Transcript Highlights:

• The only other one I'll impact.
• </c> significant impact. significant impact.
• these that might be impacting?
• I just don't know at what impact.
• I just don't know at what impact.

Summary: The meeting opened with a quorum call, the Pledge of Allegiance, a prayer, and approval of the prior meeting minutes. The first presentation was from Bo Craycraft of the Judicial Form Retirement System, who gave an update on investment performance, asset allocation, cash flow, and projected employer costs. He reported strong fiscal year 2025 investment results, with both the legislative and judicial retirement plans outperforming their actuarial assumed rates of return and benchmarks, driven largely by U.S. equity performance. He also noted the plans remained near their target asset allocation and continued to experience negative cash flow, though he said that was manageable in context of strong asset growth. Craycraft then discussed a recent experience study and actuarial assumption changes, especially a revised salary growth assumption and a higher cash balance interest credit rate. He said these changes increased projected employer costs, with contributions rising from about $700,000 to a projected $2 million in later years, though he expected the eventual 2025 valuation and investment gains to reduce that estimate. Members asked about mortality assumptions, the impact of the experience study on liabilities, and the sharp increase in the judicial plan’s projected employer cost. Craycraft explained that the increase was driven mainly by the updated assumptions and that no other major plan changes were involved. At the chair’s request, Craycraft also addressed the recent rise in Medicare Advantage premiums for the plan’s health coverage, saying the 2025 increase was largely tied to Part D changes and the Inflation Reduction Act and had been about 45%, but that future growth was expected to be under 5%. After his presentation, the committee moved to the Kentucky Public Pensions Authority update, where the next speaker began by saying the funds had exceeded actuarial assumed returns for the fiscal year.

Transcript Highlights:

• Other impacts on the cost of living, as was stated, are inflation, supply chain issues, and housing affordability
• We can't affect inflation. We can't impact the supply chain challenges.
• We can't impact inflation, we can't impact supply chain issues.
• It's less expensive, less impact.
• and state impacts.

Committee: Senate Environmental Quality

Summary: The committee first heard SB 872 by Senator McNerney, which would dedicate $150 million annually each for Central Valley subsidence repairs and Delta levee improvements. The author and supporters, including Restore the Delta and State Water Contractors, described the bill as an urgent, bipartisan effort to protect State Water Project conveyance serving 27 million people, prevent levee failure, and safeguard billions in state assets. Support came from a broad coalition of water agencies, labor, environmental groups, and local governments; there was no opposition testimony. Because the committee was operating without a quorum at the time, the bill was heard as a subcommittee item and no final vote was taken then. The committee then took up SB 981 by Senator Niello, which would require CARB to include cost-of-living impacts in its existing economic analysis for major regulations. The author argued the bill would improve transparency by showing effects on gasoline, electricity, food, housing, and business costs, while supporters from agriculture, manufacturing, business, propane, and restaurant interests said it would help lawmakers understand affordability impacts. Opponents, including the Coalition for Clean Air and the Union of Concerned Scientists, argued it would add red tape, delay rulemaking, and require CARB to make speculative predictions. The chair and other members expressed concern that the bill was redundant, burdensome, and too narrow because it singled out CARB rather than addressing affordability across state government; no vote was taken in the excerpt. SB 887 by Senator Padilla would require large data center projects to undergo CEQA review, but offer streamlined treatment for projects meeting strong environmental, labor, and community-benefit standards. Supporters, including TURN, IBEW Local 569, and several environmental and local-government groups, said the bill would protect communities from high energy and water use, cost shifting, and pollution while still allowing responsible development. Opponents from the Data Center Coalition, Silicon Valley Leadership Group, Bay Area Council, and others argued the standards were overly prescriptive, potentially unattainable, and would drive investment out of California. After a quorum was established, the committee voted 3-1 to pass SB 887 as amended to the Senate Energy, Utilities and Communications Committee, with the bill kept on call. Finally, SB 1008 by Senator Ochoa Bog would renew the CEQA exemption for California Public Utilities Commission-ordered closure of at-grade rail crossings, which had expired at the start of 2025. Union Pacific and other supporters said the measure would restore a long-standing safety tool and help eliminate redundant crossings more quickly. With no opposition testimony, the committee approved the bill unanimously, 4-0, and kept it on call.

Transcript Highlights:

• The $574 million is set by construction inflation.
• The $574 million is set by construction inflation.
• The $574 million is set by construction inflation.
• If we have negative inflation, $574 could go down.
• Is that helping inflate your cost to a degree possibly?

Committee: House Ways & Means

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, it doesn't impact the First Amendment in any way.
• I mean, I would consider that, and intent and impact are two different things.
• I think the impact of that statement is bullying.
• So if inflation goes up 2%, you get 2% more.
• Necessary government should grow as needs grow: inflation, population.

Transcript Highlights:

• Sections 3 and 4 show the impact of the attendance policy change, with only centers impacted in 2027
• Turning now to the fiscal impact of the proposed sub.
• Sections 3 and 4 show the impact of the attendance policy change, with only centers impacted in 2027
• expected to have a material impact on PERC’s workload.
• expected to have material impact on Perk's workload.

Bills: HB2689 , SB5832 , SB5922 , SB5944 , SB5988 , SB6151

Committee: House Appropriations

Keywords: Working Connections Child Care, child care subsidy, subsidized child care, Washington DCYF, Department of Children, Youth, and Families, low-income families, child care providers, licensed child care centers, family child care, market rate survey, subsidy rates, income eligibility, state median income, SNAP, Basic Food, collective bargaining, provider reimbursement, daily payment, half-day care, partial-day care

Transcript Highlights:

• What is in fact impacted? I think industry might have some estimates that...
• And yes, all those would be inflation-adjusted.
• Those have negative impact on wildlife there.
• ranching impacts as well, that we can do restoration.
• And livestock impacts or ranching impacts as well, that we can do restoration efforts that can benefit

Committee: Joint Arizona Off-Highway Vehicle Study Committee

Summary: The Arizona Off-Road Vehicle Study Committee met to review Senate Bill 1519 and broader OHV policy issues, including funding, mitigation, enforcement, and education. Staff summarized the bill’s amended provisions: raising the OHV/ATV weight threshold from 2,500 to 3,500 pounds, directing ADOT to create a new usage classification, creating an Off-Highway Vehicle Law Enforcement Fund, and setting a 50% vehicle license tax for vehicles in the 2,500–3,500 pound range. Members discussed how many vehicles would be affected, with industry testimony estimating about 2,600 new Arizona sales in that weight class in 2025 and growth of roughly 10% annually. Committee members also debated whether changes should be revenue-neutral to ADOT/HIRF or instead generate dedicated enforcement and mitigation funding without reopening HIRF distribution. The committee then turned to education. Staff reviewed SB 1567, which requires OHV course completion before issuance of an OHV indicia and includes a report due December 1, 2026. Game and Fish said the mandatory education appears to be improving behavior, especially helmet use by children. Several witnesses, including representatives from Riding Arizona and ABATE Arizona, supported a consistent statewide training model and suggested expanding the requirement from owners to operators, with possible reciprocity or compact-style recognition with other states. Members also raised practical questions about proof of completion, online access, and how law enforcement would verify compliance. For mitigation and enforcement funding, committee members and invited stakeholders discussed the scale of the need. A research presentation from Arizona Sportsmen for Wildlife Conservation estimated about $3.5 million annually for additional law enforcement and about $7.5 million annually for natural resource mitigation, for a combined target of roughly $11 million per year. The estimate was based on county sheriff input and existing federal land-management data on illegal or user-created roads, with a statewide rough range of 12,000 to 17,000 miles of roads needing some form of closure or decommissioning. Members emphasized that the estimate did not include all possible costs, such as fence repair, tank restoration, or environmental compliance, and discussed soft versus hard closures, prevention, and the need to pair any mitigation spending with enforcement and education. No formal vote was taken in the portion provided; the committee mainly received information, asked questions, and continued discussion of possible recommendations.

Transcript Highlights:

• The impact is both measurable and human.
• And our data reflects this impact.
• You have heard from Morgan on impacts to the broader UW system.
• We support and encourage the $155 million spend to address HR1 impacts.
• My name is Sheila Morley of the Family Impact Network.

Bills: SB5998

Committee: Senate Ways & Means

Keywords: fiscal appropriations, budget, state funding, financial management, operating expenses

Transcript Highlights:

• So, you know, those offices and access to those experts is really impactful for our businesses.
• I'm the CEO of DH, a social impact communications agency in Washington.
• ...or impact fees or whatever to put these lower-cost houses on the market?
• There is a real problem out there with inflated costs.
• Inflated costs lead to higher premiums for you and I on our next round of policies.

Bills: SB5871 , SB5919

Committee: Senate Business, Trade & Economic Development

Keywords: motor vehicle, glass repair, insurance claims, consumer protection, regulations, fire safety, insurance incentives, best practices, community protection, voluntary measures

Transcript Highlights:

• can scale to great heights and create many jobs, as well as revenues that can have a significant impact
• In this way, you can see that economic development really changes people's lives and impacts them.
• I'm the CEO of DH, a social impact communications agency in Washington.
• There is a real problem out there with inflated costs.
• Inflated costs lead to higher premiums for you and I on our next round of policies.

Summary: The Senate Business, Trade, and Economic Development Committee met for its first session under the committee’s new name and heard a work session on Washington’s economic development policy from the Department of Commerce. Commerce described its Office of Economic Development and Competitiveness, including small business finance, export assistance, business attraction, and sector development work, and emphasized the need for a statewide economic development strategic plan with regular review, stakeholder input, and attention to rural and regional needs. Members asked about foreign trade offices, federal funding uncertainty, tax competitiveness, workforce programs, and the role of the Keep Washington Working program. Commerce said the state’s trade and investment efforts are valuable but face funding challenges, and that Washington must compete on more than taxes, including its business ecosystem and workforce. The committee then heard public testimony on Senate Bill 5919, which would encourage fire districts and insurers to develop voluntary incentives for wildfire mitigation best practices related to agricultural activities. The sponsor described the bill as a way to reward farmers for practices such as defensible space, fire breaks, equipment storage, and avoiding high-risk work during red flag conditions. A fire chief testified in support, citing recent standing grain fires and the need for practical incentives in rural areas. The bill was described as having no appropriation and no requested fiscal note. Members also heard testimony on Washington in the Making 2040 from the Association of Washington Business and a business owner. Supporters said the 16-year economic vision plan was built from broad public engagement and focuses on workforce, business climate, infrastructure, housing, and community. They argued Washington needs more housing, a more competitive regulatory and tax environment, and reliable energy to support growth. Senators questioned how the plan would achieve its housing goals and what specific regulatory changes were needed; AWB said it would provide a regulatory study soon. The committee also received a wildfire mitigation work group update from the Office of Insurance Commissioner, which recommended stronger community mitigation, better data sharing, consumer transparency, and a possible grant program for home hardening, though it did not reach full consensus on a single property mitigation standard. Finally, the committee held a public hearing on Senate Bill 5871, which would prohibit assignment of benefits in property and casualty insurance and set new rules for motor vehicle glass repair claims, including ADAS-related disclosures and limits on steering and inducements. The sponsor and supporters, including the Office of Insurance Commissioner, Safelite, NAMIC, and the Northwest Insurance Council, said the bill would reduce auto glass fraud, improve transparency, and help stabilize premiums. Independent glass shop owners and the Independent Glass Association opposed the bill as written, arguing it would favor large vertically integrated companies, restrict small businesses, and fail to address insurer steering and conflicts of interest. Several witnesses requested technical amendments, and the committee took no final vote before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• The fiscal impact of this is indeterminate and subject to appropriations, but it removes all fiscal impact
• Van Horn for the fiscal impact. Thank you. Good morning, Mr.
• We heard the impacts, the fiscal impact should go down regarding these line amendments.
• We heard the impacts, the fiscal impact should go down regarding these line amendments.
• This amendment is estimated to have no impact on the expenditure or revenue impacts of the underlying

Summary: The committee began with a public hearing on Substitute House Bill 1592, which would change how state public defense funds are distributed and, in the substitute version, keep current law on state funding responsibility while revising the allocation formula. Staff explained the bill would shift county and city distributions to a pro rata, caseload-based model, allow very low-density counties to request OPD to provide some or all public defense services, require additional data collection and reporting, and direct OPD to study caseload reductions and retention. Representative Peterson said the bill is meant to create a better structure for future state support of indigent defense without the very large cost of the original proposal. Testimony from counties, cities, OPD, defenders, and local officials was strongly supportive, emphasizing a statewide public defense crisis, rising local costs, staffing shortages, and the need for a fairer funding model. The committee then heard Substitute House Bill 1742 on environmentally sustainable urban design and Substitute House Bill 1906 on water system regulation and water rates. HB 1742 would create a center in Ecology to promote sustainable urban design, fund design competitions and grants, and establish an advisory council; the sponsor said the bill reflects a desire to support a pilot project through alternative funding, and there was no public testimony. HB 1906 would require more planning and notice for Group A water systems, add customer notice and right-of-first-refusal provisions for some ownership changes, and direct the UTC to consider external funding sources, capital planning, and rate smoothing when setting water rates. Water utility and PUD witnesses supported the goal of improving transparency and consolidation of failing small systems, while noting the substitute reduced some fiscal concerns. The committee also heard HB 2248 on Secretary of State corporate and charity filings, HB 2438 creating the SEED scholarship for early childhood education students, and HB 2515 addressing emerging large energy use facilities such as data centers. HB 2248 would redirect part of annual filing fees to the Secretary of State revolving fund, require initial reports from nonprofits and LLPs, and change trademark certificate procedures; the fiscal note showed modest revenue losses, and the division supported restoring the fee split for operational funding. HB 2438 would transfer $10 million annually from the GET account to fund scholarships and wraparound services for early childhood education degree seekers, with testimony from early learning advocates and a student describing workforce shortages and personal financial barriers. HB 2515 drew extensive testimony both for and against: supporters said it would protect ratepayers, water resources, and grid reliability by requiring tariffs, reporting, clean-energy requirements, and a fee on large energy users; opponents argued it singled out data centers, could hurt investment and jobs, and included unrelated labor and procurement provisions. After public testimony, the committee moved into executive-session briefing on several bills and amendments, including HB 1903 on statewide low-income energy assistance, HB 1909 on a court unification task force, HB 1982 on vacating certain convictions tied to treaty Indian rights, HB 2034 on LEOFF Plan 1 retirement changes, HB 2105 on employer notice of federal I-9 audits, HB 2210 on ranked-choice voting, HB 2215 on Climate Commitment Act fuel supplier obligations, and HB 2271 on post-consumer recycled content requirements. Staff summarized proposed substitutes and amendments, with several changes aimed at reducing or shifting fiscal impacts, narrowing agency duties, or striking provisions entirely.

Transcript Highlights:

• That shows the general fund impact by agency.
• So now you get a better view of the impact for the Military Division, for instance.
• And so there are inflators in those contracts.
• And so that's what you're seeing on contract inflation to increase those budgets.
• I've listed out each of the statewide impact for those five that have... ...of the statewide impact for

Summary: The Senate Finance and House Appropriations committees met to review budget rescission options and related statewide budget decisions for fiscal year 2026. Keith Bybee of DFM walked members through a packet outlining the governor’s recommended rescissions, plus two additional agency reduction scenarios of 1% and 2%. He explained that the governor’s package would reduce appropriations by about $177.5 million and nearly 100 FTEs, while the added 1% and 2% scenarios would deepen reductions further. He also clarified that some agencies were exempt or partially exempt from the additional cuts, including public schools, Medicaid services, corrections, and Idaho State Police, and that the Secretary of State had proposed a one-time contract savings instead of participating in the full additional reduction. Members discussed why the committee was considering further reductions despite existing reserves and a balanced budget outlook, with supporters emphasizing uncertainty around tax conformity, revenue forecasts, and other policy bills that could affect the budget. Several members expressed concern that the proposed cuts were ongoing, broad, and could create instability for agencies, while others said the process would give work groups a clearer target and more flexibility to adjust budgets later. Bybee and the co-chairs repeatedly stressed that the goal was to right-size the budget and preserve flexibility as more revenue and policy information becomes available. The committee also reviewed proposed cash transfers totaling about $106.7 million to help balance the budget, including transfers from the In-Demand Careers Fund, Water Pollution Control Fund, Strategic Initiatives Fund, Idaho Opportunity Scholarship Fund, and Permanent Building Fund. Members asked whether those transfers were legally permissible and were told the legislature has authority to move money in the treasury for balancing purposes. Finally, Bybee outlined statewide decisions for maintenance budgets, including personnel benefit cost increases, contract inflation, statewide cost allocation, a small military CEC adjustment, and options for a 3%, 4%, or 5% ongoing base budget reduction. The co-chairs said motions would be brought forward on Friday, and the committee adjourned with plans to continue hearings the next day.

Transcript Highlights:

• , lack of materials, and obviously the inflation that took place since COVID has extremely increased
• </c> materials and obviously the inflation materials and obviously the inflation that<00:04:07.439><c
• </c><00:04:30.759><c> for</c> obviously be a very large L impact for obviously be a very large L impact
• Increasing property taxes has a significant impact on our residents and businesses.
• </c> narrow the streets has a dramatic impact narrow the streets has a dramatic impact uh<01:12:43.159

Bills: HF220 , HF230 , HF240 , HF241 , HF295 , HF429 , HF490 , HF505 , HF574 , HF576 , HF581 , HF865 , HF918 , HF1085 , HF1449 , HF1452 , HF1454 , HF602

Committee: House Capital Investment

Keywords: HF220, Minnesota transportation, highway user tax distribution fund, trunk highway fund, Minnesota Department of Transportation, MnDOT, transportation finance, dedicated funds, funding restrictions, arts in transportation, cultural strategies, transportation project planning, project design, project construction, placemaking, public art, infrastructure spending, state statutes 161.045, HF230, Wyoming

Transcript Highlights:

• DPA has had tremendous impact on rebuilding and reshoring industrial base capacity and it is essential
• Can you indicate or give an idea about the impact on these decisions and with respect to mobilization
• So that is not going to be impacted because it doesn't exist today.
• One is, in fact, the impact of COVID and both the inflation in general costs and the increase in cost
• In fact, DOD is still issuing contracts today with an inflation, an annual inflation clause of somewhere

Committee: Senate Subcommittee on Personnel

Transcript Highlights:

• It also included compensation increases for their staff and some general inflation.
• How has that impacted, if at all, this budget?
• How has that impacted, if at all, this budget? Yeah. Ms. Yes, Mr.
• And what impact does that have on permitting?
• So there are some impacts there as well. Senator Wintrow. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Summary: The Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee heard budget presentations for the Endowment Fund Investment Board, the Department of Lands, and the Department of Environmental Quality. The EFIB presentation emphasized its small staff, low administrative costs, and a modest request for a laptop replacement. The Department of Lands presentation focused heavily on fire suppression funding, the fire suppression deficiency fund, and the agency’s endowment and forest management work. Director Dustin Miller said 2025 fire costs were just over $40 million, noted that the Legislature had previously funded the deficiency account, and warned that current holdbacks could reduce staffing for fire operations, especially in eastern Idaho. He also explained a proposed shift of 1.25 FTE and $160,000 from the Abandoned Mines Lands Fund to the Navigable Waterways Fund, and discussed House Bill 511 as a possible future fire-preparedness funding source. Committee members asked detailed questions about how the fire suppression deficiency fund works, when it can be used, and whether it can cover prevention or only active fires. Staff explained that the fund is for active suppression and that any negative balance would later be settled through a supplemental request. Members also asked about staffing, vacancy rates, and the impact of budget reductions on fire readiness and forest health work. Miller said the agency had filled many key vacancies but still faced recruitment challenges, and he described the Eastern Idaho Forest Protective District and the agency’s growing Good Neighbor Authority work with the U.S. Forest Service. The Department of Environmental Quality presentation covered staffing, water infrastructure funding, loan and grant programs, air and water quality, and solid waste oversight. Director Jess Byrne said targeted pay increases had reduced turnover and vacancies, and that DEQ had distributed more than $835 million in grants and low-interest loans over five years, mostly to small communities. He also said the agency has fewer staff than 25 years ago despite a much larger population, leading to permit backlogs and reduced monitoring. Byrne explained that the Drinking Water Loan Fund is built from federal capitalization grants, state match, and repayments, and that its rising balance reflects awarded but not yet reimbursed projects rather than unused money. He also said DEQ is considering fee increases in air quality and drinking water programs, and supported a proposed solid waste transfer only if it includes a fee structure. No votes were taken, and the committee adjourned after the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Lastly, expenses would include land acquisition, planning and design costs, impact fees, permitting fees
• Finally, Senate Bill 208 offers a practical and impactful solution to a pressing need.
• And the first impact is clear.
• Second, it'll address inflation and rising costs.
• All right, inflation is roughly just regular inflation.

Bills: SB208 , SB628 , SB777 , SB1042 , SB2354 , SB2477 , SB2521 , SB2523 , SB2608 , SB2703 , SB2778 , SB2835 , SB2965 , SB2367 , SB3044

Committee: Senate Local Government

Summary: The Senate Committee on Local Government met with a quorum and limited public testimony to two minutes per person. The committee heard Senate Bill 628 by Senator Zaffirini, which would clarify that counties may enter interlocal agreements with emergency service districts to administer and enforce county fire codes, including for multi-county ESDs in the committee substitute. Witnesses from Travis County ESD-11, the Travis County Fire Marshal’s Office, and a member of the public supported the bill as a way to reduce duplication, costs, and jurisdictional confusion. Public testimony was closed and the committee substitute was left pending. The committee then heard several housing-related bills. Senate Bill 208 by Senator West would create a Workforce Housing Capital Investment Fund to provide zero-interest loans to nonprofit builders for workforce housing; Habitat for Humanity representatives, a Brownsville nonprofit developer, and housing advocates supported it as a way to finance infrastructure and land development for affordable homes. Senate Bill 2835 by Senator Johnson would allow cities to opt into single-stair apartment buildings for small-scale, multi-story housing; supporters said the design is safe and could expand housing supply, while the Texas APA expressed qualified opposition over code-process concerns and fire-safety questions. Both bills were left pending after testimony. Additional bills heard included SB 1042 updating the Kimble County Hospital District’s enabling law; SB 1708, a committee substitute protecting familial property divisions from platting requirements; SB 2778 raising the ESD expenditure threshold requiring board approval from $2,000 to up to $50,000; SB 2608 expanding LIHTC eligibility for certain public housing projects; SB 3044 adding board representation for Marfa and Presidio on the Presidio County Underground Water Conservation District and adjusting an exemption; SB 2367 extending park board authority to Waller County; SB 2523 clarifying ETJ reduction procedures and owner opt-out rights; SB 2521 requiring death-certificate reporting to appraisal districts to help address squatting and homestead exemption issues; and SB 2477 easing office-to-residential conversions in larger cities. In each case, the bills were laid out, testimony was taken, and the measures were left pending subject to call of the chair. The committee then recessed until 15 to 30 minutes after adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• So if you look at someone who's 84, 85 years of age, and inflation, Most vulnerable.
• So if you look at someone who's 84, 85 years of age, and inflation goes up, how do they make up that
• Those are the people that would be impacted more substantially.
• We try and go towards what we know impacts it.
• This only would impact PSRS, but that's only if you move this bill forward.

Committees: House Pensions , House Local Government, Elections and Pensions

Transcript Highlights:

• Now let's look at just The last five years, when you adjust for inflation, wireless is down 24%.
• Bureau of Labor Statistics, which has emphasized that wireless has weathered inflation that we all know
• And that additional choice is also going to have a direct impact.
• We're doing better than inflation. We're doing better than everybody else.
• Percent changes relative to inflation over time don't pay rent; bills do.

Summary: The Assembly Communications and Conveyance Committee held an informational hearing on the state of broadband affordability in California. Chair Tasha Berner said the committee was examining how broadband prices, access, and affordability are affecting households, especially after the end of the federal Affordable Connectivity Program and amid concerns about federal resistance to state broadband regulation. She noted the committee’s continued interest in policy options for 2026 and referenced prior legislation, including AB 353, that would have required affordable home internet as a condition of doing business in California. Industry witnesses from U.S. Telecom and CTIA argued that broadband and wireless prices have generally fallen in real terms even as inflation and other household costs have risen, citing competition, infrastructure investment, and faster speeds as the main drivers. They said California’s higher costs are tied to permitting delays, taxes, copper theft, and legacy obligations such as COLR requirements, and they urged the Legislature to preserve market incentives, reduce fees and regulatory burdens, and support infrastructure deployment. They also discussed fixed wireless access, federal BEAD funding, and Universal Service Fund reform, arguing that more entities benefiting from networks, including tech platforms, should contribute to support programs. Consumer and public-interest witnesses presented a different view, saying California still has a serious affordability and adoption problem, especially for low-income households. Sunny McPhee of the California Emerging Technology Fund said broadband adoption has improved dramatically over time, but about 500,000 households remain offline or underconnected and many low-income households still pay above the FCC affordability benchmark. Ernesto Falcon of the CPUC Public Advocates Office said California’s market is losing its competitive edge, with prices higher than in other states and meaningful price pressure coming mainly from fiber competition at the gigabit tier. He said roughly 4.8 million Californians are limited to one gigabit option and estimated that more competition could save consumers more than $1 billion annually. Both witnesses emphasized the need for stronger transparency, targeted subsidies, and a permanent affordability solution, including extending and refining the CPUC broadband Lifeline pilot and advancing SB 716. Public commenters, including representatives from cable providers, nonprofits, and digital equity organizations, largely supported SB 716 and a permanent broadband affordability program. Several urged the committee to remove a cap on the Lifeline program, expand the CPUC pilot, and invest in digital navigators, outreach, and enrollment assistance. The hearing ended without a vote or formal action, after the chair thanked the witnesses and public commenters for their testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• Your support will have lasting impact.
• Inflation. It does create efficiencies in two ways.
• Inflation. It does create efficiencies in two ways.
• There is no impact to state revenue.
• The four-year near general fund expenditure impact is $460,000.

Summary: The committee first heard a briefing on the proposed Senate capital budget, Substitute Senate Bill 6003, which would spend about $723 million total using debt-limit bonds, Climate Commitment Act funds, and other cash resources. Staff described major investments in housing and homelessness, human services, local infrastructure, flood response, water conservation and clean energy, K-12 school modernization and seismic work, and higher education projects. Members then took public testimony from a wide range of advocates and project sponsors, most of whom urged the Senate to preserve or increase funding for specific projects in the final budget, including affordable housing, permanent supportive housing, child care facilities, food banks, behavioral health and substance use treatment centers, tribal courthouse relocation, school modernization, community colleges, university projects, floodplain restoration, community forests, and local civic or cultural facilities. Several witnesses also asked the Senate to match or approach House funding levels on items such as the Housing Trust Fund, permanent supportive housing, the Community Forest Program, Floodplains by Design, and CCA-supported clean energy and water projects. The chair noted that amendments to the capital budget were due the next day at noon. The committee then received a briefing on Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill 2251, which would restructure Climate Commitment Act accounts by repealing three existing accounts and replacing them with two new accounts: a CCA operating account and a CCA capital account. Staff explained that the bill would preserve most existing uses while changing revenue distribution formulas, capping Ecology administrative costs, expanding allowable uses for EV-related costs, housing, and carbon capture/sequestration, and changing reporting and tribal consultation provisions. The bill also shifts some reporting from annual to biannual and modifies the thresholds for tribal-supported and overburdened-community investments. The fiscal note was described as relatively small, with the main impact being the revised revenue allocation structure. Public testimony on the CCA bill was mixed. Supporters, including the League of Women Voters, said the restructuring better aligns spending with the intent of the CCA and could improve investments for tribes and overburdened communities. Critics, including the Washington Policy Center, argued the bill still lacks strong requirements to ensure CCA spending is effective and objected to reducing the frequency of the state’s climate-spending report. No votes were taken during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Tariffs on Mexico are likely to have a similar impact.
• This has a huge impact on Vermont.
• In our meeting, we discussed the importance of the Inflation...
• Inflation.
• And when we look at inflation under the Biden administration...

Committee: Senate Finance Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• Ninety-five percent said it would negatively impact their businesses.
• Inflation has hurt all of us.
• Times will they be impacted by domestic violence before they actually report it?
• My second thought is just the impact on Medicaid services and providers.
• But this bill is not the only thing that impacts Medicaid providers.

Committee: House House Health & Human Services