Transcript Highlights:

• It disrupted operations all the way up to Virginia until the Virginia operations were attacked.
• The Railroad Commission has allowed operators to continue to file shut-in permits and exemptions indefinitely
• They also have an efficient permitting process for permits of that type.
• Michael, talk a little bit about whether you have a permit to, or are you working to get a permit to
• We need it for our operations.

Bills: HB48 , HB49 , HB 1169 , HB1971 , HB2584 , HB2663 , HB2890 , HB48 , HB49

Committee: House Energy Resources

Keywords: HB 48, oilfield theft, organized theft, petroleum products, oil and gas equipment, DPS, Department of Public Safety, Texas, Railroad Commission, criminal justice, energy resources, theft prevention, organized crime, border region, El Paso, law enforcement task force, asset recovery, pipeline theft, drilling equipment, equipment theft

Transcript Highlights:

• We have an Air Board permit, Water Board permit... We have an Air Board permit, Water Board permit.
• to meet permit conditions, etc., etc.?
• Senator, I'd like to make a comment that I have been the recipient of DTSC permits and air quality permits
• All of our Clean Water Act permits will need to be turned into state permits, all of which requires CEQA
• All of our Clean Water Act permits will need to be turned into state permits, all of which requires CEQA

Summary: The committee heard SB 404 on metal shredding facilities, SB 601 on water quality protections after the U.S. Supreme Court’s Sackett decision, SB 682 on phasing out PFOS in certain consumer products, and later SB 646 on prenatal vitamins and toxic metal contamination. SB 561 had been pulled from the hearing. In each of the measures, the authors and supporters emphasized environmental and public health protections, while opponents raised concerns about overregulation, implementation, and unintended economic impacts. The committee also spent time on the policy details of each bill, including how smaller operators would be treated under SB 404, how “nexus waters” would be defined under SB 601, and whether alternatives and testing standards were adequate under SB 682 and SB 646. For SB 404, Senator Caballero said the bill would create a permitting and enforcement framework for metal shredding facilities, with operational standards for fire prevention, stormwater, and releases of shredder residue, while supporters argued it would bring needed certainty to a critical recycling industry. Opponents, including small recyclers and community/environmental advocates, said the bill was either too broad or not strong enough, with some warning it would burden smaller facilities and others arguing it would fail to protect overburdened communities. The committee approved SB 404 on a due-pass-as-amended motion to Appropriations, with recorded support from the chair and some members and opposition from others. SB 601 sought to restore state-level protections for waters that lost federal Clean Water Act coverage after Sackett, using a “nexus waters” framework and revised enforcement provisions after amendments removed the private right of action. Supporters said California needed to preserve protections for seasonal streams and wetlands and avoid backsliding, while opponents from business, agriculture, water districts, and local governments argued the definition remained too broad and could create uncertainty, costs, and unintended consequences. The committee also approved SB 601 on a due-pass motion to Appropriations, again with split votes. SB 682, which the committee also advanced, would phase out intentionally added PFOS in six product categories, including cleaning products, cookware, dental floss, ski wax, food packaging, and juvenile products, with an amendment delaying cookware implementation until 2030. Supporters framed it as a source-control measure to reduce PFAS contamination and lower long-term water treatment costs, while manufacturers and cookware interests argued the bill was overbroad, lacked workable testing standards, and could push consumers and businesses toward uncertain alternatives. The committee chair recommended an aye vote, and the measure passed to Appropriations. SB 646 was then introduced on prenatal vitamins, with supporters saying it would require testing and disclosure of heavy metals like lead, arsenic, cadmium, and mercury, while the opposition said disclosure must be handled carefully so as not to confuse consumers or undermine confidence in prenatal supplements.

Transcript Highlights:

• permits.
• Statewide permit fee schedules are not new.
• for residential and commercial solar permits.
• costs providing permitting services.
• costs providing permitting services.

Summary: The committee heard several housing, local government, coastal, and infrastructure bills. AB 306 would create a statewide appeal and code-interpretation process for building code issues at the California Building Standards Commission; supporters said it would reduce inconsistent local interpretations and speed housing delivery, while no opposition testified, and it was moved on a do-pass-as-amended vote to Appropriations. AB 956 would clarify ADU law to allow up to two detached ADUs on a property and address ADUs in HOAs/common interest developments; supporters framed it as a flexibility and housing-supply measure, while local government and county groups raised concerns about ministerial approval, parking, density, and impacts on neighborhood character. After committee questions, the bill was moved do pass as amended to Appropriations on a 2-0 vote, with the bill remaining on call. Members also considered AB 1751, which would create a ministerial approval path for qualifying townhome projects and allow local inclusionary ordinances for larger projects. Supporters said it would expand attainable homeownership and help produce missing-middle housing, while cities and counties objected to reduced density, by-right approval, and potential housing-element net-loss issues. The bill was moved do pass as amended to Appropriations on a 2-0 vote and remained on call. AB 912, which would revise the governance structure of the Vallejo Flood and Wastewater District board, drew unanimous support from the district, city, and county; it passed 3-0 to Appropriations and remained on call. AB 1710, aimed at preserving housing project entitlements from later regulatory changes, also advanced on a 4-0 do-pass-as-amended vote after opponents said they were awaiting the committee amendments. The committee also heard AB 2080, which would make county treasurer investment authority delegations ongoing until revoked rather than requiring annual renewal; supporters said it would reduce technical noncompliance and administrative burden without reducing oversight, and it was moved to the Senate Floor. AB 1740, a coastal bill for Santa Monica, would set timelines and reporting for a local coastal program and create an expedited Coastal Commission process for bike, transit, and pedestrian projects; supporters said it reflected a negotiated path forward with the city and commission, and it passed 3-0 to Appropriations. AB 2181, backed by Unite Here, would limit use of hypothetical density bonus value in hotel and motel appraisals; supporters said it would protect hospitality jobs from speculative lease-rent increases, and it was moved to the Senate Floor on a 4-0 vote. Finally, AB 2469 on data centers and water use drew the most extended debate. The bill would require water supply and water use assessments before approval, and shift infrastructure costs to project proponents; supporters said it would improve transparency, protect ratepayers, and ensure local governments have information before approving water-intensive facilities. Opponents, including business, city, county, and tech groups, argued existing law already covers water assessments and fees, warned the bill could create a separate permitting regime, and raised concerns about privacy, security, and investment impacts. The committee had not yet taken final action on AB 2469 when the transcript ended, and members were still asking technical questions about data center cooling and water reuse.

Transcript Highlights:

• These are the areas where our program is operating thanks to the scientific collecting permit used by
• So it's just how we operate.
• The first permit in the Southern California and Central Coast ESU typically is just a non-lethal permit
• There's usually a second non-lethal permit issued, and then only after a third permit may you possibly
• The first permit in the Southern California and Central Coast ESU typically is just a non-lethal permit

Summary: The hearing focused on human-wildlife conflict in California, especially predator management involving bears, mountain lions, coyotes, and wolves. The chair and Assemblymember Hadwick framed the issue as a balance between protecting people, livestock, and property while preserving wildlife and biodiversity, citing habitat loss, development, drought, wildfire, and climate change as drivers of conflict. Department of Fish and Wildlife officials described their conflict-response work, including public education, depredation permits, wildlife incident reporting, and coordination with sheriffs, counties, and other agencies. They also noted that wildlife sightings and conflicts are increasingly common in both rural and urban areas, including recent mountain lion activity in San Francisco and ongoing bear conflicts in places like Tahoe and Sierra Madre. CDFW staff outlined the department’s human-wildlife conflict program, including the WEIR reporting system, a public toolkit, limited-term staff, and regional response efforts. They said the program grew out of drought-related incidents and later state funding, but that one-time money has expired, creating service gaps. Officials also discussed specific management approaches such as Tahoe’s trap-tag-haze bear program, DNA-based incident tracking, and the use of nonlethal deterrents before lethal action. For wolves, they explained that the species is protected and managed differently from bears and lions, that there is no general depredation-kill process for wolves, and that the department is working on data-sharing agreements, county liaisons, compensation programs, and improved coordination with ranchers and local law enforcement. Members pressed the department on underreporting, trust in state agencies, the need for sheriffs to participate in investigations, and whether more authority should be given for public-safety removals or hazing. Assemblymember Gonzalez also raised wildlife trafficking and border enforcement issues in Southern California. The panel repeatedly emphasized that more resources, technology, and local partnerships are needed. Officials gave budget context, saying roughly $17 million in one-time funding over several years supported conflict response and wolf compensation efforts, but that staffing and program capacity remain limited. The chair concluded by noting interest in further work on technology, funding, and institutionalizing collaboration, and the hearing then moved to a second panel of university researchers who presented on wolf and mountain lion conflict, habitat planning, trust, and the need for flexible, science-based, locally tailored mitigation strategies.

Transcript Highlights:

• They were permitted by the city.
• They were permitted by the city.
• SB 1013 also requires ALPR operators to operate, to require data security training and data privacy training
• When these operators have a service line that operates fully within an intercity rail corridor, all operators
• SB 1425 will establish a permit program administered by the authority, SB 1425 will establish a permit

Committee: Senate Transportation

Transcript Highlights:

• So around 20 permits are issued annually. Around 20 permits are issued annually.
• Permits are only good for...
• the permit application.
• The permit is only good for the geographic area defined in the permit application.
• Or do these permits...

Committee: Senate Agricultural Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• However, they are struggling to legally operate in our current permit structure.
• On the other hand, acquiring a permit restaurant permit costs $1,738.
• And a locally owned and operated dentistry firm spent 14 months trying to navigate the permitting process
• And a local owned and operated dentistry firm spent 14 months trying to navigate the permitting process
• permits.

Summary: The committee heard several local government-related bills, with testimony focused on permitting, transportation funding, EV infrastructure, and commercial revitalization. AB 1578 by Assembly Member Jackson would require elected local and state officials to take anti-hate speech training through existing sexual harassment training. Supporters said elected officials should understand the impact of their words on hate and democracy; opponents argued the bill lacked a definition of hate speech and could chill protected speech, especially around sex-based issues. AB 2083, also by Jackson, would authorize a regional child care special district serving Moreno Valley and Paris to expand child care facilities and programs for five years. The California Association of Local Agency Formation Commissions opposed the bill’s mechanism but said it was working with the author. AB 1693 by Assembly Member Suber would streamline retail tenant improvement permits by extending a process similar to a prior restaurant permitting law, with qualified professional certification and tighter local review timelines. It drew broad support from retail, business, and property groups and no opposition. Assembly Member Gonzalez presented AB 1679, which would create a temporary commercial activation permit for pop-up businesses to operate in vacant storefronts for up to 120 days. Supporters said it would help fill vacancies and lower barriers for small businesses; there was no opposition, and the bill advanced. Gonzalez also presented AB 2418, which would set timelines for nonresidential plan checks and inspections and allow private plan checkers after excessive delay. Business groups supported it as a way to reduce costly delays, while local government groups had no position but continued discussions with the author; the bill advanced with amendments. Assembly Member Shevlin presented AB 1820, which would cap local permit fees for EV charging installations and create a statewide fee schedule. Supporters said fees vary too widely and can deter charger deployment, while cities and counties argued existing law already requires reasonable cost recovery and that the bill could undercut local budgets and public safety review. Assembly Member DeMaio presented AB 1783, which would prohibit state and local mileage taxes or road user charges. Supporters framed it as a defense against a new tax burden, while opponents said studying road user charges is necessary to address declining gas tax revenue and future transportation funding needs. AB 1693, AB 1679, and AB 2418 were moved forward with motions and roll calls; AB 1783 was taken up with a motion and roll call left open, and AB 1820 remained under discussion at the end of the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill would allow that valid parimutuel permit holders to lease their facilities to highlight permit
• This change would enable permit holders to consolidate operations, save money and present a better overall
• permitted facilities to any other holder of a same class valid or to any highlight permit holder.
• Said to be clear, a permit would not be required or not requiring any kind of permit for these residential
• There's there's no permit required there.

Transcript Highlights:

• operation of the department.
• obligations and timelines for permitting.
• That might be permitting, might be whatever.
• There are permits to be issued on a variety, you know, whether that's water rights permits, groundwater
• recharge permits, to waste discharge permits across all of our program areas.

Summary: The subcommittee met to discuss budget issues related to vacant positions across several natural resources and environmental departments, with no votes taken and all items held open for a future hearing. The Legislative Analyst’s Office and the Department of Finance explained the administration’s proposal to eliminate about 6,000 vacant positions statewide, including roughly 293 positions in the departments before the committee, as a way to capture salary savings and reduce flexible funding tied up in vacancies. The LAO recommended retaining special-funded positions, while noting that eliminating General Fund positions would reduce savings. Finance argued that vacancy levels have remained steady statewide, that departments need flexibility to manage operations and hard-to-fill jobs, and that some vacant positions can be reclassified to higher-priority work. Members raised concerns that many of the proposed eliminations would affect core public-safety, permitting, and environmental-protection functions. The Department of Fish and Wildlife said the cuts would affect permitting, environmental protection, and law enforcement, while State Parks said its proposed ranger reductions were chosen from historically vacant, hard-to-fill positions and would still leave many vacancies to fill through the academy. The Coastal Commission said its positions supported sea-level rise planning under SB 272. The Department of Pesticide Regulation and DTSC said the reductions would affect multiple program areas, though Finance said the special funds involved were not in structural deficit and the cuts could help avoid future fee increases. The State Water Resources Control Board said its proposed reductions were spread across programs, with public-health functions protected as much as possible. The committee then heard an overview from the State Water Resources Control Board on its responsibilities for water quality, water rights, drinking water, and funding for water infrastructure. Chair Joaquin Esquivel described ongoing work on the Bay-Delta Plan update, the Healthy Rivers and Landscapes voluntary agreements, and the need to actively administer water rights. Members also discussed the board’s response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s Sackett decision, which narrowed federal Clean Water Act jurisdiction. The board requested $2.6 million and 12 permanent positions to address resulting permitting and enforcement gaps; the LAO said the request met its high bar for new proposals and was supported by the board’s data and reporting.

Transcript Highlights:

• One of these supervisors must be a landowner or operator of a farm.
• of the two appointed supervisors must be an operator of a farm.
• firearms, notice of permit denials, and any documents associated with a permit or permit application.
• Permit denials and any documents associated with a permit application, including a certificate of completion
• So it sounds like denials of a permit to purchase are also covered.

Bills: HB2235 , HJR4210 , HB2520 , HB2491 , HB2499 , HB2408 , HB2435

Committee: House State Government & Tribal Relations

Keywords: public records, concealed pistol licenses, firearm purchases, transfers, exemptions, transparency, Constitution amendment, legislative sessions, session duration, state legislature, governance, emergency meetings, public agencies, accountability, open government, HB2491, WaTech, Washington Technology Solutions, public disclosure, public inspection

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> covers our anticipated um operating covers our anticipated um operating increases<00:17:03.000><
• </c> proposal centers around um our operation proposal centers around um our operation of<00:20:51.760
• to</c> and the annual permit from $35 to and the annual permit from $35 to $45<00:21:17.120><c> I</c>
• We're asking for a group of permit writers and permit engineers that would essentially be a SWAT team
• processes may have more than permitting processes may have more than one<00:46:55.119><c> permit</c>

Committee: Senate Environment, Climate, and Legacy

Transcript Highlights:

• Mining or blasting permits within 800 feet of protected structures...
• , Tulsa, denied a permit for that expansion of the mine.
• Is it a periodic renewal, or is it once you've got the permit you never have to re-permit?
• So this does not prevent existing mining operations from operating, nor does it prevent new mining operations
• It does say a mining or blasting permit shall not be authorized for mining or blasting operations.

Bills: SB1246 , SB1510 , SB1979 , SB1929 , SB1930 , SB1976

Committee: Senate Energy

Summary: The committee heard several energy, mining, and environmental bills. Senate Bill 1246, a DEQ request bill, was described as a permitting reform measure intended to reduce delays, increase transparency, and improve public notice; members discussed newspaper publication and digital alerts, and the bill passed 11-0. Senate Bill 1929 proposed a new framework for transmission lines that would compensate landowners with recurring payments for lines crossing their property; members raised concerns about eminent domain, ratepayer impacts, existing easements, and whether payments would transfer with land sales, but the bill passed 6-5 after the author said it was an idea to start a broader conversation. Senate Bill 1510 addressed bonding requirements and reclamation standards, with the author saying the goal was to make bonds meaningful and ensure funds are available for cleanup if operators fail to reclaim sites. Members discussed bond levels, acceptable financial instruments, and the need to balance industry viability with land restoration; the bill passed 11-0. Senate Bill 1979, the Mining and Blasting Residential Protection Act, would create an 800-foot buffer around residences and sensitive facilities near mining and blasting operations and require notifications/signage; the author said it was a constituent-driven good-neighbor bill, but members worried it could affect existing mines, raise costs, and potentially be read to restrict current operations. After title was struck, the bill failed 2-8. The committee also passed Senate Bill 1930, which creates a framework for compensating surface owners when iodine is recovered from produced water for commercial use, and Senate Bill 1976, which phases in surety requirements for small oil and gas producers to soften the impact of prior regulatory changes. Both bills passed unanimously or near-unanimously after brief discussion about balancing regulation with economic impacts. The meeting ended with adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• And all the decision-making that will lead to an approved operating plan or disapproval of an operating
• Discharge permits require that the operator, when they get their permit, a portion of that is they have
• It's important to note that under the discharge permits, whether it be a new permit or whether it be
• He has the say at that point on whether to approve the permit, disprove the permit, or kick it back.
• Typically, if a permit is uncontested, we don't have a lot of permits in here.

Committee: House Radioactive & Hazardous Materials Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• local governments to allow pop-up businesses to operate for 120 days.
• However, they are struggling to legally operate in our current permitting structure.
• Their permanent restaurant permit process will cost exponentially more.
• It was the test of an idea through pop-ups and temporary operations.
• It was the test of an idea through pop-ups and temporary operations.

Committee: Senate Local Government

Transcript Highlights:

• The energy project has all required environmental permits, safety permits, easements, and licenses to
• The CPUC has played a critical role in streamlining permitting.
• So first, the permitting process.
• The permitting process for utility interconnection projects sometimes delays the completion of the permitting
• They may experience a permitting issue at the beginning when they're trying to permit and site their

Committee: House Utilities and Energy

Transcript Highlights:

• Permit or agreement issuance: upon approval, the agency will issue a permit or formal agreement, applying
• one of the easiest permits we can get.
• We know how to obtain a permit.
• don't require a permit.
• And so we have federal regulations that are required for our operators that are going to be operating

Summary: The Economic Infrastructure Subcommittee met with a quorum present and first heard HB 11 from Representative Robinson. The bill would address an unintended consequence in Florida’s municipal utility surcharge law by requiring the same water/utility rate for residents when a utility facility is physically located within one municipality but owned by another, rather than allowing the owning municipality to impose a 25% surcharge. The sponsor and several members described it as a fairness issue affecting residents who do not receive local tax support for the facility but still bear the surcharge. Public testimony included support from AARP and Miami-Dade County and opposition from North Miami Beach. The bill was reported favorably on an 18-0 vote. The committee then held a panel discussion on utility use of public rights-of-way and utility relocation. Panelists from FDOT, county government, gas, water, electric, and communications sectors described the permitting process, noting that FDOT uses a detailed utility accommodation manual and that local governments may use permits, franchise agreements, or ordinances depending on the utility type. They emphasized that utilities often must coordinate early with agencies using long-range work programs and project plans, and that the process differs by utility and jurisdiction. Communications witnesses discussed Chapter 337 and the 60-day local permitting shot clock, while others noted the role of Sunshine State One Call in locating facilities before excavation. A major focus was who pays for relocations when road or infrastructure projects require utilities to move. FDOT and several panelists said utilities generally bear the cost when they are in public right-of-way, with exceptions such as certain interstate/interchange projects and easement impacts. Utility representatives said relocations are often effectively new builds, can be costly, and are ultimately reflected in rates or customer costs. Members also asked about easements versus right-of-way, damage and disputes during construction, broadband workforce needs, and whether legislation could improve coordination. Panelists largely said the existing process works best when agencies, contractors, and utilities communicate early and continuously, and that more legislation may not be necessary compared with better planning, staffing, and use of technology.

Transcript Highlights:

• SOPA permits can also cost... ...and commercial-grade flood lighting as major operations.
• to have, in a conspicuous location, that permit registration issued by the county granting the operator
• This is already required by HCD when we get our permit to operate renewed.
• AB 925's attempt to raise the permit-to-operate fee from $4 to $10 per space, but a $6 increase multiplied
• to it as a permit.

Summary: The Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee heard a long agenda of housing-related bills, beginning with AB 518 on low-impact camping areas. The author and supporters said the bill would streamline permitting for small rural camping operations on private land, expand outdoor access, and support rural economies, while opponents from campground associations and counties warned it could undermine existing regulation, create enforcement problems, and allow advertising of unpermitted sites. Members raised concerns about fire safety and local control, but the bill was ultimately passed as amended on an 8-0 vote. The committee then approved AB 635, which would require HCD to refer up to 25 of the most serious mobile home residency law complaints to the Attorney General. Supporters said mobile home residents need stronger enforcement against egregious park-owner violations, while opponents argued the existing program is underused, costly, and should remain subject to a sunset. After discussion of the program’s surplus and enforcement role, the bill passed 9-1. AB 893, which expands ministerial approval for mixed-income housing near college campuses and broadens eligibility for affordable units to students, faculty, and staff, also drew strong support from student advocates and housing groups and respectful opposition from the League of California Cities over local control and height limits; it passed 10-0. AB 925, the Mobile Home Emergency Safety Act, would require stronger emergency preparedness measures in mobile home parks, including accessible exits, working fire hydrants, and gas shutoff access, with a fee increase to fund enforcement. Supporters framed it as a life-safety measure in disaster-prone areas, while opponents argued the bill duplicates existing requirements and imposes an unnecessary fee increase. The committee voted 6-1 to send it to Appropriations, with the bill left on call. The consent calendar, including several other housing and local government bills, was approved 8-0. The committee also heard AB 712, which would increase penalties and attorney-fee protections for applicants enforcing state housing laws against public agencies; supporters said it would improve compliance, while special districts opposed the bill as overly broad and unclear. Members discussed indemnification and timing issues, and the bill was advanced with amendments to Judiciary.

Transcript Highlights:

• . permitted.
• operating life.
• operating life.
• they want to continue operating, they need to seek a permit modification to expand the facility and
• </c> proposed years of operation. proposed years of operation.

Committee: Senate Energy and Natural Resources

Transcript Highlights:

• Historically, permit appeals were heard by a permit appeals officer within DTSC behind closed doors.
• Prior to the board's creation, around 30 facilities were operating on continued permits.
• permits stronger.
• the permit requirements themselves.
• There are permits.

Transcript Highlights:

• Cheering, clapping, yelling, signs, or other disruptions are not permitted.
• I point out that special permits are granted under Section 9 of Chapter 48.
• Special permits generally have a term of up to three years.
• Sometimes it's not months, it's years for special permit proceedings.
• , which is the Boston version of a special permit.”

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Municipalities and Regional Government

Summary: The Joint Committee on Municipalities and Regional Government held a hybrid hearing on bills related to land use, zoning, permitting, municipal governance, and homelessness. Early testimony focused on a home rule petition for Ipswich to remove a residency requirement for a town manager, with supporters saying it would broaden the applicant pool and help fill a vacant permanent manager position. Another panel backed legislation to change the Springfield Water and Sewer Commission’s governance so ratepayers in surrounding communities would have representation, arguing the current board structure leaves many users without a voice in rate-setting and capital decisions. Several housing and zoning bills drew testimony. Senator Keenan and the Home Builders and Remodelers Association supported a bill to toll the one-year period for acting on a variance while an appeal is pending, saying appeals should not consume the time needed to implement approved projects. Representative Murray and the Real Estate Bar Association also testified on broader zoning reforms, including changes to undersized lots, merger rules, hearing deadlines, appeals, and variance standards; they argued the proposals would reduce delay and uncertainty and help housing production. Committee members questioned whether shifting zoning appeals from de novo to closed-record review would limit new evidence, and the witnesses said the change would speed cases while preserving limited opportunities to supplement the record. The committee also heard testimony on bills to end the criminalization of homelessness. Representatives, advocates, and shelter organizations said local camping bans and fines are counterproductive, especially after the U.S. Supreme Court’s Grants Pass decision, and urged a statewide response centered on housing and public health rather than punishment. Other municipal bills included remote participation in open town meetings for Wayland and a statewide local option, Fairhaven and Mattapoisett charter changes, and Cambridge’s request to use automated parking enforcement and mail parking tickets. The hearing also included testimony supporting fairground zoning flexibility, a Shrewsbury solar siting bill, and an Inspector General bill clarifying county land disposition procedures by requiring written notice to DCAM and a defined response period. No votes were taken during the hearing.