 on local planning for electrification and EV charging infrastructure; AB 1129 allowing local health jurisdictions to opt into reporting birth defects and early-life health conditions; AB 1332 to allow narrow direct shipment of medicinal cannabis to seriously ill patients; AB 1056 phasing out transfer of certain gillnet permits except for a one-time family transfer; AB 408 creating a new Medical Board health and wellness program for physicians; AB 546 requiring health plans to cover portable HEPA air purifiers for vulnerable people during wildfire emergencies; AB 942 revising rooftop solar subsidy rules to reduce costs for non-solar ratepayers; and AB 967 expediting licensure for out-of-state physicians. Supporters generally framed these bills as improving access, equity, public health, or affordability, while opponents on AB 942 and AB 967 raised concerns about implementation, workload, contract issues, and impacts on existing programs. The committee took action on each bill after testimony and questions. AB 39, AB 1129, AB 1332, AB 1056, AB 408, AB 546, AB 942, and AB 967 were all moved out of committee on roll call votes, with some members voting no or not voting on certain measures. The suspense calendar was then read and deemed approved, and the committee opened general public comment, where speakers voiced support for bills including AB 715, AB 1138, AB 782, AB 98, AB 53, AB 258, AB 330, AB 650, AB 649, AB 1048, and AB 425. The meeting adjourned after public comment.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> Minnesota solar. That was in the base. Minnesota solar. That was in the base.
• solar system has.
• Thank you. solar garden. Nearly 30% of motans are solar garden.
• Community solar solar garden program.
• We have utility-grade solar. We have solar that's available on the marketplace.

Committee: Senate Energy, Utilities, Environment, and Climate

Transcript Highlights:

• And the whole concept of the importance of distributed solar on top of, or adding to, utility solar is
• The whole concept of the importance of distributed solar on top of, or adding to, utility solar is crucial
• Solar is part of the energy transition. It complements utility-scale community solar projects.
• But all of our solar metrics are down.
• But no, this is just rooftop solar.

Bills: SB101 , SB58 , SB55

Committee: Senate House Appropriations & Finance

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 101, which would repeal the July 1, 2030 sunset on the Health Care Delivery and Access Act and make the hospital provider-tax program permanent. The sponsor, the Health Care Authority secretary, and the New Mexico Hospital Association said the program has generated substantial federal Medicaid matching funds and has supported hospital workforce, quality, and infrastructure investments, especially in rural areas. Members asked why the sunset existed originally and whether federal changes under H.R. 1 would phase the program down; the secretary explained the sunset was meant as a review point, but that federal law now prevents creating a new similar program if this one expires. The committee heard support from hospital and business representatives, no opposition, and voted due pass 7-0. The committee then considered Senate Bill 58, as amended, which extends the property tax abatement period for metropolitan redevelopment areas from a fixed seven years to up to 14 years. The sponsor and Albuquerque redevelopment officials said the change would give local governments more flexibility to structure projects based on financial need, while still preserving current tax payments and encouraging redevelopment of blighted or underused areas. Several supporters, including realtors and the Greater Albuquerque Chamber, argued the longer window would improve certainty for developers and help spur housing and other reinvestment. Some members raised concerns about lost revenue for schools and whether the tool could be overused, but were told the program applies only in designated redevelopment areas and is intended to leverage future higher assessments. The committee adopted the amendment and then passed the bill as amended 7-0. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 55, which increases New Mexico’s state solar tax credit from 10% to 30% after the federal credit was reduced, and raises the individual cap from $6,000 to $15,000 while keeping the overall annual program cap at $30 million. The sponsor and numerous solar industry, business, and clean-energy advocates said the change is needed to prevent layoffs, stabilize the rooftop solar market, support local jobs, and preserve grid and affordability benefits for customers. Members asked about permitting, certification, consumer protection, and whether battery storage was included; the sponsor said the bill covers rooftop solar only, the credit is refundable, and EMNRD certifies systems before credits are issued. The committee heard broad support, no opposition, and voted due pass 7-0 before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so with that I forgot community solar.
• to be able to accept a battery and solar.
• I'd like to purchase community solar.
• We could incentivize rooftop solar and turn our neighborhoods into solar farms.
• solar.

Committee: House Water & Natural Resources Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• I support the town of Worthington solar moratorium.
• You can have solar panels in a field. You can also have battery storage without a solar panel.
• You can have solar panels in a field. You can also have battery storage without a solar panel.
• And the proliferation of solar fields in every empty field...
• Nobody wants to eat cattle that grazed underneath solar panels.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Municipalities and Regional Government

Summary: The Joint Committee on Municipalities and Regional Government held a hybrid hearing on late-filed bills and formal petitions, with testimony focused primarily on two local measures: Senate Bill 3026 concerning voting procedures for a proposed six-town regional school district, and House Bill 5294, a Worthington home rule petition seeking a one-year moratorium on large-scale solar development. Committee members reminded speakers of testimony limits and remote participation rules, then took testimony from local officials, residents, and advocates. On S. 3026, supporters from the Six Town Regionalization Planning Board and local boards said the bill would create a fairer, equal voting process across all six towns for a major regional school district decision. They argued the measure would expand voter access, address concerns about unequal polling opportunities, and help communities respond to declining enrollment and financial pressures affecting school sustainability. Testifiers thanked the bill’s sponsors and urged the committee to advance it. On H. 5294, Worthington officials and residents strongly supported the moratorium, saying it was not anti-solar but a needed planning pause for a small rural town facing industrial-scale solar and battery proposals. Witnesses cited limited municipal staff, volunteer fire and health services, water-supply and groundwater concerns, wildfire risk, decommissioning and oversight costs, land-use and ecological impacts, and the strain on rural communities from state energy mandates. Several speakers said the town needed time to develop zoning and safety regulations before projects moved forward, and they asked the committee to report the bill favorably. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the chair closed testimony after the final speaker.

Transcript Highlights:

• Community solar and storage programs work.
• put solar in their own homes, to be able to buy into community solar and have that serve their community
• In New York, 2.4 gigawatts of community solar. Minnesota, 932 megawatts of community solar.
• as an alternative to rooftop solar because the community solar program is so much cheaper.
• It's misleading to equate these types of community solar models with rooftop solar that's located on

Summary: The committee heard several energy-related bills, with AB 1715 drawing the most discussion. That bill would require the CPUC to create a searchable database of utility advice letters, protests, responses, and resolutions going back to 2020, and to require utilities to report state, federal, and other public financing so ratepayer savings from loans, grants, and similar funding can be tracked and passed through. The author and TURN said the bill is aimed at transparency, affordability, and preventing double recovery; committee amendments removed some language, and labor said the amendments would remove its opposition. Senators pressed on how “financial benefits” would be defined and whether the bill would require refunds to ratepayers, and the author said the CPUC would determine the details. The bill was later moved out of committee on a do-pass-as-amended vote to Appropriations. AB 1301, a CPUC/Public Utilities Code cleanup bill, was presented as a housekeeping measure to remove obsolete references, align deadlines, eliminate duplicative requirements, and extend the Energy Conservation Assistance Act sunset. The Public Advocates Office and Golden State Power Cooperatives supported it, and the committee advanced it do-pass as amended to Appropriations. AB 2463, which would require the CPUC to disclose the models and analysis used to set utility authorized return on equity, was described as a transparency measure for a process that is currently a “black box.” EDF and the Utility Wildfire Survivor Coalition supported the bill, while members noted the importance of understanding how utility profits are set; it also passed to Appropriations. AB 1813, on community solar and storage, generated substantial debate. The author said the bill is intended to fix a CPUC program that he argued is unworkable and inconsistent with the Legislature’s earlier direction, while supporters including San Diego Community Power, TURN, and many clean energy, labor, and local-government groups said it would make community solar viable for renters and others who cannot install rooftop solar. Opponents, including the Public Advocates Office, Southern California Edison, SDG&E, and PG&E, argued it would raise rates, create cost shifts to non-participating customers, and conflict with a recently adopted CPUC decision. The bill was moved out on a do-pass-as-amended vote to Appropriations, with some senators indicating support but also concern about affordability and pending amendments. AB 2111, which would require the CPUC to plan transmission using multiple demand and resource scenarios instead of a single forecast, was supported as a way to reduce bottlenecks, improve reliability, and avoid costly under-planning as electrification grows. Supporters said better scenario planning would help avoid transmission constraints that block new generation, while the committee raised questions about cost impacts and the role of current CPUC planning processes. The bill passed to Appropriations. The committee also took up AB 2266, which would consolidate related CPUC compliance reporting, require consistent reliability valuation across programs, and direct an evaluation if CAISO uses backstop procurement; supporters said it would reduce confusion and improve consistency, while opponents warned against forcing one valuation method across different resource types. AB 2266 was also moved to Appropriations. Finally, AB 2175 was taken up on consent and advanced without discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:04:32.160><c> systems</c> and does the the the solar systems and does the the the solar systems
• Chair, I know that typically—and there has been a bill for the solar, or a statute for the solar—and
• Chair, I know that typically—and there has been a bill for the solar, or a statute for the solar—and
• Chair, I know that typically—and there has been a bill for the solar, or a statute for the solar—and
• </c><00:07:26.680><c> and</c> peaceful coexistence between solar and peaceful coexistence between solar

Committee: House Energy Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:53:31.040><c> and</c><00:53:31.280><c> solar</c> we've found that with uh solar and solar we've
• battery policy, I mean solar and and battery policy, I mean solar and solar<00:53:34.000><c> and</c>
• In the Solar United Neighbors.
• of solar.
• </c><01:31:54.719><c> Um</c> plug-in solar. Um plug-in solar.

Bills: HF2986 , HF3555

Committee: House Energy Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• The cost of utility-scale solar farms has dropped 84% since 2009.
• Community solar has been helping. Community solar has been helping with that.
• You know, I think I like solar, to be honest with you.
• incentivizing solar development on warehouses and parking lots.
• You know, solar panels, it's nice for my car.

Committee: Senate Energy And Telecommunications

Summary: The Standing Committee on Energy and Telecommunications met under Chair Senator Kevin Parker and considered several bills related to clean energy, transmission, storage, schools, and microgrids. Bill 1456, which would require certain watercraft, aircraft, and trains to be zero-emissions and direct NYSERDA studies and incentives, was discussed as technology-neutral and advanced with one no vote to the Finance Committee. Bill 286, increasing statewide energy storage capacity, drew concerns about battery safety, fire risk, and volunteer fire department training, but was advanced to the floor with two no votes. Bill 2482, the Go Green Schools Act, would let schools convert to renewable energy and keep savings for school operations; it advanced to the floor despite concerns about siting solar on school grounds. Bill 2485 on expanding electric transmission lines and Bill 5510 directing NYSERDA to develop microgrid recommendations were both advanced to the Finance Committee, each with one no vote. The committee then heard testimony from Marguerite Wells, executive director of the Alliance for Clean Energy New York. She argued that wind, solar, storage, and transmission have made New York a leader in clean energy and said renewable energy is increasingly cost-competitive, with much of recent bill increases driven by grid upgrades and gas prices rather than renewables. She also said clean energy helps hedge against volatile fossil fuel prices, pointed to community solar and offshore wind as savings and reliability tools, and said the state’s permitting and interconnection processes have improved. Members questioned Wells about farmland use, decommissioning, recycling of solar and wind equipment, battery storage safety, local control, and misinformation. Wells said utility-scale projects require decommissioning plans and financial assurances, farmland must be restored under agricultural guidelines, and recycling capacity is developing. On battery storage, she said New York has rigorous codes and monitoring requirements, that not all storage is lithium-ion, and that state-level permitting is appropriate for large facilities. Several senators raised concerns about fires, contamination, winter performance, and siting projects in densely populated areas or on farmland, while others emphasized farmland protections and the value of renewable projects to host communities.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I know we've done a lot of work to go to offshore wind and also solar.
• We also support the proposed creation of a 2035 solar goal.
• We need distributed solar perhaps more than ever.
• Wind and solar are essential, Wind and solar are essential, yet they are intermittent.
• On sunny spring days with excess solar or on peak grid days, On sunny spring days with excess solar or

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy

Summary: The committee heard testimony on a wide range of energy bills, with much of the discussion focused on offshore wind, battery storage, solar, nuclear study proposals, and a bill to redefine clean energy. Several Barnstable-area legislators and witnesses raised concerns about offshore wind transmission infrastructure near neighborhoods, beaches, and drinking water supplies, and supported bills to create a special commission and increase local input and oversight. In contrast, environmental, consumer, labor, and clean energy groups strongly backed offshore wind expansion bills, arguing that offshore wind lowers long-term costs, improves winter reliability, reduces fossil fuel dependence, supports jobs and local supply chains, and should include wildlife protections, labor standards, and community benefits. Some witnesses and committee members noted that parts of the offshore wind legislation overlap with the Governor’s energy affordability bill, and asked for clarification on which provisions were new versus duplicative. The committee also heard testimony on battery storage and solar legislation. Two student witnesses and several industry representatives supported a bill to study grid battery storage, saying storage can reduce outages, lower peak prices, and improve grid resilience during extreme weather. Witnesses from solar and storage companies supported a broader clean energy transition bill that would expand storage procurement, create a retail-style storage program for distributed batteries, set a 10-gigawatt solar target by 2035, and streamline siting and interconnection. Committee members pressed witnesses on whether these provisions were already included in the Governor’s affordability bill and asked for a section-by-section breakdown of what was new. One witness also urged allowing developers to bond interconnection payments to reduce financing costs. Another major topic was a bill defining clean energy, especially whether existing pumped-storage hydropower should qualify for subsidies or be excluded. Supporters of the bill argued that existing pumped storage should not receive additional ratepayer subsidies because it is already built, can have environmental impacts on rivers and ecosystems, and could cost ratepayers hundreds of millions of dollars. Opponents said pumped storage is an important reliability resource and should remain eligible. The committee also heard testimony on nuclear-energy study bills: some witnesses supported creating a commission to examine nuclear power as a reliable, carbon-free option, while others opposed nuclear study bills and argued that nuclear is costly, unsafe, and inconsistent with the state’s clean energy goals. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• I don't think it should have any negative impact on solar development or the pace of solar development
• solar.
• solar.
• I'm the co-owner of Greenfield Solar, which is a residential solar PV system in western Massachusetts
• And in Massachusetts, there are 500 solar, or just under 500 solar companies operating and supporting

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy

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

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, the roof issue is this: the solar photovoltaic company, the solar installers, install a system
• company, or the solar company is filed against a solar company, and whether it's dismissed or not. .
• I am a solar homeowner.
• attack on whether solar should be up there.
• ...solar, whether solar should be up there.

Committee: Senate Senate Natural Resources Committee of Reference

Summary: The committee heard and advanced several appropriation and policy bills. SB 1488 would appropriate $600,000 for a workforce development study on coal-impacted communities in northern Arizona, especially areas affected by the closure of Navajo Generating Station and related coal operations; supporters described it as a needed transition study, and it received a do-pass recommendation. SB 1523 would provide $340,000 to the Navajo Nation for the Ganado waterline pipeline project serving 235 homes; testimony emphasized long-standing lack of safe drinking water, and the bill also received a do-pass recommendation. SB 1041 would appropriate $500,000 to the Arizona Trail Fund; supporters highlighted the trail’s statewide recreational and cultural value, and it passed with a do-pass recommendation. SB 1447 would extend the groundwater withdrawal fee moratorium and related Pinal AMA fund provisions through 2033; irrigation district representatives said the extension would help maintain infrastructure amid Colorado River shortages, and it was also recommended do-pass. The committee also considered several regulatory bills. SB 1445 would let smaller cities and towns use approved on-site bacteriological testing equipment and limit required sampling frequency for certain ADEQ permits; the sponsor said it would save small towns money, while some members raised concerns about limiting sampling during discharge events, but the bill still received a do-pass recommendation. SB 1580 would appropriate $2.545 million for a statewide fire incident management platform for fire and law enforcement agencies; supporters said it would improve accountability, information sharing, and interoperability, while one member objected to the targeted funding approach, and the bill passed on a 5-3 vote. SB 1418 would streamline siting and permitting for small modular nuclear reactors in smaller counties, especially when co-located with large industrial users; supporters argued it would help energy reliability and rural economic development, while opponents warned it would weaken local review and environmental safeguards, and it passed 5-3. The committee took up two bills involving consumer protections and access. SB 1419 would add inspection and disclosure requirements for rooftop solar installations and restrict sales claims about estimated savings; supporters said it responded to consumer complaints about roof damage and misleading sales practices, while opponents argued it would burden rooftop solar and restrict speech. After extensive testimony, including from county officials, former ROC leadership, and solar industry representatives, the bill received a do-pass recommendation on a 6-2 vote. SB 1363 would create a rural opportunity initiative to issue additional marijuana-related licenses for underserved rural communities; supporters said it would improve access and reduce illicit-market activity, while opponents argued the bill was confusing and could expand licenses too broadly. The committee ultimately recommended the bill do pass on an 8-0 vote, with members noting possible amendments before floor consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have some issues with our solar industry.
• I am the owner and founder of a small solar company, Sun State Solar here in Albuquerque.
• This is where all the action takes place, and our local solar industry provides solar energy storage
• at the point of use, which complements utility solar and community solar and can help reduce or delay
• I'm the owner of Okotillo Solar Electric, another solar installation company in Albuquerque.

Summary: The committee began with roll call, noting several members present and others absent, and then announced that HB 338 had been rolled. The first bill taken up was HB 332, a committee substitute authorizing or reauthorizing 376 previously approved capital projects, with changes that could extend reversion dates, alter purposes, or change administering agencies. After no public comment, members asked about the reauthorization period, project listings, and how HB 332 would interact with HB 247, which had been passed earlier in the session. The committee clarified that HB 332’s projects would be grandfathered in and that the standard extension is two years. The committee then voted 12-0 to do pass the committee substitute and do not pass the original HB 332. The committee next heard SB 55, which would increase a state solar tax credit from 10% to 30% while keeping the existing $30 million cap and sunset date. Legislative Finance Committee staff explained that the credit had been scored at about $9 million in recent years, so the bill would create an estimated $21 million general fund impact. The sponsor and supporters argued the bill would help New Mexico’s solar industry after the federal credit changed, preserve jobs, support small businesses, farmers, tribal communities, and lower-income households, and promote clean energy. Public testimony was strongly in favor, including from industry representatives, tribal advocates, and individual homeowners, while no opposition testified. Committee members raised concerns about fiscal impact, whether the credit should be part of the tax package, and whether an income test should be added. Some members also described consumer-protection concerns involving solar contracts, liens, and misunderstandings about credits and installation costs. The sponsor said the bill was intended to stand alone but acknowledged the fiscal issue and said it could be considered in the tax package. The committee ultimately voted 11-1 to table SB 55, with members noting it could be revisited later in the session.

Transcript Highlights:

• comes to the federal review process on agreement documents like this, it is pretty typical for us to float
• The federal review process on agreement documents like this is pretty typical for us to float the draft
• it<01:08:49.520><c> would</c><01:08:49.640><c> just</c><01:08:49.759><c> be</c><01:08:49.920><c> floating
• </c><01:08:50.359><c> around</c><01:08:51.040><c> whether</c> it would just be floating around whether
• it would just be floating around whether it's<01:08:51.400><c> the</c><01:08:51.560><c> sensitivity<

Committee: House Housing

Summary: The Housing Committee heard testimony on several housing-related bills. On SB 26, SD 2, relating to affordable housing, the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development explained a prior transit-oriented development study that identified roughly 59,000 possible units and about 25,000 affordable units from known projects, and said the bill would help fill gaps by evaluating additional public lands for housing suitability and possible co-use with existing facilities. Members asked about the need for resources and staffing to do that work, and OPSD said it would need time and consultant support to carry it out. Testimony on the bill included support from state and county housing agencies and comments from planning and land use entities. On SB 66, SD 2, relating to housing and historic preservation review, SHPD and OHA both testified. SHPD said the bill would not override existing burial-site protections and that county staff with proper qualifications could make historic-property determinations locally, while OHA asked for clearer language requiring consultation when Native Hawaiian historic sites are involved and clearer procedures if an adverse effect is found. Committee members and SHPD discussed whether the bill should explicitly preserve existing Chapter 6E processes, whether counties have qualified staff, and how quickly a county would have to decide if it cannot complete the review itself and must use a third-party reviewer. Supporters said the measure could speed permitting and keep decisions local; one opponent argued it could rush approvals and strain infrastructure. The committee also heard support from housing, construction, business, and food-industry groups, and opposition from some preservation and community advocates. The committee then heard SB 332, SD 1, on foreclosure-related protections, with testimony focused on Lānaʻi and concerns about speculative real estate after the foreclosure moratorium ended. SB 414, SD 2, on restoring access to disaster-affected areas, drew support from HHFDC, DHS, and the Maui Chamber; HHFDC noted DOH plans for a temporary paved access road to the Kayola temporary housing site and said agencies were discussing which parcels would be needed. On SB 102, SD 2, relating to affordable housing and third-party historic review, SHPD said it would need to do more upfront screening and that the bill’s timelines and third-party provisions should be clearer; OHA said the measure should include a sunset and better staffing, and asked that the department fill positions to meet review demand. No votes or final committee actions were reported in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, the governor floated some IT upgrades as a possible spend this year.
• .<00:15:40.000><c> Uh</c><00:15:40.320><c> the</c><00:15:40.480><c> governor</c><00:15:40.800><c> floated
• Uh the governor floated some IT &gt;&gt; Mr.
• Uh the governor floated some IT upgrades<00:15:42.639><c> as</c><00:15:42.880><c> a</c><00:15:43.120>

Transcript Highlights:

• As with the solar or wind turbine.
• On the solar energy installations.
• </c> for the solar energy systems exemption. for the solar energy systems exemption.
• </c> solar and roughly $1.3 million for wind. solar and roughly $1.3 million for wind.
• I'm not sure people buying<01:08:59.279><c> solar</c> buying solar buying solar like<01:09:01.440><c>

Committee: Senate Taxes

Transcript Highlights:

• or plug-in solar.
• </c><00:03:58.760><c> or</c> the roof is not conducive to solar or the roof is not conducive to solar
• </c> could ever put solar panels on my roof. could ever put solar panels on my roof.
• </c> solar. Thank you. solar. Thank you. Thank<00:13:22.480><c> you,</c><00:13:22.520><c> Mr.
• </c> about how to install solar. about how to install solar.

Committee: Senate Energy, Utilities, Environment, and Climate

Transcript Highlights:

• In total, the cost shifts onto non-solar customers is roughly one quarter of a non-solar customers energy
• else's rooftop solar.
• Caloza said about how many non-solar folks are subsidizing those with non-solar.
• It's an overall net savings. for non-solar customers.
• The reality is 10 million non-solar customers are subsidizing 2 million solar customers.

Committee: House Appropriations