Transcript Highlights:

• The 2024 federal rule was a major step forward. It... Reimbursement rates.
• The 2024 federal rule was a major step forward.
• So when we talk about single source of nutrition, there are at least 20... ...talk about single source
• Majority Leader Aguiar-Curry, thank you for bringing this bill forward.
• Majority Leader Aguiar-Curry, thank you for bringing this bill forward.

Summary: The Assembly Health Committee heard several bills focused on workforce access, consumer protection, behavioral health parity, and public health safety. AB 1591 by Assembly Member Michelle Rodriguez would create a podiatric medicine pipeline program to address shortages of podiatrists, especially in rural and underserved counties; it drew strong support from podiatrists and medical groups and no opposition. AB 2011 by Assembly Member Hart would codify federal mental health and substance use disorder parity standards into state law; supporters argued it would preserve access if federal enforcement weakens, while health plans and insurers opposed it as premature and potentially confusing. The bill was moved on a due pass motion to Appropriations and remained on call after a roll vote with several ayes and some noes. The committee also considered AB 2311 by Assembly Member Chiavo, which would allow public health care district hospitals to directly employ physicians. Supporters said the change would help district hospitals recruit and retain doctors and stabilize care in underserved communities, while CMA and emergency physicians warned it could weaken the corporate practice of medicine protections and physician autonomy. Members raised concerns about guardrails, but the author said the bill would continue to be refined; it passed on a due pass motion to the Business and Professions Committee. AB 2030 by Assembly Member Lowenthal would prohibit sales of over-the-counter diet pills and weight-loss or muscle-building supplements to minors, with supporters citing eating disorder risks and opponents objecting to scope, age-verification, and retail requirements. The bill passed on a due pass motion to the Judiciary Committee. AB 1864 by Assembly Member Berman would require screening of gene synthesis orders to prevent misuse for bioterrorism and would authorize enforcement penalties for noncompliance. Supporters from Stanford, Encode, and the medical community said the measure would align California with federal best practices and address growing biosecurity risks, while life sciences representatives raised concerns about operational burdens and supply-chain impacts. Members discussed whether the bill should include an urgency clause and how to keep the standards current; it passed to the Judiciary Committee. AB 2457 by Assembly Member Connolly would standardize and speed up Medi-Cal managed care credentialing for physicians, and it passed to Appropriations with broad support. Finally, AB 2302, presented on behalf of Assembly Member Celeste Rodriguez, would require infant formula manufacturers to test for toxic elements such as lead and arsenic and post results publicly; pediatric and disability advocates supported the measure as a transparency and infant safety bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:27:30.799><c> of</c> environmentally friendly source of environmentally friendly source of nitrogen
• So it's not normal to try to ram this bill through with a one-vote majority. That's not a majority.
• So it's not normal to try to ram this bill through with a one-vote majority. That's not a majority.
• So it's not normal to try to ram this bill through with a one-vote majority. That's not a majority.
• This bill through with a one-vote majority. That's not a majority.

Bills: HF1704

Committee: House Agriculture Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• We're talking about major projects. We're not talking about routine maintenance.
• </c><00:25:52.440><c> state</c> you a sense of the the U major state you a sense of the the U major state
• And then point source implementation grant program.
• And then point source implementation grant program.
• </c><00:36:45.640><c> implementation</c> then uh point source implementation then uh point source implementation

Committee: House Capital Investment

Transcript Highlights:

• Their source terms are so low that the planning zone is documented.
• So if you look at critical materials and their applications by source, it's all over.
• After I drop out the water, so now I've got a source of CO2. What can I use CO2 for?
• also as a heat source.
• Containment, and that is actually one of the major emissions sources attributed to nuclear: just this

Committee: Joint Advanced Nuclear Energy Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you very much. early bills, whether it's a majority early bills, whether it's a majority report
• available revenue sources Other available revenue sources including<03:28:14.720><c> Medicaid,</c><03
• remove that language because while sources were unavailable to the district sources were unavailable
• </c> in terms study it with the majority. in terms study it with the majority.
• We need some other revenue sources.

Committee: House Education Funding

Transcript Highlights:

• I'll also note that these census data are the backbone of many other data sources that we rely on.
• Retailers, when possible, want to be able to source from local Washington farms.
• The problem is that sourcing local...
• The problem is that sourcing locally is becoming increasingly cost prohibitive.
• Washington's operating environment makes in-state sourcing harder to sustain.

Committee: House Agriculture & Natural Resources

Summary: The House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee held a work session on food systems and food security, with no public testimony. The first panel covered household food security and data. Marie Spiker of UW explained how food insecurity is measured, its health impacts, and the importance of reliable data, warning that the federal Census food security data is being terminated and that Washington’s WAFOOD surveys are a useful but non-representative complement. Katie Raines of WSDA described the state’s food systems work, including efforts to build shared data and dashboard monitoring, coordinate across agencies and partners, and strengthen the hunger safety net and local food supply chain. The committee then heard from Tracy Roof of the University of Richmond, who gave a history of SNAP/food stamps as both an anti-hunger program and an agricultural support tied to the farm bill. She described how the program evolved from Depression-era commodity distribution to a permanent federal-state program, how it became countercyclical during recessions, and how state policy changes and outreach increased participation. She also noted SNAP’s economic multiplier effects and said Washington’s enrollment is in the middle of the pack nationally, while future federal changes could reduce eligibility and shift more costs to states. A later panel focused on food security challenges and opportunities across the food system. The Washington Food Policy Forum, through Danny Madrone and Chris Elder, outlined its consensus-based recommendations on food insecurity, climate and water, regional infrastructure, farmland protection, and support for small and mid-sized farms. A joint industry panel from the Farm Bureau, Retail Association, and Food Industry Association emphasized agriculture’s economic scale, rising costs, loss of farms, retail theft, and the importance of local grocery stores and SNAP/WIC partnerships. State agency representatives from DSHS and DOH described current program impacts and risks: DSHS said federal H.R. 1 could require Washington to pay up to 15% of SNAP benefits and tighten eligibility, while DOH highlighted WIC, farmers market nutrition, fruit-and-vegetable incentives, and a new Medicaid waiver project, but warned that unstable funding and the end of SNAP-Ed threaten program continuity. No votes were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• Those topics come to us from a variety of sources.
• Those topics come from a variety of sources.
• that coverage kind of covers every major facet of state government.
• Those topics come to us from a variety of sources.
• that that coverage kind of covers every major facet of state government.

Summary: The committee first heard a presentation from the State Auditor’s Office on its current performance audit work plan. The auditor described how topics are selected from a large pool of ideas and coordinated with JLARC to avoid duplication. Four ongoing audits were highlighted: Liquor and Cannabis Board operations, oversight of authorized entities serving students with disabilities, the long-term care provisions of Initiative 1163, and Medicaid managed care versus fee-for-service costs. Other planned topics included housing commission tenant ownership follow-up, DSHS vendor payment growth, implementation of the Since Time Memorial curriculum, and Washington State Ferries operations. Members asked about coordination with JLARC, and the auditor said the office regularly exchanges work plans and monthly updates with JLARC staff. The committee then received the State Auditor’s report on how charter schools identify and support at-risk students. Auditors reviewed four schools—Catalyst Public Schools, Innovation High School, Pinnacles Prep, and Rainier Prep—and focused on English language learners, homeless students, and special education students. The audit found that the schools met nearly all legal requirements reviewed and used many leading practices, including small-group instruction, culturally responsive environments, family engagement, and multi-tiered systems of support. The main recommendations were to improve documentation and written procedures so staff can apply practices more consistently. One area of partial compliance involved language access planning, and MTSS implementation varied across schools. Committee members asked why those four schools were selected, how the sample compared with district and statewide student populations, and whether the audit examined K-2 MTSS requirements. The auditor explained the schools were chosen for student need, geographic diversity, and authorizer representation, and that K-2 MTSS was not evaluated because only one school served those grades. Representatives from the Charter School Commission and charter school advocates responded positively, saying the report reflected strong practices and could help spread effective approaches. Public testimony from the Washington State Charter Schools Association and Excellent Schools Washington also supported the report and urged continued sharing of best practices across schools.

Transcript Highlights:

• On estimate or just slightly under for some of the sources.
• Tax sources doing, so that's listed from biggest to smallest of the top five.
• sources that feed into GR, and we added funds over there as well.
• So this next slide shows some of the smaller tax sources.
• the collections for that tax source come in the latter half of the fiscal year.

Bills: S0110 , S0434 , S0856

Committee: Senate Finance and Tax

Keywords: property assessment, wind damage, home improvements, real estate, tax exemption, Florida statutes, ad valorem taxes, property listings, tax estimation, disclosure, Florida, residential property

Transcript Highlights:

• So sometimes people also look at other sources and other data.
• So sometimes people also look at other sources and other data.
• I believe it requires a majority vote on the local level.
• That's a major change.
• But I think that's a major change.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on State Administration and Regulatory Oversight

Summary: The Joint Committee on State Administration and Regulatory Oversight held an oversight hearing on draft regulations implementing Article 97 of the Massachusetts Constitution under Chapter 274 of the Acts of 2022, the Open Space Act. Chairs Cabral and Collins framed the hearing as a review of how the new process for dispositions or changes in use of Article 97 land would work, including public notice, environmental justice protections, replacement land, appraisals, and the role of the legislature. Under Secretary Stephanie Cooper and Commissioner Adam Bakke testified for EEA/DCAM, followed later by Deputy Inspector General O’Neill and Deputy Inspector General Giles on appraisal review. Much of the discussion focused on how the draft regulations would operate in practice. EEA said the regulations would require advance public notice, define “comparable location” for replacement land, and allow the Secretary to make findings on whether an action would adversely affect environmental justice communities. Members pressed for longer public comment periods, clearer notice to local officials, more frequent updates to the site evaluation tool, and a clearer definition of terms such as “limited duration” for permits and licenses. EEA said the regulations are intended to standardize a process that has been handled through policy and case-by-case review, and that the legislature still retains the final authority to approve any Article 97 disposition. Committee members also questioned whether the draft rules shift too much discretion to the Secretary and whether the proposed “proponent” process could allow private entities to drive Article 97 actions. EEA responded that non-public proponents would still need municipal support and legislative sponsorship, and that the regulations do not create a new avenue to bypass the existing home rule and legislative process. Members raised concerns about the current policy’s unanimous-vote requirements for municipal commissions, the proposed waiver provisions, whether MEPA applies, and the lack of explicit enforcement or penalty language in the act or regulations. EEA and DCAM said the act does not provide an enforcement mechanism and that disputes would generally be handled through the courts or the Attorney General. The Inspector General’s office explained its role in reviewing appraisals for special legislation, including Article 97 matters, to ensure compliance with USPAP standards and to forward its review to DCAM. The hearing did not include any votes or formal committee action; members indicated that the committee may later issue recommendations to the executive agencies based on the testimony and questions raised.

Transcript Highlights:

• CARB's proposal raises major unanswered questions about impacts on transportation agencies and other
• It sets a declining limit on major polluters, major sources of pollution, covering factories, energy
• The first major adjustment in the April proposal provides additional relief for electric bills.
• It is not CARB's role to identify a viable funding source.
• So as a result of those refinery closures, where do we source that fuel from?”

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

Transcript Highlights:

• We've spent down the majority of that. We have $184,000 left in that fund.
• We are completely finished in 3 major segments of the project.
• And when I say a major segment, I'm thinking like a layman. Mr.
• source of water.
• , and one of those funding sources is local funding.

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.

Committee: Joint Water Topics Overview Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• This is intended to be a flexible source of funding to support a variety of transportation needs related
• In recent years, we've implemented major procedural improvements to the program, like upgrading from
• This is a flexible source of funding where the Secretary of Transportation, the Secretary of Housing,
• So anyway, the sourcing of those vehicles, right?
• ... ...source?

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Bonding, Capital Expenditures and State Assets

Summary: The Joint Committee on Bonding, Capital Expenditures and State Assets held a public hearing on H. 5279, a transportation bond bill financing long-term improvements to municipal roads and bridges. MassDOT and A&F testified in support, describing the bill as a major transportation investment package centered on a $300 million annual Chapter 90 local aid program, with $200 million distributed by the traditional formula and $100 million by lane miles to better support rural communities. They also outlined funding for MBTA rail reliability and modernization, transportation projects that support housing production, a new DCR parkway resilience and safety program, and reauthorizations of existing highway and municipal grant programs such as the Municipal Pavement Program and Shared Streets and Spaces. Witnesses said the bill would help address aging infrastructure, improve safety and resilience, support housing development, and leverage Fair Share surtax revenue through the Commonwealth Transportation Fund. They explained that some authorizations are structured to allow the state to issue special obligation bonds, and clarified that the bill authorizes the full spending amount for federally aided projects even though the state only borrows the 20 percent match, with the federal government reimbursing the rest. Committee members asked about bridge repair needs, the size of the backlog, how housing-related transportation funds would be allocated, MBTA vehicle procurement, and whether rural communities would have fair access to the new funding streams. Several members praised the administration’s financing approach but urged future Chapter 90 increases to keep pace with inflation and requested more attention to rural municipal capacity and bridge safety needs. The Massachusetts Municipal Association also testified in strong support, emphasizing that Chapter 90 is the most important tool for cities and towns to maintain local roads and bridges and urging prompt passage before construction season. No votes were taken; after testimony concluded, the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• As we've now learned, a great deal of the university's funding comes from sources outside of the General
• more frequently if there was a major issue?
• Do you know of a situation where somebody has intervened to fix a major issue like that?
• For presidents' salaries, that's typically, they pay with foundation sources.
• Is there a source?

Summary: The Higher Education Budget Subcommittee met to hear a presentation from the Florida Auditor General’s office on recent operational audits of four universities and to discuss how audit findings are handled. The Auditor General explained that financial audits occur annually and operational audits at least every three years, with universities required to respond in writing to findings; the office generally follows up in the next audit cycle, though it can audit sooner if needed. Members asked about accountability, whether findings are referred to other bodies, and how internal university audit functions interact with the state audit process. The chair emphasized the committee’s oversight role in ensuring public funds are used appropriately. The audit findings highlighted issues at New College of Florida, Florida A&M University, the University of Florida, and Florida Atlantic University. At New College, auditors cited invoice/payment errors, delinquent student account collection delays, prohibited extra compensation, exceeding state remuneration limits for certain employees, weak purchasing card controls, construction management cost documentation issues, and subcontractor licensing documentation gaps. At FAMU, auditors found investment accounting classification issues, delayed bank reconciliations, late vendor payments, and incomplete annual employee evaluations. At UF, auditors reported concerns over a $6.4 million consulting contract, event and catering spending, president’s office hiring and salary practices, bonus and relocation payments, continued high compensation after the president transitioned to another role, travel expenses including charter flights, and remote work agreements. At FAU, auditors found distance learning fee revenue exceeded allowable costs by about $2.8 million, carry forward funds were underreported by about $77 million, and credit card controls needed improvement. Members pressed the Auditor General on whether overpayments were refunded, whether any findings involved statutory violations, and what enforcement exists beyond the audit report. The auditor said some issues were corrected by the universities, such as New College recovering excess compensation from foundation funds, but others would be revisited in future audits; if potential fraud were identified, it would be referred to the state attorney’s office. The chair closed by noting that accountability for public spending rests with the Legislature and the committee, and the meeting adjourned without any vote or formal action beyond receiving the presentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• of all employees in the unit rather than a majority of only those casting votes.
• We shouldn't subject employees to a union unless a majority of public employees want them.
• The majority over the entire bargaining unit is just insane.
• We heard a majority of the people in this room that are teachers, educators.
• would give such foreign sources access or control to that infrastructure.

Transcript Highlights:

• Cultural access has also had a major impact on students.
• By way of background, Washington's major business taxes, the business and occupation, or B&O tax... .
• Prior to 2021, the department looked at a variety of potential permanent ongoing funding sources for
• And they were not able to come up with a funding source for wildfire preparedness.
• It is now just a majority of facility reaching useful end of life.

Summary: House Finance met on Friday, January 23rd, and heard three bills. On House Bill 2194, staff explained that the bill would allow a county and a city within that county to both impose the cultural access sales and use tax at the same time, with the county providing a credit for the city tax. Representative Parsley said the change would let more jurisdictions support cultural, arts, science, and school-related programs. Olympia and Thurston County officials testified in support, describing grant funding for cultural organizations, free programming, and school access benefits; a committee member raised a question about how the change could affect county bond obligations. The committee then heard House Bill 2089, which would narrow a B&O tax preference for first mortgage interest by removing the requirement that a financial institution be located in 10 or more states, and direct the resulting revenue to the wildfire response, forest restoration, and community resilience account. Staff said the bill would raise significant revenue and have implementation costs for the Department of Revenue. Representative Scott said the bill was intended to restore wildfire funding and limit the preference to community banks, while opponents from the Washington Bankers Association and Community Bankers of Washington warned the bill could harm community banks and mortgage lending if not drafted carefully. The Department of Natural Resources and a public employee representative supported restoring wildfire preparedness funding. Finally, the committee heard a proposed third substitute for House Bill 1960, which would replace property taxation for new or repowered large renewable energy facilities and battery storage systems with a state and local excise tax structure, while also creating a local investment distribution account and a tribal capacity grant program. Staff and the sponsor described the bill as a way to reduce property tax shifts onto nearby taxpayers and provide more stable, predictable revenue for local governments and tribes. County officials, assessors, treasurers, and some clean energy and conservation groups supported the concept but asked for clearer definitions, payment timing, and rate adjustments; utilities and renewable developers said they supported the goal but opposed the bill as drafted because of concerns about the rates and the treatment of centrally assessed utilities. No votes were taken, and the committee adjourned after closing the hearings on all three bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• Their sole source of money is property taxes, and it will be very difficult to replace that source.
• The rollback rate then would not require any more than a majority vote.
• If you reduce a major funding source, what are the real implications? I'm going to say that again.
• When you reduce a major funding source, what are the real implications for the people of the state?
• Congress and the first woman to run for a major political party.

Transcript Highlights:

• , we can begin to stop this pollution from entering our bodies, our soil, and the soil. ...the source
• 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.
• It's a major issue. But what we're trying to say is we cannot afford to get these chemicals.

Summary: The committee heard AB 1603, which would restrict new PFAS pesticides from being registered in California and add transparency requirements for pesticide use reporting. The author and supporters argued PFAS are persistent, harmful chemicals that contaminate water, soil, and food, and said the bill would reduce future contamination and public health costs. Supporters included environmental and public health groups, water agencies, nurses, teachers, and local governments. Agricultural and chemical industry groups opposed the bill’s registration ban, arguing California already has strong pesticide review, that the measure could limit future safer formulations, and that it could raise costs and reduce farmers’ access to pest-control tools. Committee members raised questions about affordability, water contamination, and the role of state versus federal regulators; the author said the bill was needed because existing regulation is too slow and incomplete. No vote was taken because the committee lacked a quorum. The committee then heard AB 2635, the Just Transition for Landscapers Act, which would create voucher programs and other support for landscapers transitioning from gas-powered to electric equipment, while limiting penalties and adding privacy protections. The author and supporters said many landscapers are low-wage immigrant workers who cannot afford the upfront cost of electric equipment and should not be punished for complying with local air-quality rules. Air district representatives and other opponents said the bill could be too prescriptive, could divert limited air district resources, and could create administrative and language-assistance burdens; one air district moved to neutral after amendments. Committee members discussed the health benefits of electric equipment and the need to avoid placing penalties on workers. The bill was held pending a quorum. The committee also heard AB 1732, which would extend CEQA streamlining to public university and community college housing projects. The author, UC student representatives, and the University of California said the bill would help address student housing insecurity and speed construction on already planned campus sites. There was no opposition. The committee then took up AB 1744, the Clear Labels, Clear Seas Act, which would prohibit sunscreen products marketed as reef safe or reef friendly from containing certain chemicals that harm marine ecosystems. The author said the bill is a transparency measure, not a ban, and the committee expressed support; no opposition appeared. Additional bills discussed included AB 2152, which would streamline CEQA review for fire station projects and was supported by firefighters and local governments but opposed by contractors over a project labor agreement requirement; AB 2231, which would streamline two hospital projects in Santa Clara and Emeryville and drew broad support with no opposition; AB 2410, which would create temporary CEQA and Coastal Act exemptions for wildfire fuel-reduction projects and drew support from counties, cities, utilities, and fire officials but opposition from Sierra Club California over the breadth of the exemptions; and AB 2234, which would update geothermal exploratory project rules to reflect newer technologies, supported by clean power advocates and opposed or opposed-unless-amended by utility groups concerned about impacts on existing geothermal operations. Several of these measures were discussed with amendments, but votes were deferred where a quorum was not yet present.

Transcript Highlights:

• what we calculated off of the 2024 rule, the average differential is less than 200 so far, vast majority
• The majority of them have stop before they get here.
• come to us, I wanted to just reference they need, I think, for some data about alternative taxing sources
• And if there are other taxing sources that that come to mind and if one were to imagine using those other
• taxing sources in various combinations to obtain the 50 billion dollars just again, looking at sort

Transcript Highlights:

• Other funding sources are going to be available or which funds it needs to be.
• So the transfer section for MOSERS has all of the different funding sources.
• So the transfer section for MOSERS has all of the different funding sources.
• But a majority of that is for weight loss.
• It's the same funding source for the same purpose.

Committee: House Budget