Transcript Highlights:

• We've got resources at our disposal.
• So a lot of analysis to approach this?
• This is a resource for it can create.
• This is a resource for the<00:08:48.720> executive<00:08:49.120> branch<00:08:49.440>
• Uh, the analysis process is really kind of—>> that's what I get for being late.

Keywords: 0:20 Rollcall 2:28 Definition of Legacy system and demands of modern workplaces 10:48 Discussion of funding and planned expenditures 22:26 Contingency funding 23:16 Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The House Budget Review Subcommittee on Personnel, Public Retirement, and Finance heard a presentation from the Commonwealth Office of Technology on legacy IT modernization funds and how they are used to address outdated, unsupported, or unsustainable systems. David Carter and Carrie Welch explained the state’s definition of a legacy system under KRS 7A.180, emphasizing not only vendor support issues but also changing business needs, regulatory compliance, and the loss of institutional knowledge for older systems. They described the office’s review process for determining whether a project qualifies, including assessing business risk, comparing options such as upgrades, replacements, shared solutions across agencies, or commercial products, and then matching the project to available funding. The presenters said COT reports twice a year to the Interim Joint Committee on Appropriations and Revenue on progress with legacy modernization projects. They reported 30 projects funded to date, with 18 completed, and said remaining projects are still moving forward while agencies continue to identify modernization needs. They highlighted examples of completed work, including modernized security cameras, replacement of unsupported systems, migration of documents to the Commonwealth Enterprise Content Management Platform, restoration of vendor support, a digital policy acknowledgement portal, replacement of the State Police dispatch system, and digitization of paper records for faster retrieval and better disaster resilience. Members asked for more detail on how the $10 million request would be allocated, including system-by-system spending, the split between software, hardware, vendor contracts, and staff time, and how the office determines when a system needs replacement. COT said it did not have a system-by-system or cost-category breakdown at the hearing but could provide one later, and explained that the funds are intended for development and first-time acquisition costs rather than ongoing maintenance. They also said the $5 million annual request was based on prior years’ experience and that agencies often contribute some funding themselves, so the program could still operate if appropriated less than the full amount. The committee then approved the minutes and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• and effectively programs are using State resources, which include State funds.
• So my office is here as a resource for the legislature.
• <00:13:42.560> of independent objective analysis of independent objective analysis of program
• State resources which include State<00:13:49.079> funds<00:13:49.959> you<00:13:50.079
• for the legislature I here is a resource for the legislature I know<00:14:30.880> we're<00:14

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <01:04:18.880> to cost but we don't have that analysis to cost but we don't have that analysis
• <01:25:40.239> I resources that have been involved. I resources that have been involved.
• Um hundreds of hours of of resources.
• . costbenefit analysis is a crucial piece costbenefit analysis is a crucial piece of<01:39:56.400>
• So the question costbenefit analysis.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But I also have to look at this as a cost-benefit analysis of whether we're adding more requirements,
• But I also have to look at this as a cost-benefit analysis of whether we're adding more requirements,
• And also would just point out several of the other policy issues that are raised in the analysis that
• As noted in the committee analysis, impaction means solely that we have more applicants.
• By expanding access, this will ensure that more students have access to these critical resources.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And finally, I'll share some quantitative risk analysis.
• And looking at that same stochastic analysis, only 100 of our same...
• Starting with phase one: planning, scoping, and resource gathering.
• Once that comes in, then we can start doing the analysis of that data.
• We'll look at the cost analysis in detail.

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: The Select Committee on Pension Policy approved its minutes by roll call vote, then postponed an OSA annual update due to a family emergency. The committee received an Open Public Meetings Act refresher from Assistant Attorney General Kate Adams, who reviewed key compliance points including quorum and serial meetings, notice and agenda rules, executive session limits, public comment requirements, and the consequences of violations. She also noted a litigation hold notice sent to members and provided resources for further guidance. Staff then briefed the committee on E2 Second Substitute House Bill 2034, which restates and terminates LEOFF 1 on June 30, 2029, creates a restated LEOFF 1 funded by transferred assets, and places excess assets into a pension surplus holding account that could later be used by the state. The bill requires DRS to seek IRS guidance, directs OSA to calculate the transfer amount and assess any future unfunded liability, assigns implementation duties to DRS, OSA, the Pension Funding Council, the State Investment Board, and the Treasurer, and requires two SCPP studies on LEOFF 1 medical benefits and policy oversight. OSA’s actuary estimated the transfer to the surplus holding account at about $3.9 billion under current assumptions and said the bill increases the modeled chance of future state contributions if the restated plan falls below 100% funded; members asked about IRS timing, the 2029 transfer date, and whether the 110% buffer is sufficient. The committee also received an update on the LEOFF 1 medical benefits study required by the bill. Staff said the study will examine the administration of pension boards and medical liabilities, likely focusing on medical benefits, and will gather anonymized data from local boards, cities, counties, and related agencies over the next three years. Members and public commenters discussed the number and structure of local boards, whether spouses receive medical benefits, and the possibility of regionalizing or consolidating administration. No action was taken, but staff said they would return with milestones and further updates. Finally, staff outlined a possible Plan 3 study, prompted by DRS, to evaluate whether the original goals of Plan 3 have been met after 30 years. The proposed study would review historical context, member choice outcomes, policy questions, and possible recommendations over a two-year period. The committee also heard an update on new correspondence procedures, including a new online web form, a correspondence log in meeting packets, and removal of correspondence from the public website. During public comment, retiree groups urged the committee to pursue an ongoing COLA for PERS and TRS Plan 1, with interim ad hoc COLAs until then, while LEOFF 1 retirees urged caution about changing the current board structure and emphasized the complexity of medical benefit administration.

Transcript Highlights:

• Someone also did an analysis.
• And that is a public resource for the public.
• And that is a public resource for the public.
• And thank you for all the work on your analysis.
• really calling out in the analysis... ...the analysis, but really calling out in the analysis programs

Summary: The committee heard several housing bills, with the longest discussion focused on SB 79, which would allow more housing near high-capacity transit stops and on transit agency-owned land. The author and supporters argued it would address California’s housing shortage, reduce vehicle miles traveled, and strengthen transit systems by putting more residents near rail and rapid transit. Supporters included housing advocates, local officials, environmental groups, and transit-oriented development organizations. Opponents, including many cities, the League of California Cities, and some tenant and legal advocacy groups, raised concerns about affordability requirements, displacement, demolition protections, local control, and the bill’s interaction with existing local planning efforts. The committee discussed amendments to strengthen anti-displacement protections, minimum density, affordability standards, and a local flexibility alternative, and SB 79 was moved out on a due-pass-as-amended vote of 8-1, with one member not voting. The committee then took up SB 21, which would amend the Housing Crisis Act to allow limited unit reductions when converting deed-restricted SRO buildings into larger, more livable affordable units with private bathrooms, kitchens, and supportive services. The author and nonprofit housing providers said many SRO buildings are financially unsustainable and that the bill would preserve deeply affordable housing while improving conditions for residents. There was no organized opposition testimony at the hearing, though one business property group registered opposition. Members expressed support for the preservation-focused approach, and SB 21 was approved on an 8-0 vote and sent to the Assembly Committee on Local Government. Next, SB 92 was heard, a measure to close a density bonus loophole by limiting how much additional commercial floor area a project can receive and preventing the law from being used to justify very large nonresidential projects with only minimal affordable housing. The author cited a San Diego project as an example of the problem, and the City of San Diego supported the bill as a reasonable fix. Several labor and housing groups also supported it, while no formal opposition witnesses testified. The committee accepted amendments, members praised the effort to curb abuse while preserving feasibility, and SB 92 passed on a 7-0 vote. Finally, the committee began hearing SB 522, which would extend just-cause eviction protections to units rebuilt after disaster if they had previously been covered by the Tenant Protection Act. The author and the Los Angeles City Attorney said the bill would help preserve rental housing in disaster-affected communities, especially after the Pacific Palisades fires, and would not create new rent control. Opponents, including apartment, realtor, and property owner groups, argued it would add burdens to rebuilding and could discourage reconstruction. Members raised questions about whether existing law already protects returning tenants and whether the bill was necessary, and the hearing continued into committee discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• But I also have to look at this as a cost-benefit analysis of whether we are adding more requirements
• But I also have to look at this as a cost-benefit analysis of whether we are adding more requirements
• And also would just point out several of the other policy issues that are raised in the analysis that
• By expanding access, this will ensure that more students have access to these critical resources.
• I appreciate the thoughtful analysis and input that the committee has provided.

Summary: The Assembly Higher Education Committee heard several Senate measures focused on community college procurement, higher education access, and student support. SB 1154 by Senator Reyes would allow community college districts to use best-value procurement for public works projects over $1 million. Supporters, including San Bernardino Valley College, the San Bernardino Community College District, labor groups, and several districts, said it would improve delivery of complex facilities and align community colleges with other education systems. Opponents, including the Associated General Contractors, argued the bill’s skilled-and-trained workforce requirements and labor-compliance scoring would narrow the bidder pool and raise costs. The committee passed the bill to the Assembly Floor on a due-pass vote, with some members voting no or not recorded. SB 1255, also by Senator Reyes, would create a California Hispanic-serving institution designation. Supporters from HACU, the CSU Chancellor’s Office, UC, community colleges, and other education organizations said the designation would recognize campuses that serve large numbers of Latino and low-income students and strengthen accountability and student success. The committee approved the bill as amended and re-referred it to Appropriations, with one no vote. SB 1328, presented on behalf of Senator Cervantes, would require LGBTQ+ points of contact at satellite or branch campuses of CSU and community colleges, either through designated staff or regular office hours. Testimony emphasized gaps in access at remote centers and the need for confidential support; one member raised concerns about staffing, costs, and whether existing systems could meet the need remotely. The bill was passed as amended and sent to Appropriations. The committee also considered SB 960 by Senator Cabaldon, which would expand the circumstances under which community colleges could offer bachelor’s degrees in response to unmet workforce needs, especially where CSU programs are impacted or not realistically accessible locally. Supporters said the bill would help meet workforce demand and expand access for place-bound and adult learners. CSU and faculty representatives opposed unless amended, urging stronger partnership requirements, clearer workforce-need standards, and safeguards around duplication and Prop 98 funding. Members discussed impaction, regional access, and the role of partnerships; the bill was passed as amended and re-referred to Appropriations. Finally, SB 632 by Senator Otagan would extend the California College Promise fee waiver to part-time community college students enrolled in nine units. Supporters said many students cannot attend full time because of work, caregiving, and living costs, and the bill would better reflect student realities; the transcript ends during testimony on this measure, before any vote is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• Some are doing cost-versus-revenue analysis.
• And others are going to pour resources in to make sure that's a go.
• You know, like just asking the question: do we have the resources?
• She did an analysis using fall '24 and '25 for the 2027-29 biennium.
• We're not creating a brand new model, but that was the analysis.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• that you submit sort of a data analysis that you submit sort of a data analysis request<00:37:53.400
• and also helps to support the software tools for data analysis and reporting.
• Many departments and boards, they have contractors that assist with data analysis.
• We've put a lot of effort and resources into getting the board up to where it is today until Mr.
• We've put a lot of effort and resources into getting the board up to where it is today until Mr.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The working session focused on the New Hampshire Prescription Drug Affordability Board’s budget request and its recent work. Early discussion centered on a technical question about a statutory dedicated fund for donations: members asked why the budget did not show a line item for accepting donations, and DHHS CFO Nathan White explained that the statute already authorizes the fund, but because no revenue has been received yet, it does not appear in the budget. He said any future donations would go through the normal process under RSA 14:30-a, with fiscal committee and Governor and Council approval and a memo to the Department of Revenue Administration. The chair clarified that the account was not a prerequisite to soliciting donations, and White said the fund would supplement, not replace, General Fund support. Kirk Williamson, the board’s executive director, then presented the board’s mission and budget. He said the governor’s budget provides about $256,500 in the first year and slightly more in the second, all General Funds, and that the board had distributed a technical amendment to continue the executive director position. He described the board’s role as analyzing prescription drug costs, identifying savings opportunities, monitoring market trends, promoting transparency, and making recommendations to the legislature and public payers. He also emphasized that the board operates publicly, with live-streamed meetings and a stakeholder advisory council that includes unions, state agencies, Medicaid, corrections, higher education, and other stakeholders. A major topic was the board’s estimate of $6 million in potential savings, based on Medicare’s newly negotiated prices for 10 drugs. Williamson explained that the board used those federal negotiated prices as a benchmark to estimate what New Hampshire public payers might be missing by not having similar leverage, and said the board is trying to build evidence for future recommendations rather than directly setting prices. Members asked how those potential savings could become actual savings, and Williamson said the board is sharing findings through its advisory council and feedback loops, though it has not yet sent a formal recommendation letter to specific purchasers. He also discussed the difference between pharmacy-benefit spending, which relies heavily on PBM-negotiated rebates, and medical-benefit spending, which is administered differently and is being added to the board’s next report. Williamson highlighted other work, including a model on Humira and a pending legislative effort to improve biosimilar competition, plus a proposed state-backed pharmacy savings card that would be no cost to the state and could save users about $240 per prescription based on Connecticut’s experience. No votes were taken during the session.

Transcript Highlights:

• It continues to be appropriate for legislators to use state resources for job references or It is sort
• I mean, I could move it from the introduction to the analysis, but it's there.
• Yeah, I think it would make sense to move it to the analysis. Okay. Yeah.
• I mean, I could move it from the introduction to the analysis, but it's there.
• Yeah, I think it would make sense to move it to the analysis. Okay. Yeah.

Summary: The board approved the October 15 meeting minutes and then reviewed three employment disclosure forms involving staff or spouses employed by the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board and the Department of Corrections. The disclosures were approved unanimously. The board also adopted a proposed rule change to conform board rules to a prior statutory amendment that separated fines from costs. Members then discussed a draft advisory opinion interpreting the phrase “letter of recommendation” under the ethics statute. The draft would read the term broadly, allow legislators to decide when to write such letters when requested by a constituent, and reaffirm that it remains appropriate to use state resources for job references or scholarships for individuals the legislator has supervised or worked closely with at the legislature, as well as for certain gubernatorial appointments. Members generally supported the draft, but asked for possible clarification of the phrase “work closely with,” and approved the opinion as drafted with that caveat. The board also reviewed proposed future meeting dates, noting a concern that January 19 falls on Martin Luther King Jr. Day and may need to be changed. No final action was taken on the dates during the public portion. The meeting then moved toward executive session after adjourning the public portion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Some are doing cost versus revenue analysis.
• And others are going to pour resources in to make sure that's a go.
• You know, like just asking the question, do we have the resources?
• She did an analysis using fall '24 and '25 for the 2027-29 biennium.
• We're not creating a brand new model, but that was the analysis.

Summary: The Higher Ed Funding Committee met to review how North Dakota might identify and address low-producing academic programs and to discuss draft funding formulas for the university system. Lisa Johnson of the NDUS explained that the State Board of Higher Education is already developing a system-wide policy, using models from other states such as Texas, Virginia, North Carolina, Colorado, Kentucky, Ohio, and Connecticut. She described how low-producing programs are typically flagged by multi-year enrollment or completion thresholds, then reviewed for workforce demand, mission fit, cost, accreditation, and regional need before any action is taken. Committee members asked about what counts as a program, how costs are analyzed, whether certificates are included, how exemptions work for mission-critical or high-demand fields, and whether the board or legislature should set the rules. Johnson said the board is the appropriate body to lead the process, but legislators could use funding leverage if they wanted to encourage action; the chair asked the board to bring a detailed proposal to the June meeting. The committee then heard a Legislative Council presentation on a draft formula for UND and NDSU. The proposal uses fall census FTE enrollment, with a placeholder undergraduate rate of $7,000 per FTE and a graduate/professional rate of $10,500, plus incentives for completions in in-demand fields and research productivity. Alex from Legislative Council walked through the projected funding effects, noting that the model would increase funding for NDSU and reduce it for UND in the current biennium, with different results in the next biennium as enrollment changes are recognized. Members questioned the use of the placeholder rates, the definition of in-demand programs, the treatment of research funding, and the exclusion of state-appropriated dollars from the external grants calculation. The chair emphasized that the numbers were illustrative and that appropriators would set the actual dollar amounts later. A second draft formula for the other nine institutions was also reviewed. That model uses fall census FTE without a weighted economic factor, applies a higher undergraduate rate, and adds completion incentives for in-demand credentials and all other completions. Members noted that the formula would benefit some institutions, such as Bismarck State College, while reducing funding for others, such as Mayville State, and discussed whether the nine institutions should be treated more uniformly or split into smaller groups because of their different missions and sizes. Committee members and staff repeatedly stressed that the formulas are still being refined and that some institutions would likely need hold-harmless adjustments or other transition measures. The meeting ended with the chair directing the committee to continue the discussion later and to expect further work on both the low-producing program policy and the funding formulas.

Transcript Highlights:

• The motion is due pass as amended to the Committee on Natural Resources. Connolly? Aye.
• already and litigation resources flowing to fund all of this.
• And I think the analysis did a masterful job.
• already and and litigation resources flowing to fund all of us.
• It's very resource intensive.

Summary: The committee heard several environmental and consumer-safety bills. AB 405, the Fashion Act, would require fashion companies to disclose and manage toxic chemicals in their supply chains; supporters said it would reduce worker and consumer exposure and align with existing industry frameworks, while retailers and business groups argued it would duplicate existing laws and raise costs. After questions about DTSC workload, international standards, and affordability, the bill was moved on a due-pass-as-amended motion to Natural Resources and held on call with three votes. AB 762 would ban the sale and distribution of disposable vape devices; supporters emphasized battery-fire risks, recycling contamination, and waste impacts, while cannabis and convenience-store interests warned it would push consumers to illicit markets and harm legal businesses. The bill passed on a due-pass motion to Business and Professions with three votes and was held on call. The committee also adopted the consent calendar with six votes. AB 794 would direct California to keep in place the federal PFAS drinking-water standard if federal protections are weakened, with supporters citing health risks and the need for certainty, and water agencies opposing the emergency-rulemaking authority and potential costs. Members debated whether the bill was too broad and whether federal funds would cover implementation; the bill passed on a due-pass-as-amended motion to Appropriations with four votes and was held open. AB 1148, the Safer Food Packaging Act, would restrict certain chemicals in food packaging; supporters cited cancer and reproductive-health concerns, while chemical, beverage, and manufacturing groups argued the bill should go through existing regulatory processes and that some chemicals lacked feasible alternatives. The author said she would remove antimony trioxide later in the process after hearing opposition concerns; the bill passed on a due-pass motion to Judiciary with four votes and was held open. Finally, AB 1338 would allow local air districts to recover costs for implementing fence-line air monitoring at metal shredding facilities, building on prior legislation and local air district efforts in AB 617 communities. The author said the bill would preserve local control and improve efficiency, and the South Coast Air Quality Management District testified in support. The transcript ends as the district witness begins testimony, with no vote yet taken on AB 1338.

Transcript Highlights:

• For the record, Bob Meyer, Assistant Commissioner, Department of Natural Resources.
• <00:37:07.280> asset million in 20125 natural resources asset million in 20125 natural resources
• <00:37:48.720> and Minnesota's natural resources and Minnesota's natural resources and preserves
• commercial uses of Natural Resources commercial uses of Natural Resources this<00:41:33.240>
• <01:27:48.920> the water and sore system analysis the water and sore system analysis the analysis

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So with regard to resources, yes. So I'll give you an example.
• Chairman Sickler, that is the way that we did this analysis: yes.
• But at the time of this analysis, that's what those rates were.
• with workforce and employer resources.
• State resources with workforce and employer resources to focus on in-demand positions in the state.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• so I don't want to give an answer that's premature for our analysis.
• <00:29:21.440> and provide learning resources and provide learning resources and opportunities
• It's a sunrise analysis to create an insurance mandate.
• It's a sunrise analysis to create an insurance mandate.
• It's a sunrise analysis to mechanism.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs held a resolutions hearing on April 1, 2025, and considered a series of measures largely focused on housing, domestic violence, corrections, Native Hawaiian issues, and public safety. Early items included HCR 158 HD1 and HR 153 HD1, which request a Judiciary-led working group to improve landlord-tenant code provisions to increase housing supply; Hawaii Realtors testified in strong support, and there was no opposition. The committee also heard HCR 55 and HR 51 on studying the effectiveness of domestic violence, restraining order, and stalking laws. The Honolulu Prosecutor’s Office said some requested data may exceed judicial authority but that useful Judiciary data exists, while the Hawaii State Coalition Against Domestic Violence supported the intent but urged broader, better-funded, survivor-inclusive analysis across all counties and islands. Members asked for clarification on the proposed draft, and the witness emphasized narrowing the scope, including stalking, and extending the timeline. The committee then took up HCR 23 HD1 on the new Oahu Community Correctional Center. The Public Defender supported adding a courtroom but objected to language about transporting released detainees away from residential communities or public spaces as unconstitutional; the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation supported the measure and said one multipurpose courtroom would be sufficient, and that most released inmates are picked up by family or programs, with others transported to a bus depot. HCR 174 HD1/HR 170 HD1, on in-school based learning programs for youth in the juvenile legal system, drew strong support from Debt Free Justice Hawaii, which said the resolution was youth-led and could help replace fees and fines with community service and rehabilitation opportunities. HCR 185, on an audit of proposed mandatory health insurance coverage for Native Hawaiian healing and cultural practices, received comments from Pāpa Lokahi supporting the concept but warning that reimbursement issues are complex, that the community should restart broader conversations, and that the measure should not be rushed or unfunded; members questioned whether the resolution was the right vehicle and whether it could affect ACA implementation. Several Native Hawaiian and community measures were also heard. HCR 147/HR 147, creating a legislative working group on Department of Hawaiian Home Lands funding, had support from DHHL and the Democratic Party of Hawaii. HCR 193 HD1/HR 186 HD1, on transferring Native Hawaiian burial site management to OHA, was strongly supported by OHA, which also proposed adding recognized lineal and cultural descendants to the working group membership; the committee noted multiple supporting testimonies and no opposition on the House draft. HCR 8/HR 8, urging DOJ inclusion of Hawaii in the missing and murdered indigenous persons outreach program, was supported by OHA, which cited a task force report showing Native Hawaiian women and girls make up over 40% of missing persons cases despite being about 10% of the population. HCR 124 HD1/HR 120 HD1 on Hawaiian language resources had no testimony. HCR 180 HD1 on collaborative homelessness response drew comments from the Statewide Office on Homelessness and Housing Solutions and three support testimonies. HCR 72/HR 65 on county ethics standards also drew support only. HCR 100/HR 96 on competency in LGBTQ+ and culturally specific gender identity training received support from the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission and the Hawaii State LGBTQ+ Commission, which stressed the need for training that reflects Native Hawaiian and other Polynesian understandings such as mahu and fa’afafine. The committee continued with additional measures that were mostly noncontroversial. HCR 30/AHR 29 on enforcement against out-of-state vehicles had support from the Department of Transportation. HCR 43 HD1, studying highway patrol and speed cameras, had one opposition testimony. HCR 119 HD1/HR 115 HD1, endorsing Taiwan’s international participation and a U.S.-Taiwan trade agreement, was supported by DBEDT. HCR 62 HD1 and HR 57, on flying the National League of Families of American Prisoners and Missing in Southeast Asia flag year-round at the Capitol, had no testimony, though DBEDT supported the related measure. Throughout the hearing, members generally asked few questions, and the transcript reflects testimony, comments, and stated positions rather than any final committee votes or deferred actions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Biden on a whole range of analysis in those domains across many policy areas.
• Resource Conservation Districts primarily work with private landowners to do critical natural resources
• And that's what's made it hard for us to do any kind of analysis.
• The SRA fee has been suspended since July 2017 per public resources code.
• And they're outlined in public resource code 4214.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I call the Environment and Natural Resources Policy and Finance Committee to order.
• <00:07:21.319> and apply rigorous scientific analysis and apply rigorous scientific analysis
• that answers some an objective analysis that answers some fundamental<00:07:43.520> questions
• Their analysis found that the average time frames to issue these permits in Minnesota took one and a
• The estimates that I provided through the Policy Navigation Group's analysis are the closest that we

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee approved the January 21, 2025 minutes and then heard a presentation from the Minnesota Chamber Foundation on its report about Minnesota’s environmental permitting system. The presenters said the report was based on research by Barr Engineering and the Policy Navigation Group and argued that permitting delays can discourage investment and make Minnesota less competitive for manufacturing, mining, energy, clean tech, and other industrial projects. They highlighted that Tier 1 permits are generally issued quickly, but Tier 2 air and water permits often take much longer than the state’s 150-day goal, with some median timelines ranging from 419 to 771 days for Tier 2 air permits and similar delays for industrial water permits. The report also said Minnesota’s permit timelines were longer than peer states and estimated that reducing delays could increase annual output by $260 million to $910 million and support 960 to 3,400 additional full-time-equivalent jobs per year. Committee members asked about which businesses fall under Tier 2 permits, the economic impact of permitting delays, and whether the Chamber had discussed the report with the governor or MPCA. The presenters said Tier 2 permits typically involve higher-emitting facilities such as manufacturing, utilities, mining, and other industrial operations, and that the economic estimates were based on modeling rather than exact lost-job counts. They also noted that the governor had been briefed and that MPCA had been invited to the hearing but did not attend. The committee then took up House File 8, which Chair Heintzeman said is intended to improve permitting efficiency while maintaining environmental standards. He described provisions that would reduce the number of 60-day wetland application extensions, require MPCA to issue permitting efficiency reports twice a year, break out data on missed timelines by municipal versus industrial applicants, treat failure to meet the 150-day Tier 2 deadline as a final action subject to judicial review, and require quicker notice when applications are incomplete. He also outlined sections that would allow separate construction and operating permits, expand expedited permitting, and change environmental assessment worksheet petition rules. The bill was moved to be re-referred to the Labor and Workforce Development Committee, and the discussion began, but the transcript ends before any final vote on the bill is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• ,<00:15:18.280> especially can take a lot of resources, especially can take a lot of resources
• ,<00:15:22.560> many Um it uses time and resources, many Um it uses time and resources, many
• <00:29:15.600> of independent, comprehensive analysis of independent, comprehensive analysis
• policies, we need to have the resources policies, we need to have the resources to<00:48:35.960>
• This is the customer impact analysis, bill impact analysis.

Bills: SB3326

Keywords: renewable energy, energy storage, cost reduction, public utilities commission, Hawaii energy policies, 910, house, all

Summary: The joint committees on Energy and Environmental Protection and Labor heard SB 3326, a bill concerning a study of separating transmission from generation in Hawaii’s electric system. Testimony was largely opposed. Life of the Land argued that true separation on an isolated island grid has not been shown to work anywhere and said the bill would waste taxpayer money. Hawaiian Electric and the Public Utilities Commission also opposed the measure, saying Hawaii already uses competitive bidding for new generation, that the bill would add cost, complexity, and reliability risks, and that a new study would duplicate prior work. In response to questions, the PUC explained its existing competitive bidding framework and said it had not seen an island system fully restructure in this way. The chair then amended the bill’s intent to require the PUC to open a proceeding for an independent, comprehensive analysis of the state’s energy pathways, including cost reduction, financial risk, state energy goals, and reliability, rather than narrowly focusing on separation. Both committees voted to pass SB 3326 SD2 with amendments, with the Energy committee adopting the recommendation unanimously and the Labor committee adopting it with one reservation and two no votes. The Energy and Environmental Protection Committee then took up SB 2497 SD2, which would require electric utilities other than cooperatives to provide transparent, publicly accessible customer bill impact analyses and annual reports to the PUC. The Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs and the PUC offered comments, with the PUC supporting the intent. Life of the Land said the proposed disclosure requirements would be too complex for most ratepayers to use meaningfully, while Hawaiian Electric said the bill could raise costs and slow projects, though it acknowledged some of the language changes and said much of the information is already available through existing planning and regulatory processes. Hawaii Clean Power Alliance and one individual testified in support. No vote was taken on SB 2497 SD2 during the excerpt. The committee also heard SB 3183 SD2, which would bar higher-income taxpayers from claiming the renewable energy technologies income tax credit for certain residential solar systems and would change refundability rules. The Department of Taxation, the Hawaii State Energy Office, and the Tax Foundation offered comments, while the Hawaii Solar Energy Association and numerous companies and individuals opposed the bill. Opponents raised concerns about impacts on financing models and the solar market. Members asked the Department of Taxation for data on how credits are claimed by homeowners versus third-party owners and on the refundability of the credit; the department said it did not have the information immediately available but would follow up. The chair indicated decision-making would likely be deferred to allow further review, and no vote was taken in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Oh, I'd like to thank the committee staff for their thoughtful analysis.
• One other challenge we're looking at is resources.
• developers identifying where we can build those resources.
• We're all trying to build a lot of resources...
• We're all trying to build a lot of resources really fast.

Summary: The committee first heard AB 13, which would restructure the CPUC to increase legislative oversight, add legislative liaisons, require more detailed and timely reporting on rate-setting decisions, and add a public advocate member. The author and supporters argued the bill would improve transparency, accountability, and geographic diversity in CPUC decision-making amid rising utility rates. Witnesses from TURN, San Joaquin County, SDG&E, and former CPUC Commissioner Loretta Lynch offered support or support-in-principle, while no opposition testimony was presented. Members generally praised the bill’s transparency goals, and AB 13 passed 10-0 to Appropriations, with the roll left open for absent members. The committee then adopted the 2025-2026 committee rules and approved three consent items: AB 61, AB 365, and AB 406. The next bill, AB 99, would cap investor-owned utility rate increases above inflation except for specified costs such as safety, modernization, and fuel/commodity costs. The author and supporters, including a representative of the California Senior Legislature, said the bill was needed to protect ratepayers, especially seniors and low-income customers, from repeated rate hikes. Opposition came from utility labor, utilities, the Chamber of Commerce, and others, who argued the bill was too simplistic, could suppress labor costs, and did not account for major cost drivers such as wildfire mitigation, mandates, and net metering. Several members supported moving the bill forward as a starting point on affordability, while others criticized it as overly blunt. AB 99 passed 11-0 to Appropriations, with the roll left open. The hearing then shifted to an informational panel on strategies to reduce California transmission costs. A Public Advocates Office staffer described a growing backlog of approved-but-unbuilt transmission projects, rising transmission access charges, and long project timelines driven largely by utility pre-application and construction periods. Panelists from Net Zero California and consulting firms presented research suggesting that public financing or public-private partnership lease models could reduce transmission costs by lowering financing, tax, and capital costs, with estimated savings of up to 57% and as much as $123 billion over 40 years. PG&E’s representative said the utility is already pursuing federal loan guarantees, grants, and a public-private partnership with Citizens Energy, but warned that state ownership could create tax, wildfire-liability, and governance risks. Members asked about the CPUC’s role, the causes of delays, and whether public financing could complement existing competitive solicitation processes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Or some combination of those three resources there on the right.
• <00:37:44.560> um the resources that we would require. um the resources that we would require
• <00:48:08.160> I I really appreciate the analysis here.
• I I really appreciate the analysis here.
• Um, so in our analysis, we are giving sort of two ranges of values.

Bills: HF4770

Keywords: biomass, anaerobic digester, renewable energy, sustainability, energy generation

Summary: The committee approved the March 26 minutes and then took up House File 4770, as amended by an A1 technical amendment. The bill was presented as a proposal to help Liberty Diversified International and Liberty Paper in Becker plan for replacement steam and energy supply as the Shuro facility closure approaches in 2030. Testimony described Liberty Paper’s current closed-loop steam arrangement with Shuro, the need to study future fuel and technology options, and the potential use of anaerobic digestion, biomass, construction and demolition waste, and food waste to produce steam and possibly power. Members asked about feedstock availability, the need for a feasibility study, possible backup natural gas use, and whether waste heat or wastewater heat could be useful. The bill was laid over as amended. The committee then heard a presentation from CenterPoint Energy on Minnesota heating demand and electrification. CenterPoint staff said affordability and reliability are central concerns and outlined how the utility manages customer costs through energy efficiency, contracting, storage, peak shaving, and conservation. Dr. Joel Lynch presented research on peak heating with natural gas and the “missing piece” in Minnesota’s electrification puzzle, explaining that Minnesota’s cold climate makes winter heating demand especially challenging and that replacing natural gas would require substantial new electric capacity and renewable resources. He compared his work with prior national and state studies and said the analysis used Minnesota-specific gas throughput, COP assumptions across several electrification scenarios, and January renewable capacity data. Lynch summarized preliminary findings that Minnesota’s peak gas heating throughput could be up to 40 gigawatts, with electric resistance heating implying roughly 36 gigawatts of new demand, and lower but still substantial demand under heat-pump scenarios. The presentation was informational only; no vote was taken on the CenterPoint presentation. The meeting ended with House File 4770 laid over and the energy demand presentation continuing.