Transcript Highlights:

• There are fees to be had when you issue bonds or fees to be had when you join in developers and developer
• Development.
• , Partner with other utilities, state agencies, and developers; develop and participate in energy projects
• Develop and participate in energy projects that promote economic development, energy reliability, and
• And L, examine closely what other states are doing with respect to SMR development.

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

Transcript Highlights:

• We just don't apply it to home development yet.
• A quick bit of background: before developing land, a developer must obtain permits from the local government
• allowing the development.
• You know, for builders and developers, time is money.
• You know, for builders and developers, time is money.

Summary: The committee heard public testimony on several housing-related bills. On SB 6054, Senator Hunt’s bill to prohibit common-interest community rules from blocking wildfire home-hardening materials, staff explained that HOA and condominium governing documents could still impose reasonable aesthetic rules, but not ones that make fire-resistant materials infeasible or more than 10% costlier. The sponsor described the bill as a response to HOA requirements for less fire-resistant roofs. Testifiers generally supported the goal but objected to the 10% cost cap, saying it could limit community-specific design choices and create unintended conflicts with aesthetic standards. The committee also heard SB 601 on scissor stairs in the building code. The sponsor and supporters from Futurewise, architects, and housing advocates said scissor stairs could make mid-rise and high-rise housing more efficient, reduce corridor space, and improve unit layouts without sacrificing life safety. They noted the design is used in places like Vancouver, B.C. and in some Washington venues, and argued the bill would help lower costs and increase housing supply. No opposition was presented during the hearing. For SB 6015 on permit-ready residential plans, staff said L&I would create a process for publishing approved plans for factory-built housing and certain small residential types, with local governments required to approve applications using those plans on qualifying lots starting in 2027. Supporters from builders, architects, Habitat for Humanity, and Sightline said statewide standard plans could reduce duplication, speed permitting, and help scale factory-built and potentially site-built housing. Counties and L&I were supportive in concept but raised concerns about mandating local adoption of model ordinances and about whether the bill should include site-built plans as well. The committee also heard SB 5470 on detached ADUs outside urban growth areas, with supporters saying it would help rural homeowners and intergenerational living, while Futurewise opposed the bill as written and sought tighter density, lot-size, and metering limits. Finally, the committee heard SB 5729, a permit-streamlining bill that would deem completeness for applications prepared by licensed professionals and limit local governments to three review cycles. Builders and business groups supported it as a way to reduce delays and costs, while counties, cities, and Futurewise argued it could lead to more denials, less communication, and unintended liability concerns. In executive session, the committee adopted the proposed substitute for SB 5884 and moved it forward with a do-pass recommendation to Ways and Means.

Transcript Highlights:

• Developers may appeal violations to the Office of Administrative Hearings.
• But we can't do much because all we could do is complain about the private developer to the IRS.
• In Washington, developers and investors come to WSHFC to seek these tax credits.
• So the first 15 years, our monitoring is over that the homes were developed.
• So the first 15 years, our monitoring is over that the homes were developed.

Bills: HB1542, HB2527

Keywords: senior housing, independent living, 55 and older, older adults, elderly, retirement housing, retirement community, resident rights, tenant protections, consumer protection act, unfair or deceptive practices, housing discrimination, assisted living distinction, Department of Commerce, Washington RCW, housing provider, community living, security cameras, resident meetings, anonymous complaints

Transcript Highlights:

• for up to 50% of the capital cost of the public infrastructure related to an eligible economic development
• Thank you very much for the opportunity to hear about a project and the impact the business development
• public infrastructure grant development public infrastructure grant program<00:02:56.480><c> has</c>
• of public infrastructure on development of public infrastructure on a<00:03:11.440><c> 40</c><00:03:
• since that time of the developers since that time of the announcement<00:04:36.600><c> of</c><00:04:

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• And with return of having irrigation and never has developed.
• Thank you. ...all ag technology research and development, ecosystem, workforce development, and projects
• Development. And so I think to Dr.
• It develops a scalar adjustment to damages, and it does that by basically...
• Any questions regarding— —move through our policy development process.

Summary: The committee met in Fargo and approved the minutes from the March 31 meeting before hearing a series of informational presentations focused on North Dakota agriculture, water, and research. NDSU President David Cook opened with remarks about NDSU’s land-grant mission, emphasizing statewide service through research, teaching, and extension, and highlighting examples such as the Lilac Agriculture startup and the university’s role in applying research to real-world problems. He said he intends to spend time listening across the state to better understand local needs. The committee then received a detailed presentation on a state irrigation and drainage study from Tom Bodine on behalf of Agriculture Commissioner Doug Goehring. The study projected significant potential for expanded irrigation acreage, especially in counties such as McLean, Williams, Sargent, Burleigh, Mountrail, McKenzie, McIntosh, Dunn, and Bottineau, and estimated major economic gains from irrigation, including higher farm returns and support for value-added agriculture. Members discussed water permits, surface water versus aquifers, infrastructure, drought resilience, and the role of legal drains in improving productivity and generating economic activity. The presenters also noted that the full report is available online. Dr. Greg Lardy followed with NDSU’s required interim report, outlining the university’s agricultural research and extension system, including the State Board of Agricultural Research and Education, seven research-extension centers, and the economic importance of agriculture to the state. He highlighted recent research impacts such as new crop varieties, potato breeding successes, virtual fencing, AI-assisted weed control, weather-network tools, and 4-H programming. He also described NDSU’s budget priorities: restoring the governor’s proposed 10% cuts, additional operating support, and deferred maintenance funding. Committee members asked about the new agricultural field lab, storage sheds, and NDSU’s partnership with Grand Farm. The committee also heard from the North Dakota Water Resources Research Institute and a professor presenting water-related research, including data center cooling, water reuse, smart irrigation, and a feasibility study on co-locating data centers with greenhouse and aquaculture production. Members asked about water use, ownership, and whether the concepts were operational or still speculative. Finally, North Dakota AgTech presented its NSF-funded innovation engine work, describing startup commercialization, on-farm trials, workforce development, and partnerships with NDSU, UND, tribal colleges, and other land-grant institutions. No formal votes were taken beyond approval of the prior meeting minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> economic development to do just that. economic development to do just that.
• </c><00:02:51.840><c> really</c> energy and economic development really energy and economic development
• </c><00:03:03.920><c> pipeline</c> about our economic development pipeline about our economic development
• </c> communities with economic development. communities with economic development.
• c> are</c> development projects, these are development projects, these are companies<00:09:27.440><c>

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Artificial Intelligence Task Force held its third meeting and adopted the prior minutes after a motion and second. The main presentation came from John Bevington of LG&E and KU, who described the utility’s Kentucky service territory, its vertically integrated operations, and its role in economic development. He said the company supported 76 projects in 2024, representing about $3 billion in announced investment and roughly 3,000 jobs, and noted that about 45% of statewide investment announcements were in its service area. He also outlined a large project pipeline of about 8.5 gigawatts, with data centers making up roughly two-thirds of that interest. Bevington explained that data center siting differs from traditional manufacturing site selection because it is driven primarily by transmission access and grid capacity rather than a process of eliminating locations. He said large data centers must locate near transmission lines, that utilities must conduct formal studies to ensure existing customers are not harmed, and that the buildout timeline for utility infrastructure is much longer than for data centers. He cited a Deloitte study and other industry data to argue that power constraints and timeline mismatches are the biggest challenges, while also emphasizing that data centers can generate significant construction activity, indirect jobs, and tax revenue. He said Kentucky’s sales tax exemption for data centers was a key enabler that increased interest in the state. Members asked about the number and size of potential data center projects, how Kentucky compares with other states, and whether regulatory reform is needed. Bevington said the 20 projects in Kentucky reflect current interest, that other states such as Ohio have had similar incentives for years, and that Kentucky is still early in the market. He also said data centers can vary in size, from 200 to 600 megawatts or more, and that they can be located anywhere with sufficient transmission capacity and, in some cases, access to workforce and roads. In response to concerns about energy supply, he said LG&E and KU are pursuing an “all of the above” strategy, including solar, batteries, and new natural gas combined-cycle units, and noted ongoing and proposed projects totaling additional capacity if approved by the Public Service Commission.

Transcript Highlights:

• That was a little compromise so that the development... Three years.
• will develop.
• Each village, one area, new area, 5,000, 9,000, whatever homes planned and developed by the developer
• Yeah, if Stevens, a development company, for example, my old friend, if you are the developer, you know
• If Stevens, a development company, for example, my old friend, if you are the developer, you know, in

Summary: The Senate Local Government Committee heard several housing, water, labor, and local governance bills. AB 1621, by Assembly Member Wilson, would tighten timelines and limit repeated plan checks in post-entitlement housing permitting; supporters said it would reduce delays and costs, while cities and counties opposed or sought amendments over concerns about health-and-safety review and litigation risk. AB 2005 would expand SB 9 lot-split eligibility to certain owners using trusts or LLCs and allow partnerships with small builders; supporters framed it as a homeownership tool, while Realtors and others warned it would weaken SB 9’s owner-occupancy guardrails and invite speculative development. AB 2397 would create a financing tool for rural housing infrastructure districts, with the author and a developer witness saying it would help projects secure roads, water, and sewer funding. The committee also considered AB 2180, which would clarify Proposition 218 rate-setting standards for public water agencies. Water agencies, cities, counties, and other local entities supported the bill as a response to conflicting court decisions and rising litigation, while taxpayer and consumer opponents argued the Legislature should not intervene while the issue is pending before the California Supreme Court and warned the bill could weaken constitutional protections against cost shifting. After debate, the committee voted 3-2 to send AB 2180 to the Senate floor. AB 1838 would require bidders on public works projects to disclose recent wage-and-hour violations; labor groups supported it as a transparency and worker-protection measure, while contractors opposed it as burdensome and likely to reduce competition. The committee voted 2-2 on the bill, leaving it open. Members also heard AB 2134, which would allow local elected officials to take parental leave without publicly disclosing private medical or family information in order to avoid removal for missed meetings; it received broad support and passed unanimously to Judiciary. AB 2308 would extend an existing tax-increment financing timeline for the San Francisco Transbay/portal project, and AB 2397 advanced on a unanimous vote. After the hearing, the committee later took up the bills on call and reported most of them out, including AB 1621, AB 2005, AB 2134, AB 2308, and AB 2397, while AB 1838 remained tied and AB 2180 was sent forward on a divided vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• Ballew is with the Texas Water Development Board. Ms.
• I ask the previous witness a question in terms of developing the scope.
• In reading the bill, do you see a time frame by which the scope would be developed?
• Scope that you might develop for a groundwater-surface water interaction study.
• Divided by the total storage from the Texas Water Development Board. For GMA 11?

Bills: HB24, HB27, HB24, HB27

Keywords: groundwater, conservation, water permits, sustainability, resource management, 997, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , and economic development.
• The Division of Community Development manages the state's land planning and community development responsibilities
• Many of our programs do fund smaller developers and developments, especially some of the special needs
• Fund smaller developers and developments, especially some of the special needs funding that we do, and
• for the development-disabled and like.

Summary: The committee met to review agency program funding as it prepared to build the budget, hearing brief presentations from six agencies and then taking member questions. Florida Division of Emergency Management highlighted its role in response, preparedness, recovery, and mitigation, describing a largely federal pass-through budget, major technology investments, and large disaster and preparedness grant activity. The Department of Commerce, Department of State, Florida Housing Finance Corporation, Department of Transportation, Department of Military Affairs, Florida State Guard, and Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles also summarized their budgets, staffing, and major programs, including workforce and economic development, elections and arts funding, housing assistance, transportation work programs, military readiness, state guard expansion, and highway safety and motorist services. Members focused questions on several issues: arts and library grant funding and whether award criteria had changed; Commerce’s rural infrastructure and job growth grants and why funds were not being disbursed faster; Florida Housing’s use of SAIL, Live Local, Hometown Heroes, and SHIP funds and how smaller agencies learn about and access funding; and DOT’s work program gap between agency and governor proposals. The most extensive questioning was directed to Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles about long DMV lines, vacancies, overtime, staffing shortages, and the ability to shift funds between divisions. The department said staffing and pay constraints, especially in South Florida, were driving service delays and vacancy rates, and that overtime was being used because troopers were leaving for better-paying jobs. The Florida State Guard was also questioned about its spending and procurement pace, including aircraft purchases and facilities. Its director said long procurement timelines explained the low initial spending and that obligations had risen sharply as contracts matured. Members also asked about the department’s public opposition to Amendment 3 and whether agency resources were used in that effort; the director said no contracts or purchases were made to influence the vote and said the colonel’s comments were made off the clock. The meeting ended with the chair asking agencies to respond promptly to unanswered questions, and the committee adjourned without any recorded votes or formal actions beyond receiving the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm the director for the Missouri Department of Economic Development.
• I am the Division Director of Business Opportunities with Economic Development.
• I am the Division Director of Business Opportunities with Economic Development.
• opportunities for research, development, and investment.
• It involves a lot of research and development.

Summary: The House Budget Committee heard the Department of Economic Development’s fiscal year 2027 budget presentation, beginning with Director Michelle Hadaway and division leaders. The department emphasized that most of its budget is federally funded and walked through requests for regional engagement, international trade and investment offices, business recruitment and marketing, Delta Regional Authority dues, business and community solutions, tax increment financing, MODESA, DRPP, CDBG, disaster recovery, Missouri Main Street, AmeriCorps, Missouri One Start, the Missouri Technology Corporation, semiconductor and API reshoring efforts, SSBCI, and other economic development items. Members repeatedly asked about lapses, one-time appropriations, whether general revenue could be reduced or replaced with other funds, and how the department prioritizes federal and other non-GR sources. Several members also praised regional engagement, Missouri Partnership, and rural economic development efforts. A major portion of the discussion focused on specific one-time or performance-based projects. Members questioned the large GR transfer for TIFs and MODESA, the use of funds for the Urban League plaza renovation, the Northeast Missouri housing fund, the Highway MM corridor, and the Missouri Technology Corporation. Department witnesses explained that many of these amounts are based on projected performance or are tied to multi-year obligations, and that some unspent balances reflect project timing, federal reimbursement timing, or delayed construction. The committee also discussed the Missouri Main Street program, with staff explaining it supports both new and existing Main Street communities and can be adapted for county-wide models. The committee spent significant time on workforce and innovation programs. Missouri One Start described its customized training and upskilling programs, including a statutory fund switch to align with existing law, while members asked for more data on participation and impact. Missouri Technology Corporation explained that reduced funding last year limited some entrepreneur-support programs, and that its venture fund has leveraged state dollars into private capital and jobs. Members also discussed the API reshoring item and semiconductor funding, asking what the money would do, what companies would benefit, and how much federal leverage the state could expect. Witnesses said the API request supports a nonprofit center working with existing Missouri companies to reshore pharmaceutical production, while the semiconductor item is tied to federal matching opportunities that have moved slowly. The committee did not take final action on the budget during the portion of the hearing provided. The chair recessed the committee to go to session, stating that the hearing would resume afterward and that public testimony on House Bill 2007 would follow completion of the department presentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• The client development evaluation report, or CEDER, The client development evaluation report, or CEDER
• The Community Resource Development Program exists to develop community provider capacity in response
• The Community Resource Development Program exists to develop community provider capacity in response
• The community resource development plan develops community resources to support services and needs for
• So if we are to develop new models, and we then have to develop the homes to support these individuals

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The Community Resource Development Program exists to develop community provider capacity in response
• The community resource development plan develops community resources to support services and needs for
• So if we are to develop new models, and then we have to develop...
• So if we are to develop new models, and then we have to develop the homes to support these individuals
• And development process. We do have an existing development pipeline with CPP and CRDP.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Human Services held an informational hearing on several Department of Developmental Services proposals, with no votes taken. The first item focused on equitable access to intake and services for regional center clients, including standardizing eligibility assessments and modernizing the strengths-and-needs evaluation used to inform individual program plans. DDS said the changes would create a more consistent, equitable, and evidence-based process statewide, while the LAO explained the proposals as a response to disparities and inconsistent regional center practices. Advocates and regional center representatives were divided: Disability Rights California, the State Council on Developmental Disabilities, and some providers supported modernization but urged clearer safeguards, more community co-design, and stronger legislative review; others, including some regional center leaders and family advocates, warned against replacing the CEDER too quickly and stressed the need to preserve the person-centered IPP process. Committee members emphasized fair process, fidelity, and the need for a validated tool, while also noting that the proposals would not change eligibility definitions or replace IPPs. The second major item addressed state-operated transitional and rehabilitative services, including proposed time limits for stays at Porterville Developmental Center and Canyon Springs, plus the merger of the Community Placement Program and Community Resource Development Program. DDS argued that people should not remain in locked facilities for years and that the proposal would create urgency, clearer transition planning, a right of return, and a more efficient single program for community resource development. Supporters, including Disability Rights California, the State Council, the Public Defenders Association, and some service providers, said the proposals align with Olmstead and the Lanterman Act, reduce overreliance on institutions, and should be paired with stronger mental health supports, oversight, and notice to counsel. Opponents, including a district attorney representative, argued that a blanket 24-month limit could endanger public safety and that some individuals require longer, case-by-case commitments. Committee members said they wanted a more comprehensive plan showing that community placements and supports will be ready before people are moved, and they questioned whether an arbitrary timeline could work for such a complex population. Throughout the hearing, members repeatedly stressed that any implementation must be fair, transparent, and backed by valid tools, adequate community capacity, and public input. DDS said both sets of proposals would require legislative approval and that the department is still open to changes in trailer bill language and further stakeholder consultation. The hearing ended with the committee indicating it would continue reviewing the proposals and hear public comment, but no formal action was taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• of development.
• we feel is ripe for development, meaning it has infrastructure, there's development around it. ...is
• right for development, meaning it has infrastructure, there's development around it.
• , meaning it's within the path of development and development has caught up, that's where we will look
• And it's interesting: we are specifically targeting solar development and not other kinds of development

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 2150, which continues the State Land Department until July 1, 2030. Members questioned the commissioner extensively about agency procedures, backlog, appraisals, auction practices, privilege claims in the Fontamonte audit, and the Coyotes land transaction. The committee also discussed the Griffin amendment, which required quarterly updates, a public hearing on the department’s strategic plan, changes to conceptual land use plans and five-year disposition plans, and legislative findings. After debate over oversight and accountability, the amendment was adopted and HB 2150 was returned with a do pass recommendation by a 6-4 vote. The committee then considered House Bill 2975, which would suspend the State Land Department’s solar scoring map and require new mining and housing resource maps, with the amendment changing the mapping deadline and requiring the maps to be posted online. Supporters said the bill would improve fairness and maximize trust revenue for schools by avoiding favoritism toward solar; opponents argued the solar map is only a guidance tool and that removing it could reduce transparency and revenue. The department said it was neutral but asked for additional staff or consultant support if the bill passed. The committee adopted the amendment and passed HB 2975 as amended on a 6-4 vote. House Bill 2781 followed, addressing solar plant decommissioning, restoration, financial assurance, insurance, and a remediation fund. The amendment narrowed the bill to decommissioning standards and limited its reach to projects receiving permits after the effective date. Testimony focused on the need to ensure solar sites are restored and that taxpayers are not left with cleanup costs; several speakers cited abandoned or aging energy infrastructure as a cautionary example. The committee adopted the amendment and passed HB 2781 as amended by a 6-4 vote. Finally, the committee began House Bill 2267, which would classify certain utility-scale wind or solar projects within four miles of residential property as a public nuisance, with exceptions and grandfathering for existing projects. The sponsor argued the bill responds to concerns about large renewable projects near homes and property value impacts, while the amendment narrowed the scope to utility-scale wind and solar and excluded rooftop solar and existing projects. The transcript cuts off before any final action on HB 2267.

Transcript Highlights:

• among affordable housing developers.
• among affordable housing developers.
• You know, what can we do to incentivize developers?
• You know, what can we do to incentivize developers?
• You know, what can we do to incentivize developers?

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on Initiative Petition 25-03, House Bill 5000, which would allow single-family homes on small lots in areas with adequate infrastructure. Committee chairs outlined the Article 48 process and the hearing format, then heard first from two subject-matter experts. Under Secretary Chris Clutchman of Housing and Livable Communities explained that the proposal would amend Chapter 40A’s Section 3 (the Dover Amendment) to require most municipalities, except Boston, to allow single-family homes on residentially zoned lots of at least 5,000 square feet with 50 feet of frontage and access to public water and sewer, while still allowing reasonable local regulations on setbacks, height, bulk, and short-term rentals. He distinguished the proposal from Chapter 40Y starter-home zoning, said implementation would likely require regulations to address issues such as wetlands, infrastructure capacity, and nonconforming lots, and answered committee questions about lot subdivision, MBTA Communities, and the relationship to existing zoning tools. Attorney Susan Murphy testified that the petition would significantly override local zoning and could create conflicts with existing statutes, including Chapter 40A Section 6 protections for certain nonconforming lots, subdivision control law, and other residential zoning districts. She raised concerns about how “access” to water and sewer would be defined, whether the measure could apply in business or industrial districts where residential uses are allowed, and whether the proposal could allow large homes on small lots without any affordability limits. She also warned that the measure could have significant infrastructure impacts and argued that the Legislature should consider broader, more comprehensive housing legislation rather than expanding exceptions to the zoning framework. Committee members asked both experts about frontage, lot size, infrastructure capacity, and how the proposal would interact with 40Y and MBTA Communities. The proponents, led by Andrew McCulla of the Legalized Starter Homes Coalition, argued that Massachusetts faces a severe housing shortage and affordability crisis, citing high home prices, high rents, declining listings, and outmigration of younger residents. They said the measure would legalize modest single-family homes on smaller lots, increase housing supply, and help first-time buyers and downsizing seniors, while leaving most other local rules in place. Other proponents, including representatives from Abundant Housing Massachusetts, the Charles River Regional Chamber, and individual residents, emphasized workforce retention, the need for more starter homes, and the view that large minimum lot sizes are a major barrier to production. Committee members pressed the panel on the lack of any home-size or affordability requirement, possible effects on 40B compliance, the number of new lots and homes that might result, and the fact that the ballot initiative would not be amendable by the Legislature. The hearing then turned to opponents from the Massachusetts Municipal Association, who urged the committee to take no action. MMA leaders said zoning should remain a local decision made by residents and elected local officials, and argued that the proposal would preempt local control with a one-size-fits-all mandate. They also said the measure is impractical because many communities with water and sewer are already at or near capacity, so infrastructure availability does not necessarily mean development capacity. The hearing ended during the MMA’s testimony, with no vote or final committee action taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• Both Clark County and the cities in those counties are authorized to adopt development regulations to
• They can also modify development regulations to include the development of such freight uses in rural
• the development of freight rail-dependent uses in rural lands.
• the development of freight rail-dependent uses in rural lands.
• There's no economic development from FRD has occurred, and there's none currently planned.

Summary: The committee heard four bills. On kit homes (ESSB 5552), staff explained the bill would direct the State Building Code Council to adopt rules for residential kit homes of 800 square feet or less by March 31, 2027. Prime sponsor Sen. Jeff Wilson said the bill would add housing options and asked that kit homes be treated as a distinct category from modular or factory-built structures; members asked whether current rules exist and whether the bill would cover 3D-printed homes. The public hearing was postponed, and later one supporter testified that the bill would help create clearer statewide standards without changing local zoning or safety requirements. On SB 5467, staff said the bill raises the thresholds for water-sewer districts to sell surplus property without notice or by private sale, increasing the personal property threshold to $5,400 and the real property threshold to $7,500. Sen. Keith Goehner said the change simply updates outdated limits to reflect inflation and improve efficiency. A representative of the Washington Association of Sewer and Water Districts supported the bill, noting the thresholds had not been updated since 2011 for real property and 1993 for surplus property. The committee closed the public hearing without action. The committee also heard SB 5820, which would repeal Clark County’s authority to apply a freight rail-dependent use overlay to certain lands under prior law. Sen. Adrian Cortes argued the existing exemption has harmed agricultural and forest lands, led to environmental violations, and cost taxpayers money, while local supporters said the overlay has not produced promised economic benefits and should be removed. Opponents, including a railroad operator, the Association of Washington Business, and others, said the rail line supports economic development, rail-served industrial demand, and existing contractual and public investments, and warned repeal could strand investments and limit future freight and climate-friendly transportation options. The hearing was closed with no vote. Finally, the committee heard SB 5995, which would remove the 2031 sunset from the existing prohibition on using public port funds to buy fully automated marine cargo container handling equipment, while continuing to allow zero- and near-zero-emission equipment purchases. The sponsor and labor witnesses said the bill protects family-wage jobs, keeps taxpayer money from subsidizing automation, and preserves human oversight for safety and efficiency. Port and shipping industry opponents argued the bill is premature, could reduce port competitiveness, and should remain subject to the current sunset so the policy can be revisited later. The public hearing was closed with no action taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> burdens on small developers. burdens on small developers.
• </c> same resources which large developers same resources which large developers have<00:19:09.200><c
• </c><00:24:37.440><c> is</c><00:24:38.240><c> fraudulently</c> a developer is fraudulently a developer
• Uh, representing developers.
• </c><00:52:58.960><c> where</c> development. um where the develop where development. um where the develop

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• ALSO WITH A PARTICULAR INTEREST IN WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT.
• WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT AS WELL. I WILL TALK MORE ABOUT THAT.
• ADDRESSING DOMESTIC WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT.
• WE PROMOTE STEADY GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT AND CROSSOVER OF THE MARITIME WORKFORCE.
• THE FOCUS ON THE CONTINUED DEVELOPMENT OF U.S.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They also do economic development. They connect people with health care.
• So the money provides direct economic development to these villages.
• Libraries also support workforce development and local entrepreneurship.
• But the main thing was they developed a really nice library there.
• In terms of economic development, we are very appreciative of the New Mexico Economic Development Department's

Summary: The committee heard a lengthy presentation from the New Mexico Rural Library Initiative in support of fully funding the rural library endowment with an additional $29.5 million. The presenters described rural libraries as essential community infrastructure that provide not only books and internet access, but also early childhood programs, adult education, workforce support, telehealth, disaster response, and civic meeting space. They argued that the endowment would provide stable annual support for staffing and operations, help sustain libraries in very small towns and tribal communities, and support new or developing libraries. Members asked about eligibility, county coverage, how funds are distributed, and whether the state tracks broader outcomes such as job placements or certifications; the presenters said the State Library administers the funds and that the initiative itself is a nonprofit capacity-building organization, not the fund manager. Some members raised concerns about whether an endowment is the best long-term model versus recurring annual appropriations, and about the need for better reporting and state-library involvement. The committee then heard from food bank leaders Jill Dixon and Katie Anderson about food security and its economic impact. They said New Mexico’s five food banks and more than 500 partner agencies serve all 33 counties, distribute over 45 million meals, and rely mostly on philanthropy, with some state and local support. They emphasized that SNAP is a major economic driver, supporting grocery access, jobs, and local spending, and that recent legislative growth funding helped food banks respond to a surge in demand during a SNAP disruption. They also highlighted food banks as community hubs that can connect people to health care, job training, and other services, including through clinic referrals and closed-loop systems. In response to questions, they said food access gaps remain in some rural areas, that clients can generally seek food at other distribution sites without barriers, and that longer-term solutions should include more grocery access, healthy corner stores, and stronger broadband and health care infrastructure. The final presentations came from the Gallup-McKinley County Chamber of Commerce and the Artesia Chamber of Commerce. Gallup-McKinley described a shrinking workforce, youth outmigration, crime, health care shortages, malpractice costs, and gross receipts tax burdens as major barriers to rural economic growth, and urged action on workforce pipelines, housing, public safety, malpractice reform, and tax/regulatory changes. Artesia highlighted its murals, library, sports tradition, oil and gas, agriculture, federal training center, and refinery, while also noting workforce shortages, health care recruitment challenges, housing constraints, and the need for quality-of-life investments and more flexible regulation. The committee also briefly heard a bill presentation proposing a New Mexico-Ireland Trade Commission to promote bilateral trade and investment, especially in technology, agriculture, and energy sectors. No votes were taken because quorum was not reached, and the endorsement item was not acted on.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our Economic Development Cabinet does a great job.
• Our Economic Development Cabinet does a great job.
• Rural development was my primary reason for running for office.
• </c> you want to talk about rural development you want to talk about rural development in<00:08:40.440
• <c> primary</c><00:09:17.880><c> reason</c> Rural development was my primary reason Rural development

Keywords: Reuploaded to restore full meeting, 958, all

Summary: The Senate Standing Committee on Agriculture met with a quorum and adopted a committee substitute for Senate Bill 28, which would create a framework for the $5 million in agricultural economic development funding included in the 2024 budget. Commissioner of Agriculture Jonathan Shell testified that the bill is intended to support agriculture-focused economic development, especially processing and further processing projects, by giving the Department of Agriculture tools to identify opportunities, convene partners, and offer incentives. He emphasized the role of the new economic development division in the department and said the effort is meant to complement, not replace, the work of the state Economic Development Cabinet. Shell and several senators described the bill as a rural development tool aimed at helping smaller communities attract projects that fit their scale. He cited examples such as poultry processing, grain and elevator operations, milling, and specialty crop ventures, arguing that local processing can create jobs, strengthen markets for farmers, and keep more value in Kentucky. Senators discussed the need for return-on-investment metrics and clawback provisions for unsuccessful projects, and Shell said the framework includes those concepts. He also said the department is working on opportunities in sustainable aviation fuel, biofuels, and other markets that could bring more acres into production. Members also raised questions about small-farm innovation, raw milk, and direct-to-consumer opportunities. Shell said raw milk testing and related consumer protection issues are more closely tied to the University of Kentucky and the department’s consumer/environmental protection functions than to the bill’s economic development focus, but he said the department can help expand small-farm programs such as Kentucky Proud, Buy Local, KOAP, CAP, food-as-medicine efforts, LFPA, and farm-to-school initiatives. The discussion also turned to beef processing and feedlot development, with Shell saying Kentucky wants a beef processor but first needs to prove it can feed cattle at scale; he said changing conditions in western states could create an opening for Kentucky if it can build the necessary supply chain.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have the, uh, next to our K Kola, um, development, or excuse me, the Koa development, which we're
• c> development</c><00:38:08.240><c> which</c><00:38:08.359><c> we're</c> me the coua development which
• </c><00:38:22.119><c> which</c> our kamakana ali uh development which our kamakana ali uh development
• The other part of Kakaʻako's development was what was contemplated: that private developers, you know
• </c> you already were part of the development you already were part of the development but<00:47:40.520

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard several transportation and arts-related measures. HB 307 on special member plates drew written support from Protect Ohana, and HB 531 on a University of Hawaiʻi Cancer Center specialty plate received strong support from the Cancer Center and the American Cancer Society, both emphasizing cancer research, patient care, outreach, and public awareness. HB 706 would require skateboard users under 16 to wear helmets, and HB 1231 would expand red light photo enforcement; both drew support from transportation and safety advocates, while the Judiciary raised concerns about citation volume, staffing, manual processing, and the need for consultation and a phased rollout. The committee also discussed HB 54, which increases penalties for repeated excessive speeding offenses; the Attorney General’s office supported the enforcement rationale and fingerprinting language, while the Public Defender opposed the bill, arguing it adds harsh penalties and jail time despite broader efforts to reduce excessive punishment. For the camera-enforcement bills, the Department of Transportation said the red-light and speed-camera programs would be expanded gradually, with existing intersections converted first and additional locations added over time, and noted that the system would require about $2 million and significant automation for the Judiciary. The Judiciary repeatedly asked for more time, public input on camera locations, and effective dates that would allow staffing and system changes. On HB 1166, which funds the automated speed enforcement program, DOT proposed technical amendments to make the citations non-moving violations and to align the statute with the red-light program; the Judiciary again said it had no position on the policy but needed time and consultation to absorb the workload. HB 235, a North Shore red-light imaging bill, drew similar Judiciary concerns and support from a testifier who said enforcement would improve compliance and reduce crashes. The committee also heard HB 1159 on commercial harbor evacuations, with Hawaii Emergency Management Agency supporting the bill as a way to give harbor masters enforceable authority to order vessels out during emergencies. The discussion focused on whether the measure would affect all commercial harbor users, including smaller fishing vessels, and whether it would conflict with Coast Guard authority; the bill’s proponents said it would let the state enforce orders already issued by the captain of the port and protect cargo lanes during crises. Finally, HB 17 on the Hawaiʻi Community Development Authority was described by HCDA as a housekeeping and structural bill that would update its purposes, allow it to assist other agencies, and replace multiple county boards with a single program reporting to the 17-member board. DHHL supported the bill because of potential transit and infrastructure benefits for Kapolei and nearby homestead developments, and committee members discussed future financing tools such as improvement districts, TIF, and other mechanisms to fund infrastructure early in the development process.