Transcript Highlights:

• </c> that's uh 85% sourced domestically. that's uh 85% sourced domestically.
• Um right now we source high about iron.
• At present, we are, you know, sourcing iron from, you know, we source high-purity metallic iron, and
• And right now we're just sourcing high-purity iron that already meets our specs. looking to source it
• </c><00:47:58.000><c> of</c> because it depends on other sources of because it depends on other sources

Bills: HF4059 , HF76

Committee: House Energy Finance and Policy

Keywords: climate change, greenhouse gas emissions, financing, sustainability, environmental policy, renewable energy, Minnesota Climate Innovation Financing Authority, earned incentive release credit, release credits, supervised release, corrections, Minnesota Department of Corrections, sentence reduction, good time, prison time, incarceration, violent offenses, murder, criminal sexual conduct, sex offenses

Transcript Highlights:

• It's the single largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in California.
• And so I've been saying since 2022... ...a Band-Aid on in the next major rulemaking.
• So we recommend against any further major LCFS programmatic changes at this time.
• Did I add one thing just to provide a source for my numbers? Sorry.
• of, you know, making major changes?

Summary: The hearing was a select committee discussion on the transportation costs and impacts of California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), with opening remarks from the co-chairs and members emphasizing affordability, climate goals, and the need to explain the program’s benefits to the public. The first panel from CARB and the California Energy Commission described how LCFS works as a market-based, declining carbon-intensity program that rewards lower-carbon fuels, supports zero-emission vehicle infrastructure, and is intended to reduce greenhouse gases and local air pollution. They argued the program has driven billions in private investment, increased alternative fuel use, and that LCFS credit prices are not the main driver of retail gasoline prices, which they said are dominated by crude oil, refining, and distribution costs. Members questioned the panel on the gap between the regulatory target and actual carbon-intensity performance, the role of credit banking, which fuels are generating the most credits, how the 2025 amendments affected the program, and whether LCFS credits are truly additional. CARB explained that banking helps cost-effectiveness and investment certainty, that ethanol, renewable diesel, and biodiesel currently provide the largest volumes while electricity is expected to grow, and that the updated targets were informed by the state’s 2045 carbon-neutrality goals and the 2030 scoping plan. The Energy Commission said its data show environmental programs add some cost to gasoline but do not drive price volatility, which is mainly tied to crude oil and refinery margins. The second panel, featuring academic and research experts, focused on program design, out-of-state credit generation, and broader economic effects. Speakers said LCFS is successful because it ties incentives to emissions benefit, uses life-cycle analysis, and allows flexible compliance that lowers costs compared with more direct regulation. They also said the program’s benefits generally outweigh costs, that it can reduce air pollution disparities and support equity, but that some issues—especially indirect land use change, additionality, and older program assumptions—need more research and may warrant future rulemaking. One researcher noted that while LCFS likely raises gasoline prices somewhat, the effect is uncertain by design and usually smaller than normal market fluctuations, and another warned that limiting credit generation too narrowly could create legal and efficiency problems.

Transcript Highlights:

• majority majority vote. vote. vote.
• Um and then in 20 source of revenue.
• </c><01:05:15.039><c> concerts,</c> seasons, hosted 28 major concerts, seasons, hosted 28 major concerts
• </c> create an amazing experience for major create an amazing experience for major events<01:06:35.920
• approved by a simple majority. GO bonds approved by a simple majority.

Bills: HF2148 , HF2693 , HF2542 , HF1141 , HF1770 , HF1489 , HF1709 , HF244 , HF1266 , HF807 , HF2619 , HF1340

Committee: Senate Capital Investment

Keywords: affordable housing, local control, revolving loan fund, community partnerships, Minnesota housing policy, housing, locally controlled housing, Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, housing infrastructure bonds, state bonds, bonding bill, supportive housing, permanent supportive housing, homelessness, veterans housing, senior housing, manufactured home parks, community land trust, single-family housing, multifamily housing

Transcript Highlights:

• And so we have multiple fund sources.
• You have eight sources.
• The first four You have eight sources.
• , source, source, if<01:25:33.920><c> the</c><01:25:34.040><c> state</c><01:25:34.520><c> or</c><01:25
• sources.

Committee: Joint Appropriations & Revenue

Transcript Highlights:

• To prevent the use of Phase I or II funding as a permanent source of revenue, my bill imposes a $75 million
• This yields an ROI of 3.7 on all of our funding sources.
• I think one of the major bottlenecks for that program is the idea of. of these esoteric, very nuanced
• And so the SBIR, the STTR, the programs, they're just critical sources.
• They're critical sources of capital for start-ups and for people who see a problem and think how can

Committee: Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee

Keywords: SBIR, STTR, Innovate Act, small business, innovation, legislative reforms, economic growth, funding, technology transfer

Summary: The meeting focused on the Small Business Innovation Research and Small Business Technology Transfer Programs (SBIR-STTR), emphasizing the critical reforms necessary to enhance their effectiveness. Chair Ernst introduced the Innovate Act to streamline processes, ensuring funding is awarded based on merit and addressing existing abuses within the system. The discussion was robust, with numerous members expressing concerns about phase transitions and the need for targeted funding to support impactful technological innovations. The conversation also highlighted the program's importance in fostering economic growth, particularly for small businesses in rural areas, and the urgency for legislative changes as the program's authorization approaches expiration.

Transcript Highlights:

• I will turn it over to our majority leader. I will turn it over to our majority leader.
• Several years ago, my daughter was going through a major medical crisis.
• It's a major jump in a very short period.
• It's a major jump in a very short period.
• This is a major crisis, and this is an actual crisis point.

Transcript Highlights:

• So this is a major problem.
• Now, no one is saying that pesticides are the only source of TFA.
• It's a major issue. But what we're trying to say is we cannot afford to get these chemicals.
• Now, no one is saying that pesticides are the only source of TFA.
• It's a major issue. But what we're trying to say is we cannot afford to get these chemicals.

Committee: Senate Environmental Quality

Transcript Highlights:

• It changes the revenue source for the fiscally constrained counties distribution from the direct-to-home
• The direct-to-home satellite service is a declining tax source.
• With the majority of them coming from Miami-Dade County.
• The funding source The funding source is declining, and so shifting it to a sales tax percentage creates
• The funding source The funding source is declining, and so shifting it to a sales tax percentage creates

Committee: Senate Finance and Tax

Summary: The Finance and Tax Committee met with a quorum and considered two Senate proposed bills. The first, SPB 7046, was the Senate tax package. It included changes to Live Local property tax exemptions, charter school distributions from voter-approved property tax levies, limits on special assessments for RV parks, revisions to fiscally constrained county funding and eligibility, a permanent sales tax exemption for small propane tanks, a hunting/fishing/camping sales tax holiday, restrictions on governmental net zero policies, and new voting thresholds for certain local millage actions. Staff estimated the bill would reduce general revenue by about $77 million in FY 2026-27 and about $50 million recurring. An amendment making the charter-school distribution change prospective starting July 1, 2026, was adopted. A late-filed amendment by Senator Gaetz on disability tax exemptions was withdrawn for lack of a fiscal analysis. The charter school provision drew the most debate. Senator Jones and Senator Bernard raised concerns that expanding eligibility to charter schools authorized through alternate authorizers could reduce funding available to traditional neighborhood public schools and that the effective date did not give districts enough time to plan. Senator Avila argued the change corrected an omission from earlier legislation and ensured public schools, including charter schools, were treated equally. Several speakers supported the fiscally constrained county provisions, while the Florida Association of Counties urged grandfathering for counties that could currently opt out of the Live Local exemption and asked the committee to review language on millage thresholds and net zero provisions. SPB 7046 was ultimately reported favorably as a committee bill by a roll call vote. The committee then took up SPB 7048, which updates Florida’s conformity to the Internal Revenue Code as of January 1, 2026, and partially decouples from federal changes in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The bill addresses federal changes to bonus depreciation, Section 179 expensing, research and experimental expenses, business meals, and business interest deductions, with some provisions phased in or adjusted over time. The Florida Chamber testified in support of continued conformity but expressed concerns about administrative burdens and the bill’s partial decoupling structure. After brief debate, the bill was reported favorably as a committee bill by roll call vote, and the committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• The source rule is a legal theory used to establish the legality of cannabis material based on its source
• According to the same legal theory, the source rule, according to some, the source rule has become less
• source.
• source.
• I'm a major with the New Brightite.

Committee: Senate Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:

• A slight majority of our members, our business owners, are women, so...
• I would say that the overwhelming majority of... ...companies.
• The majority are 10 and below. Yeah.
• I think we can all agree on sources of the wealth gaps at this point.
• The majority population and who were involved in the legal system.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Racial Equity, Civil Rights, and Inclusion

Transcript Highlights:

• Another source is base funding for Cal Fire operations.
• Another source is based funding for Cal Fire operations.
• And instead, we're trying to take it out of temporary sources. To Cal Fire.
• The majority of the funding is going to Cal Fire, with...
• That's going to be our only source of funding.

Summary: The subcommittee began by announcing a change in the agenda order, moving item 6 ahead of item 1 and then item 7, and noting there would be no votes taken on any items that day. Item 6 covered a proposed operational efficiencies control section for the Natural Resources Agency that would let multiple departments jointly fund landscape-scale or multi-jurisdictional projects and allow Finance to transfer climate bond funds to a lead state entity. The LAO said the proposal was reasonable but suggested the Legislature consider requiring summary notification on how it is used; Finance said it would consider that request. Item 7 focused on the 2026-27 biodiversity and nature-based solutions spending plan. Finance and the Wildlife Conservation Board described the climate bond funding for habitat restoration, wildlife crossings, public access, tribal nature-based solutions, and related work, including $111 million proposed for WCB and $30 million for Salton Sea habitat and public access projects. The LAO supported the overall approach but flagged the San Andreas Corridor Program as an area where the Legislature may want to specify geographic priorities. Members discussed the pace of Salton Sea work and whether the proposed projects would count toward disadvantaged community goals. Item 8 addressed Cal Fire’s aviation contract and staffing needs for wildfire response. Cal Fire said year-round fire activity, a larger and more complex aircraft fleet, and labor market pressures justified the proposed contract increase, including more mechanics, pilots, and maintenance support. The LAO recommended approval, saying the proposal addressed health and safety concerns. Members asked about contractor staffing, competition in the bidding process, and future technology for early fire detection and suppression. The committee then took up item 1 on golden mussel containment. Fish and Wildlife described the invasive species’ spread in the Delta, the task force and response framework, and a request for eight new positions funded by Prop. 4 to support control plans, outreach, monitoring, research, and coordination with partners and law enforcement. Members pressed the department on whether the state should fund more direct decontamination infrastructure and grants to local water managers, and on the realistic goal of containing the mussel. The chair and several members emphasized the urgency of the threat and requested an itemized breakdown of the $20 million request. The hearing then moved to a broader LAO overview of wildfire prevention and response funding, where the LAO summarized the state’s funding mix and warned that ongoing wildfire resilience funding will likely decline as one-time bond and GGRF funds are exhausted, prompting discussion of long-term funding options and the balance between prevention, suppression, and community hardening.

Transcript Highlights:

• Energy is a major cost for many Minnesota businesses.
• Energy is a major cost for many Minnesota businesses.
• The next major innovation is not on the horizon; it is at our doorstep.
• <00:35:56.720><c> um</c> Source um Source um the<00:35:58.359><c> small</c><00:35:58.680><c> modular<
• So, um, I haven't heard necessarily from a vast majority of hydroelectric power.

Transcript Highlights:

• Because it's open-source, anybody can take advantage of it.
• sources versus in-state.
• Minimum unit size can be a major barrier.
• And so we see a major influx of residents out of California.
• And costs are a major part of the home itself.

Committee: House Economic & Rural Development & Policy Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• We don't really need to complement proven renewable energy sources.
• It cannot be turned on when power is needed, or off when cheaper sources are abundant.
• Or off when cheaper sources are abundant.
• First, a successful transition to a cleaner energy future requires all major sources of carbon-free energy
• Nuclear is a proven, scalable, clean source of electricity that meets all of these goals.

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several bills. House Bill 2272 would update state park inspection language for ski lifts and related equipment to better match current equipment and federal standards; the sponsor and State Parks said it was a simple modernization bill, and there was no opposition. House Bill 2245 would expand Clean Energy Transformation Act coverage to port districts that distribute electricity, utilities with a single customer, and certain affected market customers such as data centers; supporters said it closes loopholes and applies clean-energy rules more fairly, while ports, business groups, and some utilities warned of unintended consequences, added reporting burdens, and impacts on cogeneration and rural economic development. Ecology and Commerce supported the goal but raised concerns about allowance allocation, fiscal impacts, and possible double counting, and WAPUDA asked that existing single-customer PUDs be grandfathered. House Bill 2215 would lower Climate Commitment Act thresholds for gasoline, diesel, biodiesel, and propane suppliers and extend coverage to some purchasers; supporters said it would prevent entities from gaming the system and cover significant emissions now below the threshold, while Ecology, fuel distributors, propane suppliers, grocers, and business groups warned of compliance costs, supply-chain impacts, possible linkage issues, and the need to preserve existing reporting authority for natural gas. Ecology estimated about 50 additional covered entities could be brought in, and several opponents argued the bill would sweep in small family-owned businesses not intended to be regulated. House Bill 2090 would direct Commerce to develop a nuclear strategic framework for inclusion in the state energy strategy, contingent on outside funding. The sponsor and supporters argued the bill is only a planning measure to ensure Washington considers advanced nuclear as a firm, low-carbon, small-footprint resource amid rising demand, grid constraints, and land-use concerns; supporters included Energy Northwest, local governments, labor/environmental Democrats, and pro-nuclear groups. Opponents, including the Sierra Club, Columbia Riverkeeper, tribal representatives from the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, and several environmental advocates, said the bill gives nuclear special treatment, relies on private funding that could bias the study, and risks advancing projects at Hanford without early, meaningful tribal consultation. Tribes requested explicit consultation, independent and publicly funded analysis, and attention to treaty rights and historic nuclear impacts. Testimony also sharply divided over cost, waste, and land use, with supporters emphasizing reliability and footprint and opponents citing high costs, unresolved waste disposal, and the immaturity of small modular reactors. No votes or final actions were taken in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's the most important water source we have, and that's what we told them.
• Wyoming's major concern is the Colorado River, but they still participate.
• And so that's the source of the state and the local.
• That source is high in manganese, which is above the secondary limits.
• It's not the fact that it's a supplemental source or anything like that.

Summary: The Water Topics Overview Committee met with a quorum and received updates from the Department of Water Resources and the State Water Commission, followed by presentations from Deloitte on two legislative studies required by House Bill 1020. Director Reese Haas reviewed major project and budget updates, including the Northwest Area Water Supply and Southwest Pipeline projects, Resources Trust Fund balances, carryover spending, project prioritization, bid conditions, regional water system coverage, and department process improvements. Members also discussed how the commission prioritizes projects, maintenance expectations, and the impact of limited municipal water supply funding. No formal committee action was taken during the DWR update; the commission’s municipal funding decisions were described as pending its April 8 meeting. Deloitte then presented the cost-share policy study, which found that under current policy and forecasted revenues, North Dakota faces an estimated $1.3 billion shortfall over 14 years, with a near-term gap of about $1.8 billion through 2031. The firm outlined seven recommended options, including tighter definitions and a 25% cost share for eligible replacement projects, caps and financing strategies for the Mouse River and Red River Valley projects, aligning cost share with commission priority guidance, delaying lower-priority projects, using available lines of credit, and adjusting reimbursement timing for revolving loan funds. Committee members questioned inflation assumptions, affordability, user fees, and the use of legacy fund earnings for bonding, but no decisions were made. In the governance and finance study, Deloitte said final recommendations are still being refined, with a final report due May 29. The study examined the Southwest Pipeline, NAWS, and Red River Valley systems using governance and finance criteria such as decision authority, transparency, affordability, risk, and access to funding. For Southwest, Deloitte outlined options ranging from improved state-authority coordination to transferring ownership to the Southwest Water Authority; for NAWS, options focused on strengthening the authority’s role and potentially transitioning operations and maintenance; and for Red River, options ranged from enhanced facilitation to formal state oversight or state ownership. Members asked follow-up questions about ownership transfer, capital repayment streams, and why NAWS was not considered for transfer, and Deloitte said NAWS’s limited organizational maturity made that option less viable in the near term.

Transcript Highlights:

• Transportation is also the dominant source of NOx emissions, which are a major component of what creates
• like gas stations, and mobile sources like diesel trucks.
• Our air toxics... ...like gas stations and mobile sources like diesel trucks.
• Such as sanctions on stationary sources and the loss of federal highway funding.
• So really, six major refineries in California if the plans go through in 2026.

Summary: The joint informational hearing focused on California’s transportation fuels sector, especially the risk of refinery closures, fuel supply stability, and how the state should manage a long transition to cleaner transportation. Committee chairs and agency leaders said California’s fuel market is becoming more fragile as demand declines, refinery capacity shrinks faster than demand, and the state relies more on imports and a smaller number of critical pipelines. Professor Emily Grubert framed the issue as a managed transition problem in which the public already bears much of the risk and should also capture benefits from any state intervention. CARB Chair Leanne Randolph reviewed California’s climate and air-quality framework, including AB 32, the low-carbon fuel standard, clean vehicle rules, and the state’s at-berth regulation for port vessels. She said these programs are intended to reduce fossil fuel demand while protecting public health, and she noted that California remains in litigation over federal attempts to block some waivers. CEC Vice Chair Sivagunda described the administration’s market-stabilization work, saying the state is trying to preserve fuel supply and investor confidence during a “mid-transition” period. He said the CEC’s recommendations fall into three broad areas: stabilizing the existing fuel system, aligning regulatory tools such as a possible pause on the CEC’s margin cap, and planning for worker and community impacts. Department of Conservation Director Jennifer Lucasey outlined the administration’s petroleum market stabilization proposal, centered on returning California crude production to a 125 million-barrel annual stabilization target to support pipeline throughput and domestic supply. The proposal would codify the ban on hydraulic fracturing, validate Kern County’s oil and gas permitting ordinance, create a temporary CEQA exemption for new wells in existing fields paired with a two-for-one plug-and-abandon requirement, and strengthen spill prevention and pipeline safety rules. Several members questioned the CEQA exemption, tribal consultation, environmental review, and whether the proposal would adequately protect communities and workers. Mayor Steve Young of Benicia testified that a Valero refinery closure would sharply reduce city revenue and jobs, while also creating redevelopment and remediation challenges; he said the city wants a cleaner future but needs time and support to manage the economic loss. No formal vote was taken at the hearing, though CEC officials said a vote on a margin-cap pause was expected at an upcoming business meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Blaise Bags and Majority Staff.
• Good morning, former Majority Leader Janae Shamp.
• Because the greatest contribution is not the radiation source itself, but the greatest source is the
• Because the greatest contribution is not the radiation source, the x-ray is not the radiation source,
• the x-ray source itself, but the greatest source is the patient.

Bills: SB1001 , SB1011 , SB1016 , SB1052 , SB1072 , SB1100 , SB1112 , SB1113 , SB1116 , SB1118 , SB1120 , SB1121 , SB1122 , SB1123 , SB1124 , SB1125

Committees: Senate Health and Human Services , Senate Senate Health and Human Services COR

Keywords: appropriation, economic security, blind individuals, older adults, state funding, medical examiners, sudden infant death, autopsy protocols, forensic pathology, public health, assisted living, health care, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, physician orders, informed consent, reimbursement rates, intellectual disabilities, community services, funding appropriations, foreign adversary

Transcript Highlights:

• But we were proposing to cut a revenue source that is exclusively local, because nothing from LBT goes
• But we are proposing to cut a revenue source that is exclusively local, because nothing from LBT goes
• Do you guys have another revenue source we should be considering prophylactically?
• Do you guys have another revenue source we should be considering prophylactically?
• So the four major areas: you do see a lot of construction in South Florida.

Summary: The Committee on Community Affairs met with a quorum present and took up SB 122, which would repeal Chapter 205 on local business taxes while allowing municipalities to continue imposing a gross-receipts-based business tax on merchants. Senator Trumbull presented the bill for the sponsor, and committee members questioned what services local governments fund with local business tax revenue and whether the bill should be considered alongside broader property tax changes. County and city representatives opposed the bill, arguing that local business taxes are capped home-rule revenues used for general fund services such as public safety, zoning and licensure checks, economic development, and business support, and warning that repeal would shift costs to residential taxpayers and reduce local flexibility. Senator Shreve said he would vote no because of ongoing property tax discussions, while Senator Pizzo said he would support the bill but wanted clearer accounting of how the revenue is spent. The committee voted 5-1 to report SB 122 favorably. The committee then held a housing panel discussion focused on Florida’s housing shortage, affordability, and supply constraints. Dr. Samuel Staley said Florida is in a housing crisis driven largely by insufficient supply, arguing that the state needs roughly 100,000 additional units per year just to keep up with in-migration and that local planning systems often do not prioritize housing enough. He urged more emphasis on measurable impacts, streamlined permitting, accessory dwelling units, smaller lot sizes, and other market-responsive tools. Ann Ray of the Shimberg Center said Florida is seeing more single-family and multifamily construction but that production is concentrated in a handful of counties, while condo construction remains limited; she also noted that rents and home prices spiked sharply in the early 2020s and remain above pre-2020 levels, with nearly 905,000 low-income renters cost-burdened. Leslie Deutsch of John Burns Research said the national housing market is slow, Florida has a severe affordability problem, and builders are lowering prices and offering incentives but still face high land, labor, materials, and insurance costs. In committee discussion, senators focused on whether Florida should encourage more density, including townhomes, build-to-rent products, modular housing, and redevelopment of existing sites rather than relying on large new subdivisions. Members also discussed the role of local zoning, impact fees, density bonuses, and state incentives tied to housing targets. Several senators said Florida’s growth and affordability challenges require updating land development codes and planning for where future residents will live without overbuilding rural or environmentally sensitive areas. The chair closed by emphasizing that density can support affordability and that Florida should use existing footprints more efficiently.

Transcript Highlights:

• On average, that's only the major brands. Prices are going up significantly.
• And then by contrast, almost one in two gasoline is a major branded station.
• And we've diversified sources to marine, to pipeline.
• If we have sources of fuel to backfill them, it's not a bad thing.
• the source of the oil in the state.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Energy, Utilities and Communications held an oversight hearing on managing the transportation fuels transition, fuel pricing, and supply reliability. Chair Allen opened by discussing prior legislation, including SB 1322 and special session measures, that expanded reporting to the California Energy Commission (CEC) and gave the state tools to study gasoline costs, refinery margins, inventories, and potential supply disruptions. He framed the hearing around refinery closures, rising imports, global conflict affecting crude markets, and the need to balance affordability, reliability, and the state’s long-term clean-fuels transition. CEC Vice Chair Siva Gunda, CDTFA Chief Deputy Director Gentian Droboniku, and DPMO Director Ty Miller presented data showing California’s growing dependence on imported crude and refined products, declining in-state refining capacity, and stable-to-tight inventories that are being supported by higher imports. They said the new transparency laws have improved understanding of the market and pointed to the proposed Gateway Pipeline, marine imports, and distribution constraints as important supply issues. CDTFA and DPMO emphasized that retail margins, especially for branded gasoline, have widened significantly, with large price gaps between branded stations and hypermarts/unbranded stations, and that some of the recent price increases were tied to the Iran conflict while earlier spikes were more consistent with localized market behavior and possible price gouging. DPMO also said it is investigating high-priced branded stations, monitoring algorithmic pricing under AB 325, and continuing to analyze diesel spot-market transparency. The CEC and CARB also discussed the Transportation Fuels Transition Plan and the SB 237 assessment, describing them as efforts to plan for a managed decline in fossil fuel demand while protecting workers, communities, and consumers. They said California’s climate goals remain centered on an 85% greenhouse gas reduction by 2045, with continued use of liquid fuels expected but with lower-carbon alternatives, more efficient vehicles, and alternative fuels playing a larger role. Committee members focused heavily on workforce impacts, the need for concrete transition planning, and whether the agencies could provide a clearer picture of what California’s fuel system will look like under the state’s long-term goals. No votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Do we have limited other funding sources?
• So there's limited funding sources that we have in order to be able to backfill. Okay.
• Yeah, I mean, that just remains a major problem.
• And so thinking about how we maintain reliable fuel supply for each of these major sources of fuel and
• that or choose to have a different fund source for it.

Summary: The subcommittee heard extensive testimony on the governor’s proposed sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) tax credit, which would provide a $1 to $2 per gallon credit against the diesel excise tax for SAF sold for use in California from 2026 to 2036. The Department of Finance and CARB argued the proposal would help decarbonize aviation, support a long-term transition in the fuel sector, and encourage in-state investment and jobs. The Legislative Analyst’s Office and several outside witnesses recommended rejecting the proposal, saying it is a relatively expensive way to reduce greenhouse gases, could have uncertain or limited net climate benefits, and may shift limited feedstocks away from renewable diesel rather than create additional fuel supply. A major point of debate was whether the credit would mainly benefit California refineries and workers or instead subsidize out-of-state producers while reducing revenue for transportation programs. Supporters, including union members, refinery workers, airlines, Boeing, and airport representatives, said SAF is one of the few viable near-term options for aviation, that California should keep fuel production and jobs in-state, and that the credit would help maintain refinery operations and support the industry’s transition. Opponents, including the LAO, trucking and fuels groups, environmental organizations, and county/road advocates, warned that the proposal could raise gasoline and diesel prices, reduce diesel excise tax revenue for highways and local streets and roads, and provide limited climate benefit compared with other uses of state funds. Some members also raised concerns about feedstock availability, food-system impacts, and whether the policy should be more narrowly targeted if the goal is to support a specific refinery. No vote was taken. The chair stated at the outset that all items on the agenda were being held open for a future hearing, and public comment was taken after the first item because of the level of interest. The hearing then continued with public testimony, which was split between strong support from labor and industry and strong opposition from environmental, transportation, and local government groups.