Transcript Highlights:

• The first being the California Managed Care Complaint System resources and project implementation.
• The initiative, which we were able to essentially implement without using all of those funds.
• The state has now implemented the loan program and is now implementing the grant program, and presumably
• The premium for these individuals is to be implemented no sooner than July 1, 2027.
• So, budget year plus one, we're looking at about 822,000 individuals at full implementation.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Health held a May Revision hearing covering several health-related budget proposals and broader concerns about the state’s budget structure. The Chair opened by praising some May Revision changes, such as added health IT funding, county administration support tied to Medi-Cal changes, a delay in Medi-Cal cuts for some lawfully present immigrants, and additional support for Covered California subsidies, while criticizing proposed increases in Medi-Cal premiums, changes to senior eligibility, the lack of a Medi-Cal dental solution, and other reductions affecting counties, mobile crisis units, workforce incentives, and physician shortages. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the state’s budget condition remains weak despite progress on the structural deficit, and the Department of Finance said the May Revision uses a mix of reductions, reforms, revenue proposals, and fund shifts to cut out-year deficits. The committee first heard Department of State Hospitals proposals, including adjustments to county bed billing authority, contract exemption language for online clinical/pharmacy subscriptions, reversion of unspent funds, a revised Metro Central Utility Plant replacement project, electronic health record implementation, and workforce development funded partly through Behavioral Health Services Act resources. DSH also described savings and realignments in incompetent-to-stand-trial and conditional release programs, including extending the independent placement panel program and shifting funds to support additional bed capacity and a mental health rehab center. Members asked about the use of BHSA funds for workforce programs, and the department said the proposal would replace General Fund support with BHSA reimbursements. The Emergency Medical Services Authority proposed funding for statewide behavioral health crisis response guidance and for enterprise system development, and the Department of Managed Health Care proposed modernization of its complaint system and claims-settlement data system to improve oversight and comply with AB 3275. The largest discussion centered on the administration’s BHSA spending plan under Proposition 1, including state-directed prevention, workforce, and other uses, plus General Fund offsets for existing programs. The LAO questioned whether some proposed offsets fit Proposition 1’s non-supplant and eligible-use requirements, while the administration argued the uses were consistent with the measure and that the state-directed share can be adjusted annually. The Commission for Behavioral Health’s proposals drew the most public and member concern. The administration proposed cutting the commission’s Innovation Partnership Fund from $20 million to $10 million and reducing the Community Advocacy Program by $6.7 million, while redirecting BHSA dollars to other state purposes and direct services. Commissioners, advocates, and several members argued the cuts would weaken community voice, reduce support for underserved populations, and disrupt grants already in process; they also objected to using BHSA funds to backfill General Fund commitments. Public commenters, including youth, disability, behavioral health, LGBTQ, tribal, veteran, immigrant, and community-based organization representatives, overwhelmingly opposed the cuts and urged preservation of prevention, advocacy, mobile crisis, and innovation funding. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• from delaying the property tax transfer. from delaying the property tax transfer.
• The change involves a halt and delay in implementation of the program requirements.
• The Senate delays the implementation of the calculation of these ratio targets until fiscal year 2030
• The proposed three-year delay in implementation of greenhouse gas and vehicle miles traveled requirements
• The proposed three-year delay in<01:23:39.280> implementation<01:23:40.000> of<01:23:40.239

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Without the amendment, these important health care benefits will be delayed another year.
• The Governor's amendment delays enactment from January 1 to July 1, 2027.
• The Governor's amendments for HB 834 simply remove the delayed enactment from the enrolled bill.
• Speaker, to give them time to implement these changes.
• The Governor's recommendation refines implementation standards.

Keywords: April 22, 2026 - Reconvened Session, 976, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• However, some of these proposals are modified, as mentioned, deferred, and/or delayed.
• We're shrinking some of the solutions we delayed, and we are trying to reduce some of our costs and delaying
• Understanding that we have an opportunity for delayed or deferred implementation around what I believe
• I want to thank the Legislature for the delay and the cut on Prop 66 dental payments.
• I want to acknowledge and appreciate many of the delays.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Prohibiting the MCOs from implementing prior authorization for diagnostic services could lead to increased
• The bill is written requiring us to submit a SPA waiver 30 days after implementation.
• So they went on to implement blanket suspensions, terminations, widespread payment delays, payment denials
• Currently, with the department not being the designated payee, it delays the secure funds.
• The department's already been implementing this and was required to implement this in September of 2024

Bills: SB1086, SB1193, SB1318, SB1345, SB1346, SB1451, SB1496, SB1611, SB1630, SB1631, SB1632, SB1672

Keywords: reimbursement, healthcare, laboratory services, noncontracting providers, Arizona health care cost containment, personal identifying information, PII, privacy, confidential records, public records exemption, commercial disclosure, data privacy, licensure, certification, health professions, health care licensing, Arizona Department of Health Services, ADHS, emergency medical care technician, EMCT

Summary: The committee first approved the February 4 minutes and then heard Senate Bill 1086, which would require AHCCCS contractors to reimburse non-contracting providers for certain laboratory services when a member was referred by a contracting provider, and would bar prior authorization for diagnostic services and retaliation tied to such referrals. AHCCCS testified neutral but warned the prior-authorization ban could increase utilization and create fiscal and federal compliance concerns. The committee adopted the Warner amendment limiting non-contracting reimbursement to no more than contracting-provider rates, then passed SB 1086 as amended on a 4-2 vote. The committee next took up Senate Bill 1611, an emergency measure to require AHCCCS to contract with an administrative services organization for program integrity and case management functions for the American Indian Health Plan, while keeping AHCCCS ultimately responsible. The chair’s amendment expanded the ASO’s duties to include provider support, quality improvement, and data analytics, removed AHCCCS claims payment authority, added more tribal observers, and exempted IHS and tribal facilities. Testimony strongly supported reforming the system after fraud and overcorrection harmed Native members and providers, but AHCCCS raised concerns about the fast timeline, possible duplication of fraud-fighting functions, and the need for 45 days of tribal consultation. The committee adopted the amendment and passed SB 1611 as amended on a 5-2 vote. Senate Bill 1630 would create a Medicaid-funded home and community-based services program for adults with serious mental illness, capped initially at 250 members under the Angius amendment, with semiannual reporting and a process for future expansion only if costs are reduced or neutral. Supporters said the bill would help the sickest SMI patients avoid repeated hospitalizations, jail, and homelessness, and could save the state general fund by shifting costs to federal Medicaid funding; AHCCCS was neutral and said it was finalizing the fiscal estimate. The committee adopted the amendment and passed SB 1630 unanimously. The committee also passed SB 1193, protecting emergency medical care technician personal information from disclosure; SB 1318, repealing an outdated state dense-breast notification requirement to align with FDA language; and SB 1345, restricting anonymous complaints against health care institutions, though AHCCCS warned that federal law may still require investigation of complaints from any source and that the bill could reduce reporting and invite litigation.

Transcript Highlights:

• The budget includes $2.7 million in the budget year, decreasing to $800,000 in 2027-28, to implement
• So withdrawing these proposals is simply really more of a delay.
• So withdrawing these proposals is simply really more of a delay.
• And this will serve as a beacon for how we implement the rest of the California model.
• It's just this one piece of it that we're just going to put a little bit of a delay on.

Summary: The subcommittee heard May Revision presentations for the Office of Emergency Services, Judicial Branch, CDCR, and the Department of Justice, with the LAO offering comments and recommendations throughout. For Cal OES, the administration outlined funding for relocating the Red Mountain communications site, increased FEMA reimbursement authority, cybersecurity grants, next-generation 911 support, and a reduction to the Flexible Cash Assistance for Survivors of Crime program. Members raised concerns about VOCA backfill and disaster reimbursement, while the LAO recommended approving the 911 request with reporting, adding contingency planning for cybersecurity grants, clarifying the FEMA reimbursement language, and increasing reporting on emergency spending. For the Judicial Branch, the May Revision included funding for implementation of the Trial Nations Access to Justice Act, reductions tied to court facilities and employee benefits, and General Fund solutions such as a reduction to the pretrial release program, a reversion from the Trial Court Trust Fund, and elimination of the jury duty pilot program. The LAO cautioned that the pretrial reduction could affect detention and release decisions and recommended tighter legislative oversight over the trust fund transfer and reallocation language. Members questioned the impact of the pretrial cut, the lack of Prop. 36 court funding, and the rationale for the jury pilot elimination; the Judicial Branch said it was generally supportive of the budget as proposed. CDCR presented requests for roof repairs, fire alarm replacements, CalAIM-related costs, and trailer bill changes on incarcerated college students, mental health hiring, and tuberculosis testing, along with a planned prison closure by October 2026. The department also proposed reducing or delaying several items, including radio replacement, ADA improvements, COVID mitigation, and some facility upgrades, while adding a $125 million placeholder for consultant-driven operational savings. The LAO recommended rejecting or reducing several San Quentin-related proposals, questioned the staffing and contract medical requests, and urged more transparency on the consultant savings plan; members expressed concern about the realism of the savings targets and the potential legal or operational risks from delaying ADA and radio projects. For DOJ, the May Revision proposed ongoing funding and 44 positions to defend against federal actions, IT and accounting system upgrades, implementation funding for AB 1877, and a special fund loan. The LAO supported the KLETS connection but asked for a contingency plan if the new DMV link is delayed, noted that AB 1877 would not be fully implemented without additional funding, and recommended limiting and reporting on the federal accountability workload. Members questioned the size and permanence of the DOJ request, the use of the earlier $25 million special session appropriation, and the pace of federal litigation; DOJ said the new request would support ongoing litigation, expert assistance, and coordination across multiple cases and states.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I think that this is not something that, you know, we want to delay on.
• The reason for the delay is... ...salary reduction and a PLP program.
• The emergency regulatory process to implement the funding programs.
• Buckley in support of the AB 617 implementation out of the GDRF.
• Buckley in support of the 617 implementation out of the GDRF.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Committee held an informational hearing on the September budget package, which included SB 105 and a series of trailer bills covering health, human services, education, resources, child care, transportation, labor, public safety, housing, revenue, background checks, collective bargaining, and a special election. The Department of Finance described the package as largely technical and clarifying, but also responsive to state and federal changes, especially H.R. 1. Key items included roughly $3.3 billion in Proposition 4 climate and environmental spending, $540 million in discretionary greenhouse gas reduction funds, and major responses to H.R. 1 such as CalFresh error-rate mitigation, food bank support, and Medicaid-related changes. Other notable provisions included vaccine policy flexibility, an Abortion Access Fund, a gender-affirming care program, community college basic-needs and aid changes, CEQA and coastal permit exemptions tied to the 2028 Olympics, invasive mussel prevention funding, a civic media program, labor and pension-related provisions, and special election administration changes. Members raised questions and concerns about several parts of the package. There was support for climate, water, transit, offshore wind, food security, and health investments, but also significant criticism of the lack of cleanup language for SB 131 and its advanced manufacturing exemptions, with multiple members saying promised fixes had not materialized and expressing concerns about tribal consultation, labor standards, and environmental protections. Members also questioned the scale and timing of some Proposition 4 allocations, including fairground upgrades, regional conveyance, and a UC Davis alternative protein research center. The Department of Finance said some programs would roll out over time and that certain funding levels reflected current implementation capacity. The hearing also featured discussion of Bay Area transit financing, with Finance saying SB 105 directs the department and CalSTA to examine loan or other financing options rather than immediately providing loans. Members and public commenters also discussed the state’s response to H.R. 1, with advocates supporting food bank, health care, and immunization provisions while warning of ongoing harm to immigrants, foster youth, and other vulnerable groups. Public testimony broadly supported the health, food, water, offshore wind, and golden mussel provisions, while many speakers echoed legislative concerns about SB 131 and urged cleanup action in the next session. No votes were taken because the hearing was informational only, though the chair noted votes on the bills were expected later that night or the next morning.

Transcript Highlights:

• <01:03:16.279> in um and this program had some delays in um and this program had some delays
• This delays the implementation date, the effective date of the implementation date."
• "Currently, this delays the implementation date." "Okay. All right.
• <01:47:07.639> it that and making changes to implement it that and making changes to implement
• 73 is it is this basically implementing 73 is it is this basically implementing the<02:02:50.320

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first recessed briefly, then took up HB 570, the prescription drug affordability board (PDAB). The chair and several members discussed the House amendment to repeal the board, which removed the fiscal note. The main concern raised was that the PDAB had not yet produced a clear business case showing value for the taxpayer investment, despite several years of work and four annual reports. Supporters of the repeal said the board’s recent report was largely redundant and that the board should either demonstrate a strong return on investment or be shut down; others cautioned against discarding the program too quickly and urged more time to refine the mission and legislative language. No vote was taken, and the committee appeared to agree to retain the bill for further work, with the possibility of revisiting it in a formal executive session on Tuesday. Members also shifted into discussion of HB 2, beginning with Section 85 on opioid abatement trust fund dollars for shelter programs. Department of Health and Human Services officials explained that the provision would provide $10 million from the opioid abatement trust fund, replacing general funds in the governor’s budget, while also noting an additional $2.5 million prioritized needs request for shelter care that was already fully funded. Committee members asked about shelter bed capacity, job placement efforts, and the remaining balance in the opioid fund; DHHS said there are 934 contracted beds and that case management includes help with housing and employment. Officials also said the current proposed budget includes another $1 million later in HB 2 from the opioid fund. The committee then began discussion of Sections 86 through 87, which would preserve the department’s ability to transfer funds between personnel lines. DHHS said the provision is operationally critical and that losing it would make it extremely difficult to manage the department, though it would not have a direct fiscal impact. The next item introduced was Section 88, extending a suspension related to eligibility for services until July 1, 2027; DHHS indicated that if the suspension were not continued, it would likely increase expenditures for Community Mental Health Centers and potentially others. No votes were taken during this portion of the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• That gap leads to delays, difficult treatments, and outcomes. We can and must improve.
• That gap leads to delays, difficult treatments, and outcomes. We can and must improve.
• That gap leads to delays, difficult treatments, and outcomes. We can and must improve.
• THAT GAP LEADS TO DELAYS, DIFFICULT TREATMENTS, AND OUTCOMES. WE CAN AND MUST IMPROVE.
• DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT A PROGRAM TO PROVIDE DOULA RESOURCES AND PATIENT'S.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Monday, April 20, 2026, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• for them so that way they can implement it.
• And it will also cost the landlords and the delay of eviction. That's correct. OK.
• It's not for delay. Most of these cases are not delayed. Um, that's not the point.
• Uh, it does not delay eviction.
• It's not a delayed tactic. It's just giving them their rights, right?

Bills: HB303

Keywords: jail standards, living conditions, Harris County jail, safety, inmate welfare

Transcript Highlights:

• , which significantly delays resolution.
• and enforce its own licensing Implement and enforce its own licensing system<00:24:08.200> and
• the effective date to allow time for implementation and stakeholder engagement.
• meet the goals of this bill and delaying meet the goals of this bill and delaying the<00:30:50.440
• Effective implementation and stakeholder engagement<00:30:55.360> we<00:30:55.519> also

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint hearing first took up SB 696, which would create an emergency management office and fund tax credits, grants for low-income taxpayers to fortify homes, shelter development, and staffing. Supporters argued Hawaii needs a dedicated preparedness office and funding before the next hurricane season, while the Tax Foundation said the bill was too vague, especially on who would qualify for the tax credits and under what conditions. The Department of the Attorney General and the insurance division offered comments, and both committees recommended deferral of SB 696. The Commerce and Consumer Protection committee then heard SB 179 on construction defect remedies and the contractor repair act. Builders, Realtors, carpenters, and a mortgage industry witness supported the bill, saying it would reduce abusive litigation, speed repairs, and help housing production and affordability. Homeowner advocates and plaintiff attorneys opposed it, arguing it would weaken consumer protections, shift repair costs to homeowners, and delay or limit legitimate claims. One testifier suggested the Senate focus instead on stronger alternative dispute resolution, and the committee noted 105 written supporters, four opponents, and one comment submission. The committee next heard SB 416 on allowing pets in rental housing, with the Attorney General recommending a non-impairment safeguard because of possible effects on existing contracts. SB 593 on commercial dog breeders drew support from the Hawaii Humane Society and others, with concerns raised that counties would be expected to enforce the new regime without funding. SB 641, creating a tax on low-alcohol-by-volume spirits beverages, drew opposition from the Wine Institute, which said it would create a tax break for one segment and likely reduce state revenue. SB 1048 on online crowdfunding received support from GoFundMe and comments from the Attorney General, with GoFundMe urging changes to reduce burdens on charitable fundraising. SB 1213, allowing businesses to accept service of process by email instead of maintaining a registered agent, drew DCCA comments and opposition from LegalZoom, which warned email service could be unreliable and vulnerable to phishing.

Transcript Highlights:

• in implementation?
• Housing laws are effectively implemented and enforced.
• The proposal will be implemented over... our affordable housing programs.
• The proposal will be implemented over, Talk a little bit about the timeline.
• The proposal will be implemented over a phased and multi-year timeline.

Summary: The joint hearing focused on the Governor’s 2025 reorganization plan to split the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency into two new agencies: a Business and Consumer Services Agency and a California Housing and Homelessness Agency. Administration officials said the change would give each side more focused leadership, improve consumer protection and regulatory oversight, and better align housing and homelessness policy with the state’s broader housing goals. Leaders from the Department of Consumer Affairs, Cannabis Control, Alcoholic Beverage Control, and Financial Protection and Innovation all voiced support for the business-side reorganization, while housing officials emphasized that the new housing agency would help streamline funding, compliance, and coordination across programs. Members raised concerns about timing, budget impacts, office space, and whether the split would actually reduce bureaucracy. The administration said the plan would be included in the May Revision, was intended to be cost-neutral, and would not require fee increases for licensees or additional office space. On the housing side, officials said the new Housing Development and Finance Committee would work toward a single application and more coordinated award process for affordable housing funding, while preserving CalHFA’s statutory and financial independence. They also said the reorganization would improve compliance monitoring, data collection, and coordination with local governments, including Los Angeles homelessness programs. Public testimony was largely supportive. Industry groups representing beverage distributors, craft brewers, wine, mortgage lenders, and housing organizations backed the business-side split, and housing advocates such as Housing California, the California Housing Partnership, and the California Housing Consortium supported the housing agency concept and the proposed one-stop-shop approach. Several witnesses urged that tax credits, bonds, and other funding sources be better coordinated, and some said the plan should be paired with additional state investment and implementation resources. No formal vote was taken; the hearing was informational.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:28:11.240> or<00:28:11.400> created, implemented or created, implemented or created
• Um it it will it will delay some. Um it it will it will delay some.
• Number two, investigate any federal funds that would be available to implement the program.
• There is a delay. There is a delay.
• people who suffer from those delays.

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The school division begins implementation on January 1, 2027, and then it strengthens the implementation
• The Senate substitute delays the enactment date for two years.
• The Senate amendment simply adds a delayed enactment. So, Mr.
• The amendment added a delayed enactment to July 6th. and others.
• The amendment merely delays the effective date to July 1, 2027.

Keywords: March 11, 2026 - Regular Session, 976, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• to make sure all parties are prepared for implementation.
• to make sure all parties are prepared for implementation.
• to make sure all parties are prepared for implementation.
• to implement.
• in implementation.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• These delays have kept PAs from being allowed to practice, and there's delays in patients from getting
• These delays have been allowed to practice, and there's delays in patients from getting care.
• These delays have kept PAs from being allowed to practice, and there's delays in patients from getting
• These delays have kept PAs from being allowed to practice, and there's delays in patients from getting
• These delays have kept PAs from being allowed to practice, and there's delays in patients from getting

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, things got delayed.
• Um, things got delayed.
• Um, things got delayed.
• Um, things got delayed.
• Um, things got delayed.

Bills: SB3326, SB2911

Keywords: renewable energy, energy storage, cost reduction, public utilities commission, Hawaii energy policies, intoxicating liquor, direct shipment, breweries, distilleries, Hawaii, 912, senate, all

Summary: The committees heard SB 3001 on artificial intelligence in a joint Commerce and Consumer Protection/Labor and Technology hearing. Testimony included support from the Department of Education and Google, comments from the Office of Consumer Protection and the Attorney General’s office, and late opposition from Agentic LLC. The Attorney General raised constitutional and vagueness concerns and suggested clarifying amendments, while Google said the bill’s risk-based approach and proposed amendments could help establish industry-wide safety standards for minors. The committees recessed and then voted to pass SB 3001 with amendments, adopting DCCA/OCP recommendations on data minimization for minors and UDAP clarity, the Attorney General’s proposed clarifications and deletions, and Google’s nonconflicting amendments; the effective date was deferred to July 1, 2050. The vote passed unanimously among members present, with some members excused. The Commerce and Consumer Protection committee then took up several previously heard measures in decision-making. SB 2045 on combat sports passed with amendments reflecting DCCA and boxing commission recommendations, including clarifying the on-site medical professional requirement, reporting duties, promoter payment, removal of the combat sports registry and ambulance requirement, and other technical changes; the effective date was deferred to July 1, 2050. SP 2347 on the residential landlord-tenant code passed with amendments striking landlord requirements so OCP could work on a multilingual tenant-rights notice, and SP 2495 on consumer protection passed with amendments requiring OCP to publish an annual report on potential code violations. SB 2777 on insurance was deferred to February 17, 2026 for further decision-making. At a later CPN decision-making agenda, SB 2471 and SB 2829, both relating to the powers of artificial persons, passed with amendments clarifying the preamble, removing language about foreign artificial persons, and making other consistency and non-substantive changes; both effective dates were moved to January 1, 2027. SP 2033 on renewable energy also passed with amendments clarifying the definition of grid-ready homes, cost-sharing provisions, applicability to interconnecting customers, and safety/certification compliance, with the effective date deferred to July 1, 2050. In each case, the committee voted to adopt the recommendations without objections from members present. The committees also heard SB 3000 on insurance, which would authorize the Attorney General to bring civil actions to recover costs and losses tied to climate-attributable harm and future climate risk, including costs incurred by state insurance-related entities. The Insurance Division and Attorney General’s office offered comments seeking clarification and warning about redundancy, implementation issues, possible representation of private insurers, and concurrent litigation concerns. Supporters, including the Center for Climate Integrity, a resident testifier, Sierra Club, and Green America, argued the bill would help shift insurance costs to fossil fuel companies responsible for climate harms and address rising premiums and nonrenewals in Hawaii. Opponents, including the American Petroleum Institute, argued the bill singled out one industry, raised constitutional concerns, and should be deferred because related climate litigation is already pending. The transcript ends with the committee continuing testimony and discussion on SB 3000 and then moving into SB 3326 on energy, where the consumer advocate and Hawaiian Electric opposed the bill’s proposed separation of generation from transmission and distribution, while the PUC stood on written testimony, Retail Merchants of Hawaii supported it, and Life of the Land raised concerns about assumptions and the need for more substance.

Transcript Highlights:

• , implementation structure and process, and, in one case, I think...”
• Meanwhile, the Sustainable Energy Utility is doing the bulk of the actual implementation of programs,
• So, without a unified authority, fragmented decision making, delayed approvals, and funding gaps are
• So possible structures for implementation could include one or more of a cabinet-level energy agency.
• I think there's a working body of opinion in support of the recommendation that their implementation

Summary: The meeting focused on finalizing recommendations from the Delaware Nuclear Energy Task Force, with most of the discussion centered on how the state should organize itself to evaluate and potentially pursue nuclear power. Public commenters strongly supported nuclear energy, emphasizing energy reliability, economic competitiveness, data center demand, and the need for Delaware to act quickly. Several speakers argued that Delaware is falling behind neighboring states and should not delay if it wants to attract developers and preserve access to federal tax incentives. Members then worked through revisions to the recommendations, especially the section on state actions moving forward. There was broad agreement that Delaware needs a clearly empowered leadership structure, but disagreement over the best form: a cabinet-level energy agency, an expanded existing agency such as DENREC, a dedicated coordinator, an expanded Sustainable Energy Utility, or a separate quasi-independent authority. Some members favored a nimble, one-off entity with bonding and financing authority; others cautioned against creating a new body outside state government and stressed the need for coordination with existing agencies, public oversight, and cost discipline. The group also discussed adding responsibilities such as site identification, public engagement, coordination with PJM and federal agencies, and financing tools, while removing or folding in items that seemed duplicative or too broad. The committee also revised earlier modules to broaden the focus from small modular reactors to nuclear power more generally, while keeping the task force’s original SMR work in view. Members agreed to keep recommendations on state and local regulatory readiness, financial mechanisms, permitting coordination, and public engagement, and to add a recommendation for Delaware to participate as an observer in the Advanced Nuclear First Mover Initiative through NASEO and NARUC. The committee approved the revised Module Four recommendations by vote, with one abstention from Tom Noyes. Minutes from the prior meeting were also approved with minor corrections.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you. delays so this bill would shift uh the delays so this bill would shift uh the State<00:27:
• These projects are being delayed or abandoned due to unrestricted lawsuits.
• These projects are being delayed or abandoned due to unrestricted lawsuits.
• <01:42:08.960> the questions but would it still delay the questions but would it still delay
• and possible first-to-implement issues.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Housing held a public hearing on January 31 and heard testimony on a series of housing and building-code bills. The first major item, HB 1 relating to building codes, drew sharply divided testimony. Supporters, including BIA Hawaii, Grassroot Institute, Dr. Horton, and several builders and trade groups, argued the current code-adoption process is slow, fragmented, and costly, and that reform would help housing production. Opponents, including Sierra Club Hawaii, AIA Hawaii, ICC, and labor representative Kiko Bosi, said the bill would weaken public safety, reduce statewide consistency, and could leave tenants and first responders at greater risk. No vote was taken during the hearing, and members asked questions about the effect of a governor’s emergency proclamation suspending the Building Code Council and about county authority over code amendments. The committee then heard HB 745 and HB 1321, both also relating to building codes. Grassroot Institute supported both measures, saying the system is broken and needs streamlining, while BIA Hawaii and others emphasized the cost burden of repeated code updates. Opponents, especially Bosi and ICC, argued that the bills would undermine the State Building Code Council’s role, create confusion, and prioritize cost over safety; Bosi also said labor should be included in any code discussions. Members questioned whether counties can remove state code provisions and whether the state code already supersedes county codes, and one member noted the need for clarity and consistent enforcement rather than a wholesale overhaul. Later, the committee heard HB 284 on housing, HB 761 on county permitting and inspection, and HB 738 on historic preservation. HB 284 drew support from several housing and real estate groups, while DLNR opposed it. On HB 761, HHFDC supported the bill, DLNR warned that the proposed changes could jeopardize Hawaii’s participation in the National Flood Insurance Program, DAGS said it would likely need to duplicate county permitting staff, and the Department of Planning and Permitting opposed it; Grassroot Institute and NAIOP supported it. For HB 738, HHFDC, DLNR, Grassroot Institute, Hawaii YIMBY, NAIOP, and others supported the measure, with Grassroot and NAIOP suggesting clarifications so expedited review would also cover mixed-use projects and better define the scope of work. The transcript does not show any final votes or committee action on these bills during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• And $1.6 million in 26-27 and annually thereafter to support implementation of the exemption review and
• the implementation of certain recently enacted legislation.
• This is similar to our January 10 Governor's budget approach to delay things while DMV works through
• the implementation of the DXP project.
• Capital costs and request clarification about the proposed eight-year implementation. Thank you.

Keywords: 988, house, all