Transcript Highlights:

• encompasses a pretty large area, the whole southeastern part of the state, and Graham, Greenlee, Cochise, Santa
• Cruz, and... ...and Graham, Greenlee, Cochise, Santa Cruz, and Pima.

Committees: Senate Natural Resources , Senate Senate Natural Resources Committee of Reference

Transcript Highlights:

• Clean Coalition, the STAND Coalition, California Interfaith Power and Light, Citizen Climate Lobby in Santa
• Cruz, Climate Alliance, and Indivisible Santa Cruz.

Committee: House Revenue and Taxation

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Revenue and Taxation heard several tax-related bills, with most measures either passing, being sent to suspense, or being approved on consent. SB 284 would clarify Proposition 19 rules for inherited family homes in probate, including when the one-year occupancy deadline begins and whether sibling ownership consolidation triggers reassessment; it drew support from Realtors and opposition from assessors over concerns about expanding exclusions and creating administrative complexity, and it was sent to suspense. SB 333 would let San Luis Obispo County voters approve a local transportation sales tax above the current combined local tax cap, with supporters arguing it would fund major transportation needs and opponents warning about regressive tax burdens; it passed 5-2 with a five-year sunset amendment. SB 376, which clarifies that charitable remainder trusts are not treated as incomplete gift non-grantor trusts for California income tax purposes, had support from the California Lawyers Association and passed unanimously to Appropriations as amended. The committee also heard SB 591, which would replace steep penalties for failing to use electronic funds transfer for certain tax payments with fixed penalties of $100 for a first violation and $500 for later violations unless reasonable cause is shown. Supporters said current penalties can be excessive and out of line with other states, while members questioned how common the problem is and why checks are still used; the bill was sent to suspense. SB 419 would partially exempt hydrogen fuel from the state sales and use tax while leaving the existing annual road fee in place, with supporters saying the current tax structure discourages hydrogen adoption and opponents seeking amendments; it too went to suspense. SB 587 would create a state tax credit for local sales tax paid by manufacturers on qualified equipment purchases, with broad support from industry and local business groups and committee members emphasizing the need to keep manufacturing jobs in California; it was also sent to suspense. The committee then took up SB 710, which would extend and update the property tax exclusion for solar and storage installations, including a new limited exclusion for systems installed after January 1, 2026, with a five-year sunset amendment. Supporters said the measure preserves a long-standing incentive that helps solar adoption and affordability, while one large energy consumer group registered opposition unless amended; after questions about how the exclusion works, the bill was sent to suspense. The consent item, SB 863, passed 7-0 to the Assembly Floor. Finally, SB 663, an urgency measure to extend deadlines and exemptions for property tax relief after the January wildfires, was presented with strong support from assessors and members, but the committee noted technical issues and sent it to suspense for further work.

Transcript Highlights:

• Jack Werson from Nossaman, on behalf of the Santa Clara Valley Water District and the Padre Dam Municipal
• California Stormwater Quality Association, Monterey One Water, Eastern Municipal Water District, and Santa
• Good afternoon, Tasha Newman, on behalf of the California Council of Land Trusts, Santa Clara Valley
• Jake Schultz, on behalf of the Land Trust of Santa Cruz County, the Conservation Fund, Save the Redwoods
• Barbara, Riverside, San Bernardino, Orange, Los Angeles, Santa Barbara, Riverside, San Bernardino, and

Summary: The committee heard several natural resources bills focused on wildfire resilience, recycling, forest management, and organic waste diversion. AB 442 would remove a requirement that a harvest area be limited to a single watershed for working forest management plans; the author and supporters from the California Forestry Association and Pacific Forest Trust said it would reduce barriers to forest resiliency work, and there was no opposition. AB 623 would require state agencies to report on the use of CEQA and Coastal Act suspensions for wildfire and fuel-management projects after the governor’s emergency proclamation; the author said the bill would provide data on how well the suspensions are working, and it drew support with no opposition. AB 35 would exempt Proposition 4-funded programs from the Administrative Procedures Act to speed implementation of climate, water, wildfire, and environmental projects; the author and a large coalition of local governments, water agencies, conservation groups, and fire organizations argued the exemption would help get funds out faster, while no opposition was present. The committee also discussed AB 3333, which would create a market-development payment to support end users of non-container glass, such as ground glass pozzolan used in cement, in order to divert glass from landfills and reduce carbon emissions. Supporters said the bill would create a productive use for hard-to-recover glass, while opponents from the Glass Packaging Institute, Californians Against Waste, and waste management interests argued it would divert beverage container recycling funds away from the bottle-to-bottle system and could undermine existing recycling investments and recycled-content goals. Members raised questions about the fund’s revenue sources, the purpose of the beverage container recycling program, and whether the bill would amount to “downcycling”; despite those concerns, the bill advanced on a due-pass-as-amended recommendation, with members noting fiscal and policy issues for further work. AB 643 would allow certain diverted organic material used as a beneficial agricultural amendment, including CDFA-licensed fertilizer products made from biosolids, to count toward SB 1383 recovered organic waste procurement targets. Supporters from wastewater agencies and Clean Water SoCal said the change would expand options for meeting procurement requirements and help move biosolids out of landfills, while Californians Against Waste and other opponents argued the bill could expand procurement credit beyond SB 1383’s original intent and weaken investments in composting infrastructure. Committee members questioned what kinds of biosolids would qualify, how the procurement credit would work, and whether the bill could be narrowed to historically landfilled materials; the author said she would continue working with opponents and wait for CalRecycle technical assistance. The committee adopted the bills’ amendments and passed AB 35 with urgency, AB 3333, AB 442, AB 623, and AB 643 to Appropriations, and also approved consent-calendar AB 946. After roll calls, all of the measures were reported out of committee, and the hearing adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• In Santa Clara County, we have— We are facing this crisis head on.
• In Santa Clara County, we have moved swiftly in response.
• Impact is just a Santa Clara County number. Okay. Mr.
• George Cruz on behalf of the California Behavioral Health Association.
• George Cruz on behalf of the California Behavioral Health Association.

Summary: The subcommittee heard an extended briefing on the impacts of H.R. 1 on Medi-Cal and CalFresh, followed by testimony from the Legislative Analyst’s Office and county officials. DHCS described major Medi-Cal changes in H.R. 1, including work/community engagement requirements, six-month redeterminations, reduced federal matching for some emergency services, narrower immigrant eligibility, reduced retroactive coverage, and limits on provider taxes and directed payments. CDSS outlined CalFresh changes, especially the expanded able-bodied adults without dependents time limit, reduced exemptions and waivers, and the new federal-state-county administrative cost split. Both departments emphasized implementation plans, automation, outreach, and county coordination, while acknowledging significant expected coverage losses and administrative burden. The LAO and an independent policy expert discussed how H.R. 1 could increase demand on county indigent care systems and public hospitals as people lose Medi-Cal. They reviewed the history of county indigent care, 1991 realignment, and AB 85, explaining that counties already rely on a patchwork of funding and that current realignment revenues are often used for public health rather than indigent care. They warned that counties may face large increases in uninsured residents, with wide variation in how counties respond, and raised concerns about equity, financing, and whether a more standardized state-county program should be created. Committee members pressed witnesses on county funding, exemptions, homelessness, older adults, undocumented residents, and the effect of administrative burden versus true ineligibility. County representatives from Los Angeles, Santa Clara, Tulare, and San Bernardino described the expected local impacts and asked for additional state support. They said H.R. 1 would drive major losses in Medi-Cal and CalFresh enrollment, increase uncompensated care, strain eligibility staff, and worsen homelessness and food insecurity. Several counties urged the Legislature to fund eligibility workers, preserve enrollment, and consider a CalFresh match waiver; Santa Clara and San Bernardino also cited local tax measures and staffing reductions already underway. No formal vote or committee action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm Representative Art de la Cruz. I represent District 12.
• We have four industrial parks in Santa Teresa in addition to the Santa Teresa jet port.
• Santa Teresa, in addition to the Santa Teresa jet port.
• That gives another motive of logistics in Santa Teresa.
• Talks about our Santa Teresa Intermodal Terminal.

Transcript Highlights:

• Santa Cruz County will lose up to $11.2 million for wildfire mitigation projects.

Committee: House Emergency Management

Transcript Highlights:

• Cruz; Barrios Unidos; Sisters Warriors Freedom Coalition; the California Youth Project; the Freedom
• Other superior courts, like Santa Clara and Santa Cruz, appear to allow live streaming at the judge's
• Santa Cruz appears to allow live streaming at the judge's discretion.
• Additional reported cases exist in Santa Clarita, Acton, Calabasas, Malibu, the San Gabriel Valley, and
• In Santa Clara, they ran a test case to measure the cost of pulling, reviewing, and properly redacting

Summary: The committee heard a large public safety agenda and began by announcing several bills off calendar and limiting testimony to two witnesses per side. The first major item was AB 2698, which would authorize local governments to create youth court diversion programs for first-time juvenile offenders. The author and supporters, including Bakersfield Police Department representatives and a student participant, described the program as restorative, record-clearing, and successful in Bakersfield. Opponents argued it was not true diversion because it occurs after adjudication, could widen system involvement, and should instead be replaced by pre-arrest community-based diversion. The bill was moved on a due pass motion to Appropriations, but remained on call with some members not voting. The committee also adopted a consent calendar of ten bills without opposition. The committee then heard AB 1959, which would create a narrow exception allowing resentencing in adult court for certain violent juvenile offenders in a case arising from the Santana High School shooting. The author, San Diego County District Attorney Summer Stephan, and a survivor/city councilmember argued the bill would close a loophole that could lead to resentencing and early release despite parole denials. Several organizations registered opposition or opposed unless amended, but many noted they were reviewing the amended version. The bill was moved due pass as amended to Appropriations and remained on call. AB 1628, extending California’s safe surrender window for newborns from 72 hours to 30 days, drew broad support from the author, firefighters, medical and child welfare groups, and no opposition; it was moved due pass to Human Services and remained on call. The committee also approved AB 1974, which authorizes law enforcement agencies to create voluntary temporary firearm storage programs. The author and supporters from San Francisco law enforcement, Giffords, and gun safety groups said the bill would expand safe storage options during crises and in custody disputes; there was no opposition, and it passed due pass as amended. AB 2297, requiring restitution in diversion cases, drew support from the author, district attorneys, and victims’ advocates, while opponents argued it was duplicative, could burden low-income participants, and might undermine diversion success. After discussion about restitution law and ability to pay, the bill passed due pass. Finally, AB 2438, which would require people sentenced to more than six years to serve in state prison rather than county jail, drew support from the author and Riverside County Sheriff Bianco, who said realignment had overcrowded county jails and strained resources. Opponents warned it could worsen state prison overcrowding and conflict with realignment’s purpose. The chair recommended no, and the bill was moved due pass and re-refer to Appropriations, remaining on call.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thirteen are based in Santa Fe, and one is based in Albuquerque.
• Maria Rogan, Israel Aguilera, Aaliyah Salazar, Angelica Cruz, and Yolanda.
• Angelica Cruz? Good afternoon, members of the committee.
• The corridor from Las Cruces all the way up and through Santa Fe and some of our areas.
• So with that, we are adjourned, and we will see you in Santa Fe in November.

Committee: House Legislative Health & Human Services Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• Clara, and Santa Cruz, just to name a few.
• Living Center, providing services, supports, and resources for people with disabilities living in Santa
• In Santa Clara County, the Home Safe Program has served nearly 400 APS-referred older adults.
• I'm the CEO of Community Bridges, serving Monterey, San Benito, and Santa Cruz counties, an operator
• George Cruz with the California Behavioral Health Association.

Summary: The joint Assembly Budget Subcommittee hearing focused first on long-term services and supports for older adults, especially the “forgotten/overlooked middle” who earn too much for Medi-Cal but cannot afford private long-term care. Administration witnesses from DHCS, the Department of Aging, and Social Services described Medicare’s limited long-term care coverage, Medi-Cal’s role, the elimination of the Medi-Cal asset test, and ongoing state studies and listening sessions on financing options. Testimony from advocates and researchers emphasized rising homelessness among older adults, the need for better navigation and coordination across health, aging, housing, and social service systems, and short-term policy steps such as share-of-cost reform, housing stability supports, and protecting home- and community-based services. Members highlighted the need for a coordinated, no-wrong-door approach and asked for the most impactful budget investments to address affordability and homelessness risk. The second major topic was the Community-Based Adult Services (CBAS) program. CDA reported that CBAS helps participants remain in the community, that 304 centers operate statewide serving about 42,000 people, and that demand is stable but access gaps remain in some regions. DHCS explained that a 2024 rate increase authorized by SB 159 became inoperative after Proposition 35, and that a separate 10% rate change on the fee schedule was the result of a DHCS system error; the department said it would not require recoupment, though managed care plans may act under their contracts. CBAS providers and advocates warned that reimbursement rates have not kept pace with costs, that several centers have closed, and that clawbacks could trigger more closures. They requested $74.8 million ongoing General Fund to close part of the rate gap and preserve the program, while members expressed concern about closures and the cost savings of keeping people out of more expensive institutional care. The hearing then moved to In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) and statewide collective bargaining. CDSS reviewed provider recruitment and retention efforts, including electronic timesheets, direct deposit, and the now-completed IHSS Career Pathways program, which trained more than 59,000 providers. CDSS also summarized its AB 102 workgroup report on statewide versus regional bargaining, saying the final report would be sent to the Legislature soon and that statewide bargaining appeared more viable than regional bargaining, though it would require clear statutory scope and major fiscal changes. The department estimated that each $1 per hour statewide wage increase would cost at least $1.3 billion to $1.5 billion annually. Labor advocates argued that IHSS wages, benefits, and training are too inconsistent across counties and called for statewide bargaining, consumer participation, and ongoing state funding. County representatives supported stronger wages but cautioned that counties need protection from new costs and administrative burdens, and consumer advocates warned that moving bargaining to the state could weaken local consumer control and the program’s consumer-driven structure.

Transcript Highlights:

• Brock Campbell from Lighthouse Baptist Church in Santa Maria in support.
• Emily Campbell with Lighthouse Baptist Church in Santa Maria in support.
• Hi, Jill Hawkins from Santa Monica, California, with Vaccine Common Sense.
• Kelly Brooks, on behalf of the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors, in support.
• Kelly Brooks on behalf of the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors in support.

Committee: Senate Health

Transcript Highlights:

• The Chair calls John Cruz. Did I get that right? You did. Man, I'm on fire today.
• You've seen it in Santa Fe. You've seen it in El Paso. You've seen it in Allen.
• My name is London Delgado, and I'm a graduate of Santa Fe High School, class of 2023.
• I go to Santa Fe Junior High.
• I'd like to remind you of foreign exchange student Sabika Sheik who died at Santa Fe.

Bills: HB259 , HB259 , HB 1128 , HB1337 , HB1506 , HB1794 , HB2215 , HB2470 , HB2771 , HB2882 , HB2993 , HB3053 , HB3428 , HB3669 , HB3789 , HB3924 , HB4201 , HB4675

Committee: House Homeland Security, Public Safety & Veterans' Affairs

Keywords: redistricting, Independent Citizen Redistricting Commission, Texas Legislature, elections, district boundaries, voter representation, healthcare, insurance, patient rights, medical expenses, access to care, affordability, legislation, firearms, penal code, regulation, short-barrel firearms, ammunition, gun control, public safety

Transcript Highlights:

• . ...the California Association of Public Hospitals, and the counties of L.A., Riverside, Ventura, Santa
• Clara, Santa Cruz, and Santa Barbara.

Transcript Highlights:

• Manzanita Reservation, the Mesa Grande Reservation, the Pala Reservation, the Yuima Reservation, the Santa
• I also like to recognize air districts from the Bay Area, San Joaquin Valley, Santa Barbara, Monterey
• Filipino labor leaders Larry Itliong and Philip Vera Cruz stood shoulder to shoulder with Dolores Huerta
• During the farm worker movement, Filipino American leaders including Larry Itliong, Philip Vera Cruz,
• I want to thank the member from Santa Clarita for bringing this forward and to thank all of our firefighters

Transcript Highlights:

• My 27 years as Santa Cruz County's Chief Elections Official is what I carried into these conversations
• Citizen California strongly oppose this bill as a Santa Cruz, California resident.
• One of my communities that I represent, Santa Clara County, is going to voters to the to the ballot to
• And so if that's just Santa Clara County, two million people and it's over one billion dollar hit that
• their health care system is taking that the poorest residents of Santa Clara County rely on just to

Committee: House Elections

Transcript Highlights:

• He didn't do that in Santa Fe; he did that right here in the plaza on top of the building.
• House District 50 is the southern half of Santa Fe County in the Placidus area of Sandoval County.
• Parts of four counties, I used to have six, but I still have a lot of San Miguel, Santa Fe, Torrance,
• And it's with leaders, not only here... at the local level, but also leaders from Santa Fe that represent
• Then other non-federal disasters have had smaller numbers in Dixon, Rayon-Medio, Santa Cruz, Sierra County

Committee: House Water & Natural Resources Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• That's Cochise, Graham, Greenlee, a part of Santa Cruz, and part of Pima counties.
• Legislative District 21, which is 2,100 square miles of southern Arizona, parts of three counties: Pima, Santa
• Cruz, and Cochise County, and it is a beautiful blend of our urban and rural spaces in southern Arizona

Bills: HB2155 , HB2156 , HB2162 , HB2762 , HB2791

Committees: House Land, Agriculture & Rural Affairs , House House Land, Agriculture & Rural Affairs Committee of Reference

Keywords: Arizona Beef Council, agriculture, market development, beef products, terminating council, livestock, compensation, funding, ranching, game and fish commission, wildlife, appointment, commission membership, Arizona Revised Statutes, food labeling, cultivated cells, cell-cultured products, consumer information, food safety, cell-cultured protein

Transcript Highlights:

• I don't think anybody but possibly maybe my colleague from Santa Cruz can explain this...
• I don't think anybody, but possibly maybe my colleague from Santa Cruz, can explain this to the voters
• If my colleague from Santa Ana wishes to speak, I would like you to deny him that opportunity for the
• I concur one unanimously, like wholeheartedly with my colleague from Santa Monica.
• He was born in Santa Monica, California, where he lived, and he was 40 years old.

Summary: The Senate opened with roll call, prayer, and the Pledge of Allegiance, then spent much of the session honoring Sister Michelle Gorman, the Senate chaplain, on her final day after 11 years of service. Members from both parties praised her prayers, compassion, humor, and steady presence, and several noted her long career in education and religious service. The chamber also welcomed delegations from the Japanese Chamber of Commerce of Northern California and the Japanese Business Association of Southern California, as well as a delegation from Morelia, Mexico, in connection with Sacramento’s sister-city relationship. The Senate then handled several procedural items, including Assembly messages and motions to remove or withdraw certain bills from consent or committee. The chamber adopted a motion to move Budget and Fiscal Review Committee measures to third reading, and later approved author’s and floor amendments. The main floor action was on ACA 20, the Save for California Futures Act, which would expand the state Rainy Day Fund target from 10% to 20% of general fund taxes, change how reserve deposits count under the Gann limit, and extend and broaden debt repayment provisions, including federal unemployment insurance debt. Supporters argued it would strengthen fiscal stability and reduce volatility; opponents said it was too complicated, still allowed too much borrowing, and did not sufficiently prioritize paying down existing debt. The measure passed 29-2. The Senate also took up SB 623, a compromise measure addressing transportation network company accident cases and medical lien practices. The bill would cap certain lien-based medical charges, restrict attorney referrals and kickbacks tied to lien providers, require more standardized billing, and add rideshare safety requirements such as background checks and additional disqualifying offenses; it passed 36-0. The chamber then considered SB 417, the Veterans and Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2026, an $11.25 billion housing bond with $10 billion in general obligation bonds and $1.25 billion for veterans home loan assistance. Supporters said it would fund shovel-ready affordable housing, preservation, homeownership, youth housing, infrastructure, and veterans’ housing; opponents criticized it as a “bait-and-switch” that used veterans to justify broader housing debt and argued the state should focus on existing programs and private financing. Despite the opposition, the measure passed 29-2.

Transcript Highlights:

• But Santa Monica gets about 77 kilowatts or megawatts of power from Kern County.
• In my good colleague's district from Santa Cruz, 130 megawatts comes from my district to your district
• I represent the Santa Anita Racetrack.
• I represent the Santa Anita Racetrack.
• Cruz, the Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District.

Transcript Highlights:

• Brock Campbell from Lighthouse Baptist Church in Santa Maria, in support.
• Emily Campbell with Lighthouse Baptist Church in Santa Maria, in support.
• Hi, Jill Hawkins from Santa Monica, California, with Vaccine Common Sense.
• Kelly Brooks, on behalf of the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors, in support.
• Kelly Brooks on behalf of the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors in support.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Health heard a series of bills focused on access to care, insurance coverage, and public health. AB 387 on youth sports AED access drew support from the author and safety advocates, but opposition from school, park, city, and county groups over liability, cost, and access concerns. The author said he would continue working on amendments to shift the bill toward requiring access to existing AEDs rather than mandating facility procurement. Committee members emphasized the life-saving purpose of the bill while also raising affordability and access concerns for youth sports programs. The committee also heard AB 1682, which would require health plans and insurers to cover FDA-cleared scalp cooling devices for chemotherapy patients. Supporters, including breast cancer survivors and health groups, described the emotional and quality-of-life benefits of preventing hair loss and said cost is the main barrier to access. There was no formal opposition, though one senator raised concerns about whether the mandate could exceed essential health benefits. The chair and members expressed support for the bill’s goals and said it would be taken up when quorum was established. AB 2093, a follow-up to the 988 crisis line law, sought to clarify statewide leadership, improve coordination among 988, 911, and mobile crisis teams, and create a more sustainable funding structure. Behavioral health organizations and crisis center representatives supported the bill, saying implementation challenges and demand growth require statutory fixes. Committee members generally supported the concept but noted the bill was a gut-and-amend and that additional work was needed with county and behavioral health stakeholders. The committee then heard AB 1843 on hepatitis C treatment, AB 1629 on dental assignment of benefits, AB 2540 on community college access to medication abortion services, and AB 1929 on disclosure of health plan investments. AB 1843 had broad support from medical and public health groups but opposition from health plans, which argued it conflicted with the prior-authorization framework in SB 306 and could raise drug costs. AB 1629 was supported by dental and patient advocates but opposed by dental plans and insurers over concerns about network participation and out-of-pocket costs. AB 2540 drew strong support from reproductive health advocates and student representatives, while community college health services and some others opposed or were neutral pending amendments; the author said the bill was about equity and accepted amendments to reduce burdens. AB 1929 was backed by labor and immigrant rights groups as a transparency measure, but opposed by health plans and insurers who said Covered California was not the right entity to administer the disclosures and that the information was already publicly available. Throughout the hearing, members repeatedly weighed public access and transparency against cost, administrative burden, and implementation concerns.

Transcript Highlights:

• c><00:04:02.920><c> thank</c><00:04:03.079><c> you</c><00:04:03.239><c> chair</c><00:04:03.519><c> Santa
• </c> support yes you do thank you chair Santa support yes you do thank you chair Santa Ventura<00:04:
• /c><00:25:27.720><c> we</c><00:25:27.919><c> have</c><00:25:28.320><c> lyette</c><00:25:28.720><c> Cruz
• </c><00:25:29.679><c> malama</c> much next we have lyette Cruz malama much next we have lyette Cruz malama
• Ernie Cruz, can you come on up? Sorry, Board of Water Supply. Uh, Senator...

Committee: Senate Health and Human Services

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several bills related to cesspools, Red Hill cleanup, water testing, environmental governance, and beverage container recycling. For SB 472, SB 501, SB 675, and SB 958 on cesspools, most testimony supported accelerating cesspool conversion and expanding Department of Health capacity, though the Attorney General flagged a single-subject issue on SB 472 and the Department of Health and others raised concerns about funding, program structure, and coordination. Supporters emphasized cesspools as a major water pollution source and urged earlier deadlines, while some testimony questioned the tax credit approach and asked for clearer grant and staffing language. For SB 639 on underground storage tanks and Red Hill cleanup, the Department of Health asked for clearer cleanup standards and noted limits on laboratory detection and sampling, while supporters argued the bill would create a binding legal standard for remediation and help prevent reopening of the facility. Testimony also stressed the need to remove all contamination to the extent practicable and protect aquifers and drinking water. SB 664 on water quality testing drew strong support from residents and water advocates, but the Department of Health warned the measure could duplicate existing authority and create significant cost; the Board of Water Supply supported the concept while noting it would expand responsibilities into private-property testing. SB 674 on environmental advisory council and waste reduction received mixed testimony: supporters said it would help address landfill siting and protect water resources, while industry groups requested changes to advisory council membership and exemptions for certain products, and one witness opposed the measure. For SB 1067 on deposit beverage container recycling, the Attorney General said the grant language may be constitutionally problematic because it lacks standards, while industry testimony both supported the recycling goals and asked for amendments, including broader representation on the advisory council and clearer treatment of compostable and packaging-related issues. No votes or final committee actions were taken in the portion provided.