Transcript Highlights:

• So the point of regulation for transportation fuel, there's two points.
• It's much easier to change now before the regulation goes into effect.
• This is the reason for our deepest concern about the proposed regulation.
• Now under this regulation, they're not.
• So we think that the current regulation is reasonable in that respect.

Committee: House Joint Legislative Committee on Climate Change Policies

Summary: The Joint Legislative Committee on Climate Change Policy heard an overview from CARB on proposed amendments to California’s Cap-and-Invest program, which was reauthorized through 2045 by AB 1207 and SB 840. CARB said the draft rules are intended to preserve affordability, market certainty, and progress toward the state’s 2030 and 2045 climate targets. The agency described the program’s main features, including the declining emissions cap, utility and industrial allowance allocations, offset changes, the allowance price containment reserve, and new reporting and oversight requirements. CARB also said the rulemaking is on a public comment timeline, with board consideration planned for late May and an effective date targeted for September 1, 2026. Committee members focused heavily on electricity affordability, the planned shift of free allowances from natural gas utilities to electric utilities, and whether the proposal would raise rates for investor-owned and publicly owned utilities. CARB said the proposal is meant to protect ratepayers from compliance costs and that the utility allocation is based on updated data showing utilities are greener than before, but members and utility representatives argued the transition should happen faster and that the current draft could reduce expected revenues and disrupt long-term planning. Members also pressed CARB on carbon capture and sequestration, asking that the regulations clearly recognize it as a compliance pathway, and on whether the SB 905 rulemaking for carbon capture should move forward on schedule. A second major topic was industrial allocations, especially for refiners and other sectors at risk of leakage. CARB said it is keeping all industries at high leakage risk through 2030, maintaining the current cap-adjustment approach, and leaving room for additional comments and data on whether refiners need more allowances to avoid economic leakage and preserve in-state refining. Members also questioned how imported gasoline is treated, and CARB explained that transportation fuel is regulated at the rack and through the low-carbon fuel standard, while cap-and-invest covers in-state tailpipe and smokestack emissions rather than full life-cycle emissions. CARB said it is open to using additional data, including SB 253 reporting, to improve fuel carbon-intensity estimates. The panel of outside experts largely agreed that the program must balance affordability, ambition, and leakage concerns, but they differed on how much allowance value should go to utilities, industry, and the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. The Legislative Analyst’s Office emphasized that the Legislature should scrutinize CARB’s allocation choices now because they will be hard to change later. An IEMAC representative said the proposal appears to shift more allowance value to industry and utilities, which could reduce GGRF revenues, while EDF argued the cap could be tightened further in the near term without triggering price containment. SCAPA, representing publicly owned utilities, warned that the proposal would reduce utility allowances and could raise costs for ratepayers and undermine early decarbonization investments. No votes were taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Committee on Regulated Industries will now come to order. Good morning, everyone.
• governing an inherently dangerous, but also industry-specific regulation.
• OSHA does regulate tower cranes.
• OSHA does regulate tower cranes.
• If additional regulations... During last year's hurricane season.

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and considered several bills, reporting each favorably after hearing sponsor presentations, public testimony, and member questions. SB 578 would allow wine to be sold in recyclable containers, aligning wine with beer container rules; it received support from Americans for Prosperity and passed without debate. SB 606 clarified when guests in public lodging or food service establishments may be removed for nonpayment, updated notice and checkout provisions, and removed a mandatory arrest requirement, with support from hotel and restaurant industry groups; it also passed favorably. Members then heard SB 202, which addresses a municipal water utility surcharge issue affecting Miami Gardens and North Miami Beach by requiring the utility to charge residents where the plant sits the same rate it charges its own residents. The sponsor and supporters described it as a fairness issue, while North Miami Beach argued it would shift costs and threaten utility finances; the bill was reported favorably. SB 570 modernized and clarified the scope of work for swimming pool and spa contractors, and SB 928, as amended, regulated non-approved disposable nicotine devices by restricting advertising and display, increasing inspections and penalties, and adding a school-buffer provision; both were reported favorably. The committee also approved SB 346, which repeals state preemption over local regulation of hoisting equipment and cranes, prompted by concerns after Hurricane Milton and a crane collapse in St. Petersburg. Supporters said local governments need authority to address storm-related crane safety, while industry representatives warned against patchwork regulation and said local oversight already exists in some areas. Finally, the committee took up SB 652, creating Veterinary Professional Associates to perform certain tasks, including limited surgeries under veterinarian supervision; animal welfare groups supported it as a way to expand access, while some veterinarians opposed the surgery provisions. The bill was reported favorably after amendment. The committee then began SB 354, a major overhaul of Public Service Commission oversight, including expanding the commission, adding financial expertise, tightening rate-setting and storm-hardening review, and increasing transparency for nonprofit water and wastewater utilities; the substitute amendment was adopted and public testimony was heard from consumer advocates and utility-related groups, but the transcript ends before final action on the bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:02:07.439><c> and</c> overly burdensome regulations and overly burdensome regulations and ensures
• </c><00:02:31.440><c> expressly</c> to allow for regulations expressly to allow for regulations expressly
• </c> engagement to promate costly regulations engagement to promate costly regulations elected<00:02:
• </c><00:02:54.360><c> that</c> to review and discuss regulations that to review and discuss regulations
• every administrative regulation has to be vetted through.

Summary: The Senate Standing Committee on Licensing and Occupations met with a quorum and first heard Senate Bill 20, sponsored by Senator Matt Nunn, which would bar state agencies from adopting administrative regulations with implementation and compliance costs above $500,000 over a two-year period unless an exception applies. Nunn said the bill is intended to increase legislative oversight, reduce burdensome regulation, and preserve agency authority for routine rules, with exceptions for emergency actions, loss of federal funds, express legislative authorization, and health facility/service matters. Senators asked about the definition of “major economic impact,” whether broader societal costs were considered, and how the legislature could respond quickly to year-round agency rulemaking; Nunn said the bill is meant to force those larger policy choices into the legislative process. Several members voiced concern that the threshold was too low and could tie agencies’ hands, while others supported the bill as a check on regulation. The committee voted to report SB 20 favorably, with some members voting no or passing. The committee then took up Senate Bill 127, sponsored by Senator Shelley Frommeyer, concerning real estate license reciprocity. Frommeyer and representatives from Perry Real Estate College explained that the bill would codify Kentucky’s current education and licensing standards for out-of-state real estate licensees, rather than relying on bilateral agreements that can be terminated by other states. They said the measure was prompted by the end of reciprocal agreements with states such as Ohio and West Virginia, which left students and licensees uncertain, and argued that codifying the standards would provide stability, help military spouses, and support Kentucky’s real estate industry. Senators questioned whether a compact would be better, whether the bill would disadvantage Kentucky licensees seeking to practice elsewhere, and whether it would weaken Kentucky’s leverage in future negotiations. Supporters said the bill only fixes Kentucky’s side of the process and could encourage other states to adopt similar standards; opponents worried it was unilateral and might not produce reciprocity from other states. The committee ultimately reported SB 127 favorably, with several members explaining yes, no, or pass votes, and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• I know probably for regulation purposes, but to me it seems more of a security.
• I know probably for regulation purposes, but to me it seems more of a security.
• I know probably for regulation purposes, but to me it seems more of a security.
• I know probably for regulation purposes, but to me it seems more of a security.
• And I want to be clear right now, Coinbase is a federally regulated business under FinCEN.

Summary: The House Standing Committee on Banking and Insurance met with a quorum and first introduced a guest before taking up House Bill 701, sponsored by Representative Adam Bowling. The committee adopted a committee substitute by voice vote. Bowling explained that the substitute removed the bill’s mining-related language and added clarification that the bill does not require anyone to accept digital assets as payment. The bill was described as a measure to modernize Kentucky’s approach to digital assets and blockchain technology, protect the right to hold and transact in digital assets, and clarify that certain crypto activities are not securities; it also preserves authority for the Attorney General to pursue fraud under existing consumer protection laws. Members asked questions about why Kentucky should act before federal regulators fully resolve whether digital assets are securities or commodities, whether the bill affected local zoning authority, and how the measure addresses consumer protection and money laundering concerns. Bowling and a Coinbase representative said the bill is intended to provide clarity, align Kentucky with emerging federal developments, and avoid stifling innovation. They noted that Coinbase remains subject to federal AML/KYC rules and that recent federal litigation over staking and securities issues had been dismissed. Several members said they supported the bill as a way to put Kentucky in a leading position, while others expressed uncertainty about the security-versus-commodity question. The committee then voted on House Bill 701 as amended by the substitute. The bill passed on a roll call vote, with most members voting yes. Representative Camuel passed, saying she wanted more time to understand the issue, and Representative Grossberg voted yes with reservations. Representative Hancock and others said the bill’s regulatory clarity and consumer protection aspects were important, and Representative Lockett said the measure would help Kentucky be ready once federal regulators decide how crypto should be classified.

Transcript Highlights:

• A regulator, by definition, is at a real disadvantage relative to the regulated firm in understanding
• So they want to make sure, the regulator wants to make sure, that the regulated entity is not just throwing
• So the regulator has to work with the regulated utility to determine what is the right level of reliability
• regulation.
• Well, if you tell any regulated entity that when you spend a dollar, Well, if you tell any regulated

Committee: Senate Energy, Utilities and Communications

Summary: The Senate Committee on Energy, Utilities and Communications held an oversight hearing focused on electric rates, utility regulation, affordability, wildfire costs, and the California Public Utilities Commission’s role. Chair and members framed the discussion around the challenge of transitioning to a cleaner grid while maintaining reliability and keeping bills affordable. The hearing also served as the annual update from the CPUC and the Public Advocates Office, with testimony from Professor Severin Borenstein and CPUC President-designate Alice Reynolds. Borenstein gave a primer on utility regulation, explaining that generation is largely deregulated while transmission and distribution remain regulated, and that most rate-setting follows cost-of-service regulation. He emphasized that the hardest issue is setting the allowed return on equity: too high can raise bills and encourage capital-heavy spending, while too low can deter investment and harm reliability. He argued there is no silver bullet, said performance-based regulation and price caps have limits, and suggested some costs now charged through electric bills—such as climate programs, low-income subsidies, and wildfire-related public policy costs—might more appropriately be paid through the state budget. Reynolds described the CPUC’s oversight role, saying the commission reviews utility spending through general rate cases, balancing accounts, and other proceedings, and that affordability is addressed through front-end scrutiny, post-spend accountability, and legislative direction. She highlighted wildfire mitigation as a major driver of rate increases, noted recent progress on clean energy procurement and battery storage, and said the CPUC is working on return-on-equity decisions, FERC advocacy on transmission costs, and implementation of SB 254 and other statutes. Members pressed on a range of issues, including wildfire securitization, load growth from EVs and data centers, gas-system stranded assets, balancing accounts, and a water-service dispute in Keene involving Union Pacific. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational, with several follow-up commitments from the CPUC to provide data and updates.

Transcript Highlights:

• But the regulatory authority and the reporting to the Office of Insurance Regulation to be able to regulate
• Tell me, if I'm correct, would they become the continuous regulating entity for the regulations that
• The OFR would be the regulator of the Bitcoin kiosks. Would be the regulator of the Bitcoin kiosks.
• So we need this regulation in Florida. I am not a big over-regulation type of operation.
• So we need this regulation in Florida. I am not a big over-regulation kind of guy.

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and heard five bills. HB 1097 would rename the Florida Catastrophic Storm Center at FSU as the Florida Center for Excellence in Insurance and Risk Management, transfer the public hurricane loss projection model from FIU to FSU, and provide recurring and nonrecurring appropriations to support independent insurance research and collaboration with OIR and other universities. Members discussed university roles, model oversight, independence from industry funding, and student/workforce benefits. The bill passed favorably on a roll call vote. HB 319 would create a regulatory framework for virtual currency kiosk businesses, requiring registration with the Office of Financial Regulation, consumer disclosures, and penalties for violations. Much of the discussion focused on fraud prevention, especially for seniors, and whether the bill should include transaction caps or stronger recovery tools; AARP supported the bill but urged additional protections. The bill passed favorably. CS/HB 385 made technical changes to the Florida Trust Code and Community Property Trust Act, including decanting, trustee claims, redemption by satisfaction, and homestead transfer treatment; an amendment conforming to the Senate version was adopted, and the bill passed favorably. CS/HB 97 would allow service of process for exploitation injunctions against unascertainable scammers through the same communication method used to contact the victim, such as text or social media, and would let courts freeze funds temporarily while the matter is heard. Testimony from elder law practitioners and AARP supported the bill as a tool against scams, while some members raised due process and overreach concerns; the bill passed favorably. HB 839 would shorten the overpayment recovery window for claims submitted to psychologists and HMOs to match other health providers, with the goal of improving parity and access to mental health care; an amendment was adopted, and the bill passed favorably. The meeting concluded with adjournment after the final roll call votes.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Committee on Regulated Industries will now come to order. Good morning, everyone.
• governing inherently dangerous, but also industry-specific regulation.
• OSHA does regulate tower cranes.
• OSHA does regulate tower cranes.
• If additional regulations— ...during last year's hurricane season.

Committee: Senate Regulated Industries

Summary: The committee took up several bills and reported each favorably after brief debate and roll call votes. SB 578 would allow wine to be sold in recyclable containers, aligning wine with beer container rules; it had support from Americans for Prosperity. SB 606 clarified when nonpaying guests may be removed from public lodging establishments, updated notice and checkout provisions, and removed a mandatory arrest requirement, with support from Florida Realtors, the Asian American Hotel Association, and the Florida Restaurant and Lodging Association. SB 202 addressed a long-running dispute between Miami Gardens and North Miami Beach over a water utility surcharge, requiring the utility to charge residents in the city where the plant sits the same rate as its own residents; supporters argued it was a fairness issue, while North Miami Beach opposed it as a burden on its residents. All three bills were reported favorably. The committee also approved SB 570, which updates and clarifies the scope of work for swimming pool and spa contractors, and CS/SB 928, which targets non-approved disposable nicotine devices by restricting advertising and display visible to minors, increasing inspections and penalties, and adopting an amendment to clarify the bill does not cover fully unlawful products and to add a 500-foot school buffer for smoke shops. SB 346, dealing with state preemption of local regulation of hoisting equipment, was reported favorably after testimony about the St. Petersburg crane collapse during Hurricane Milton; supporters said local governments need authority to address hurricane-related crane safety, while builders and contractors warned against patchwork regulation and urged a more targeted approach. The committee then considered SB 652, creating Veterinary Professional Associates to perform certain tasks under veterinarian supervision, including limited surgical procedures after an amendment clarified those procedures are limited to spay/neuter and non-cavity surgeries. Supporters said the bill would expand access to veterinary care and help shelters, while some veterinarians expressed concern about training and safety; the bill was reported favorably. Finally, the committee took up SB 354 on the Public Service Commission, adopting a substitute amendment that would expand the commission, require stronger financial expertise and more detailed rate justifications, set rate-filing schedules, tighten storm-hardening review, and add transparency rules for nonprofit water and wastewater utilities; the bill drew support from consumer advocates and AARP, while Florida Rural Water warned of unintended consequences for nonprofit systems. The transcript ends while testimony on SB 354 is still underway, with no final vote shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• c> strictly</c> least regul regulating them as strictly least regul regulating them as strictly as<00
• </c><00:46:38.800><c> regulate</c> and talk about regulate regulate and talk about regulate regulate
• ><c> situation</c> regulate, but this particular situation regulate, but this particular situation uh
• </c><01:58:14.960><c> that's</c> have an entity that's regulate that's have an entity that's regulate
• </c> meet the local regulations or zoning. meet the local regulations or zoning.

Committee: Senate Commerce

Transcript Highlights:

• Since then, the board has grown to regulate approximately 17.
• It would also create redundant regulations and serves neither the public nor the practitioners regulations
• We do not seek regulation under this board.
• They are not authorized to regulate traditional naturopathy.
• Our concern is not with regulation itself, but with jurisdictional Our concern is not with regulation

Summary: The joint sunset oversight hearing reviewed five California regulatory entities: the Respiratory Care Board, the California Council for Interior Design Certification, the Speech-Language Pathology, Audiology, and Hearing Aid Dispensers Board, the Board of Occupational Therapy, and the Board of Naturopathic Medicine. Each agency described its licensing, enforcement, modernization, and consumer-protection work since the last review, and committee members focused heavily on workforce access, public safety, transparency, and fee authority. For the Respiratory Care Board, the main issues were a possible move from an associate’s degree to a bachelor’s degree for licensure, fee structure changes, and ongoing work on LVNs performing respiratory tasks. Board representatives said the degree proposal was intended to strengthen competency and could be phased in without harming access, but several public commenters—especially respiratory therapists and families of medically fragile children—argued it would worsen shortages, particularly in rural and low-income areas. Other stakeholders supported clarifying LVN authority in congregate living health facilities, while the California Medical Association flagged the proposed Advanced Practice Respiratory Therapist classification as having limited current workforce impact. The interior design segment drew the most debate. CCIDC leaders defended the current voluntary certification/title-act model, saying it establishes competency, has produced minimal complaints, and that licensure would unnecessarily disrupt the workforce and create barriers without demonstrated public harm. Committee members questioned the lack of state-style enforcement authority, transparency, and Bagley-Keene compliance, and some public commenters criticized the private structure and inconsistent plan acceptance in local jurisdictions. Supporters of the current system said the certification and commercial designation help educate building officials and allow qualified designers to work safely, while opponents argued licensure would provide clearer accountability and reduce confusion. The speech-language pathology, audiology, and hearing aid dispensers board reported major modernization gains, including online licensure processing, faster turnaround times, and new continuing education audits and advertising rules. The board supported creating a licensed audiology assistant category to improve access to care, and public commenters generally backed the board while urging continued modernization. The occupational therapy board described steady growth, improved enforcement and licensing performance, and requested additional fee authority to address rising costs; the main public comment supported the sunset extension and a reduction in advanced practice hand therapy training hours. The naturopathic medicine board emphasized consumer protection, enforcement against unlicensed practice, and the need to clarify statutes; it said most licensed naturopathic doctors practice in underserved areas and welcomed legislative collaboration on scope and enforcement issues.

Transcript Highlights:

• Even well-intended regulations can add up in ways that affect feasibility.
• “The state has a direct role in housing regulation in some ways.
• CARB engages in a multi-year stakeholder process when developing regulations.
• There is too much freight in my experience placed on this phrase regulator.
• This type of work for the regulator to permit and approve is labor intensive.

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Regulatory Authority held its first hearing to examine how California’s regulatory framework affects housing availability and affordability. Chair Pacheco and Assembly Member Haney framed the discussion around the state’s housing shortage, rising costs, and the need to reduce unnecessary delays and burdens while still protecting public health, safety, and environmental goals. The first panel included housing policy experts and industry representatives, who argued that overlapping state and regional rules, complex code requirements, utility delays, and lengthy review processes add substantial cost to new housing. Bill Fulton described California’s land use system as a “big Rubik’s Cube” of competing goals, while CBIA’s Chris Ochoa and Bob Raymer urged more attention to affordability impacts in code adoption and state agency rulemaking. The Bay Area Council’s Louis Marante called for a statewide cost target for housing and stronger accountability for state agencies, citing project review delays, regulatory costs, and indirect impacts from water, stormwater, and transportation policies. State agency witnesses generally defended their roles as balancing housing with other statutory mandates. HCD said its enforcement of housing element law, streamlining statutes, and technical assistance has helped increase production, reduce entitlement times, and approve tens of thousands of homes that might otherwise have faced discretionary review. CARB said SB 375 does not regulate local land use or reduce housing supply, and that sustainable community strategies are planning tools that could support housing if fully implemented. The Coastal Commission said it has worked with local governments to streamline coastal housing approvals, approve density bonus and ADU ordinances, and support legislation to exempt some affordable housing from coastal permits, while still protecting coastal resources and sea-level-rise hazards. The Energy Commission said its building energy standards are required by statute to be cost-effective and save consumers money over time, though they can add some design complexity and upfront cost. Other agencies emphasized collaboration and early engagement as the best way to reduce delays. Fish and Wildlife said its mission is to protect California’s natural diversity and that better early coordination with developers can improve outcomes. DTSC said brownfield cleanup and vapor intrusion review are necessary to protect public health, but that early engagement, workshops, and site-specific approaches can help projects move forward; it also noted grant funding supporting affordable housing on contaminated sites. The Water Board said it uses general orders and basin planning to streamline permitting while meeting federal and state water-quality obligations, and that its infrastructure grants and loans support housing affordability. In response to Assembly Member Haney’s questions, several agencies said they already coordinate across departments, but he pressed for more cross-agency clarity and less siloed decision-making. No votes or formal actions were taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• They want to be regulated.
• So what are we regulating and what's not being regulated? Yes, sir.
• At regulating, we regulate the right things because we are going to regulate a lot of things out of business
• I'm all for regulation and trying to make things safer. But you know what, you can't regulate God.
• It's regulated by the Medical Practice Act and it's regulated by the Texas Pharmacy Act.

Bills: HB265 , HB25

Committee: House Public Health

Transcript Highlights:

• by DTSC, and they're already regulated.
• How does this bill, they're already regulated in all of these processes.
• regulated.
• How does this bill, they're already regulated in all of these processes.
• and have oversight from the appropriate state and local regulators.

Committee: House Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials

Transcript Highlights:

• So the point of regulation for transportation fuel, there's two points.
• It's much easier to change now before the regulation goes into effect.
• And why so is because the regulations are not done? Is that the reason?
• Now under this regulation, they're not.
• So we think that the current regulation is reasonable in that respect.

Committee: Senate Joint Legislative Committee on Climate Change Policies

Summary: The committee heard an overview of CARB’s proposed amendments to California’s Cap-and-Invest program, implemented under AB 1207 and SB 840 after last year’s reauthorization through 2045. CARB said the draft rule changes are intended to support affordability, market certainty, and the state’s 2030 and 2045 climate targets, while also addressing offsets, utility allowance transfers, leakage protections for industry, and post-2030 allowance budgets. Members emphasized the importance of completing the rulemaking on schedule this spring so the changes can take effect by September 1, 2026. A major focus was how allowances are allocated among electric utilities, natural gas utilities, industry, and the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. CARB explained that the proposal transfers natural gas utility allowances to electric utilities over time to support electrification and ratepayer protection, while maintaining free allowances for industry to reduce leakage risk and preserve in-state manufacturing and refining. Several members and panelists questioned whether the proposed utility changes could raise rates, whether the transition from gas to electric credits should happen faster, and whether the industrial allocation changes reduce climate credit and GGRF revenues more than necessary. CARB and panelists said they were open to additional data and comments, and noted that the proposal is still in public comment. The committee also discussed carbon capture, carbon removal, and refining. Members asked CARB to ensure that CCUS and CDR are clearly recognized as viable compliance pathways and to keep SB 905 rulemaking on track. On refining, members raised concerns about imported gasoline, leakage, and the need for better data on the carbon intensity of imported fuels; CARB said cap-and-invest applies to fuel suppliers at the rack, while life-cycle accounting issues are handled more through the Low Carbon Fuel Standard and related modeling. CARB said it is continuing technical work on those data tools. In the second panel, the LAO, IEMAC, EDF, and SCAPA representatives generally agreed that the program faces real tradeoffs between affordability, ambition, and leakage protection. The LAO and IEMAC stressed that the Legislature should scrutinize how CARB divides the allowance “pie,” since more free allocations to utilities or industry mean less revenue for GGRF. EDF argued the program could be somewhat more ambitious in the near term without harming affordability, while SCAPA said the proposal would reduce allowances for publicly owned utilities and could undermine early decarbonization investments and ratepayer benefits. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• There have been bills attempting to regulate kratom over the last few years.
• kratom products and regulating 7-OH.
• kratom products and regulating 7-OH.
• These regulations regulate natural kratom leaf, age gate, appropriate labeling, and prohibit these synthetic
• We need comprehensive regulation, mandatory... Consumer protection.

Summary: The committee held an informational hearing on kratom and 7-hydroxymitragynine (7-OH), focusing on public health risks, overdose deaths, and regulatory gaps in California. The chair opened by noting that FDA and CDPH consider kratom and 7-OH products unlawful, yet they remain widely sold in smoke shops, vape stores, gas stations, and convenience stores. Members referenced AB 1088, which would be considered later, and said the hearing was intended to clarify the science, medical perspective, and whether stronger safeguards are needed. The first panel featured a toxicology expert, state and local public health officials, an emergency/addiction physician, a medical examiner, and county health representatives. Witnesses from CDPH and Los Angeles County described rising deaths and enforcement actions, including statewide advisories, retailer letters, and product removals from manufacturers, wholesalers, and retailers. Medical testimony emphasized that 7-OH acts much more like an opioid than traditional kratom leaf, can cause dependence, withdrawal, and respiratory depression, and may require naloxone, buprenorphine, or methadone in overdose or withdrawal cases. Local officials said enforcement is difficult because packaging is inconsistent, testing capacity is limited, and counties lack resources and statewide infrastructure; they generally favored a centralized state framework if regulation is pursued. Committee members asked about testing, age restrictions, scheduling, and whether a distinction between kratom and 7-OH could be enforced. Witnesses said forensic labs can potentially test for 7-OH but validated assays are not routine, emergency departments cannot readily distinguish exposures, and local health departments do not have the lab capacity to verify product labels. Several officials warned that a ban or abrupt scheduling could push products into the black market and discourage research, while others argued that current prohibition and enforcement are the most protective approach because legalization or age-limited regulation could create confusion about legality and safety. The second panel included kratom and 7-OH advocates and industry representatives, who argued that natural kratom leaf and concentrated or synthetic 7-OH are different products and should be regulated differently. They supported age-gating, labeling, testing, and packaging rules for kratom leaf while opposing a ban on the botanical. They said 7-OH is used by many adults for pain relief or harm reduction, and that prohibition would drive consumers to illicit markets and worsen harm. Committee members pressed them on whether 7-OH is more potent than kratom, the availability of testing, and whether any safe dose is known. The hearing ended without a vote or formal action, with the chair noting the issue will continue to be considered in future legislation.

Transcript Highlights:

• Test bed for regulated utilities.
• that regulate utilities have.
• that regulate utilities have.
• that regulate utilities have.
• that regulate utilities have.

Committee: Senate Energy and Natural Resources

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:07:59.200><c> He</c> and with federal regulators. He and with federal regulators.
• ><c> and</c><00:19:15.200><c> lawmakers</c> facing regulators and and lawmakers facing regulators and
• </c> how do they regulate it? how do they regulate it?
• </c> gaming and how states have regulated it? gaming and how states have regulated it?
• and Alaska does not the states regulate and Alaska does not regulate regulate regulate despite<00:54

Bills: SCR145 , SCR132 , SCR31 , SCR110

Transcript Highlights:

• These proposed regulations propose to make really notable changes, not just compared to current regulations
• That's relative to current regulations.
• I think I can speak to, relative to existing regulations, these proposed regulations do provide additional
• relative to current regulations.
• Under this proposed regulation relative to current regulations. Again, more relative to January.

Summary: The joint hearing focused on CARB’s proposed April amendments to California’s cap-and-invest regulations, adopted under AB 1207 and SB 840. Committee members repeatedly framed the issue as a balance between climate ambition, affordability, leakage prevention, and the Legislature’s budget priorities. Several senators argued the proposal would weaken the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF), reduce funding for transit, affordable housing, drinking water, wildfire prevention, and other programs, and potentially undermine the Legislature’s intent in last year’s reauthorization. Others emphasized that the program’s core purpose is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and that any changes should preserve the cap’s integrity and the state’s climate targets. CARB Chair Lauren Sanchez said the amendments were designed to implement legislative direction while responding to public comment and economic uncertainty. She described four main changes: increasing electric bill credits, expanding the manufacturing decarbonization incentive (MDI) to $4 billion, adding about $800 million in additional compliance support for industry, and removing post-2030 allowance allocations from the current rulemaking. CARB said the proposal would still maintain declining caps aligned with 2030 and 2045 targets, provide near-term affordability relief, and support businesses and jobs while reducing emissions. In response to questions, CARB said the MDI has guardrails, is limited to emissions-reducing projects, and would require reporting and repayment if projects do not materialize. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the amendments are significant and could affect several legislative priorities. LAO highlighted that the MDI would add allowances above the cap, creating uncertainty about environmental ambition and 2030 compliance, while also shifting more allowances to industry and fewer to the GGRF. LAO said the proposal could significantly reduce GGRF revenues and noted that, if revenues fall to CARB’s estimated level, some tiered programs could go unfunded. The Department of Finance explained that GGRF revenue estimates are updated three times a year and are difficult to predict because they depend on auction outcomes and market conditions. Senators pressed both agencies on whether the proposal would raise consumer costs, whether industry savings would be passed through, and whether the Legislature should receive updated revenue estimates before voting on the budget.

Transcript Highlights:

• We support the continued licensing and regulation by the board.
• Since then, the board has grown to regulate approximately 17.
• Iridologists are not licensed by nor regulated under the board.
• We do not seek regulation under this board.
• They are not authorized to regulate traditional naturopathy.

Transcript Highlights:

• Input about the regulations that have been out there so that you feel like you can have regulations that
• The regulations process is open to all stakeholders.
• The delay or withholding of the regulations.
• For withholding the regulations?
• With these regulations, they were not perfect.

Transcript Highlights:

• You know, these regulations are going into effect.
• The regulations were confusing and difficult to comply with.
• You know, these regulations are going into effect.
• That's changing the regulations every year potentially.
• This requires emergency regulation authority.

Summary: The committee heard and advanced several bills related to parks, wildlife, water, and veterans. AB 1592 would authorize the Department of Parks and Recreation to partner with the California Indian Heritage Center support organization; supporters said it would help move the long-planned center forward with Native-led governance. AB 2216 would expand the Delta Conservancy’s service area and update its authority to better support watershed-scale conservation, climate resilience, workforce, tribal grants, and related projects. AB 1702 would expand state parks access for veterans, National Guard, reservists, and active duty service members by broadening eligibility for the Distinguished Veterans Pass and creating a discounted parks pass. AB 1673 would allow county fish and game commissions to use certain revenues to reimburse sheriffs for fish and wildlife enforcement and wildlife-conflict prevention, especially in rural counties with limited state enforcement presence. The committee also considered AB 1912, which would allow archery deer hunters to carry concealed firearms while hunting, aligning deer hunting rules with those already in place for other big game archery hunts. Supporters argued it would improve hunter safety in remote areas without harming wildlife enforcement, while opponents were not present. AB 1987 would dedicate revenues generated from state wildlife areas back to those areas for operations, maintenance, and habitat management; supporters said the areas are underfunded and need a stable funding source. All of these bills received due pass recommendations and were later approved by the committee, with AB 2216 passing 11-1 and the others passing 12-0. The most contested measure was AB 2630, which would give the State Water Resources Control Board emergency-style authority to make measurement and reporting changes for water diversions and use, with a five-year sunset. The author and supporters said the board needs flexibility to update the CalWATRS reporting system quickly as technology and conditions change. Water agencies, farm groups, and business groups opposed the bill, arguing it would bypass public input and could allow repeated emergency regulations affecting compliance and operations. After extended debate, the committee passed AB 2630 on an 8-4 vote. The committee also approved two consent items, AB 1804 and AB 2260, both unanimously.