Transcript Highlights:

• This program is supported by an assessment on all employers, public and private.
• The program is funded by employer assessments.
• There's a workers' comp assessment that is assessed on employers, and SIBTF is a separate assessment
• it was $19 million and it is now ...assessment.
• Assembly Member Koloza. liabilities to come down, the assessments to come down.

Summary: The Budget Subcommittee on State Administration heard presentations on the Department of Industrial Relations’ labor-related budget items, with the main focus on proposed trailer bill language to reform the Subsequent Injury Benefits Trust Fund (SIBTF) and a related budget change proposal for staffing. DIR said SIBTF has grown far beyond its original purpose, citing the 2020 Todd decision, expanded eligibility based on chronic or asymptomatic conditions, and a backlog that has grown to more than 30,000 pending cases. The administration argued the reforms would restore guardrails, reduce liabilities and employer assessments, and speed processing for severely injured workers; the LAO said the proposal was largely consistent with its prior recommendations. Members raised concerns about using trailer bill language for major policy changes, the retroactive application to open cases, and the impact on workers already in the queue, while supporters from employer groups and public agencies backed the proposal as necessary to control costs and restore sustainability. Public comment was split, with injured-worker advocates opposing the retroactive changes and business/public employer representatives supporting the reforms. The committee then heard the SIBTF workload request, which would phase in 177 positions over five years at a cost of $36.5 million, including staff for the Division of Workers’ Compensation, the Office of the Director Legal Unit, and administrative support. DIR said the additional staffing is intended to address very high caseloads and reduce processing times, but emphasized that the request assumes the reform package is adopted; LAO agreed the staffing increase made sense if paired with reforms. Members asked about vacancy rates, current staffing, and whether the workload request would become the new normal, and DIR said it would monitor caseload trends and adjust future requests as needed. Finally, the committee received an update on the California Workplace Outreach Program (CWOP), which DIR described as a partnership with community-based organizations to educate workers and help employers comply with labor laws. DIR reported that CWOP has reached 1.75 million workers and employers and made 8 million touchpoints since 2020, with the current round awarding $50.7 million to 87 partners for a two-year period through June 2027. Members and public commenters highlighted the program’s role in reaching immigrant, farmworker, janitorial, nail salon, and other vulnerable communities, and several speakers urged continued funding at $30 million per year for five years. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Institutions collect those assessments and then provide those assessments to the Bureau's Student Tuition
• What that rate of assessment is varies. It is set by the Bureau.
• What that rate of assessment is varies.
• Institutions have to... ...stopping those STRF assessments is a detailed one.
• It is a pretty streamlined process in terms of those assessments and the submittal of those assessments

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Institutions collect those assessments and then provide those assessments to the Bureau's Student Tuition
• What that rate of assessment is varies. It is set by the Bureau.
• What that rate of assessment is varies.
• It is a pretty streamlined process in terms of those assessments and the submittal of those assessments
• So at this point, we would— The submittal of those assessments to the Bureau.

Summary: The joint Sunset Review Oversight Hearing focused on the Bureau for Private Post-Secondary Education (BPPE) and its reauthorization, with committee chairs and members emphasizing the Bureau’s role in protecting students, overseeing private postsecondary schools, and responding to a changing federal higher education landscape. BPPE and the Department of Consumer Affairs reported that the Bureau has modernized data systems, improved enforcement, increased citations and inspections, reduced pending complaints, and is now meeting its statutory inspection mandate. They also said the Bureau faces a structural budget deficit and has reduced costs through staffing cuts, streamlined inspections, and shifting some student-relief functions to the Student Tuition Recovery Fund (STRF).

Transcript Highlights:

• The penalties you collect nowhere near match what the penalties will be assessed. That goes on.
• The penalties you collect nowhere near match what the penalties will be assessed against the district
• Under today's law, as you'll see on the handout in a moment, you can assess a penalty of $10,000 per
• The state assesses a penalty of $5,000 a day for violations of the use of the state's water.
• The state assesses a penalty of $5,000 a day for violations of the use of the state.

Bills: HB4530 , HB4931 , HB5559 , HB5560

Committee: House Natural Resources

Keywords: water rights, Texas Water Trust, water bank, environmental conservation, water quality, instream flows, aquifer, water injection, Edwards Aquifer, environmental regulation, groundwater, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, water conservation, drought, utility regulation, water use restrictions, Public Utility Commission, civil penalties, drought contingency, environmental protection

Summary: The Committee on Natural Resources met with a quorum present and first took up several pending bills for reconsideration and committee substitute adoption. House Bill 2692, relating to codification and clarification of local laws concerning the San Antonio River Authority, was reported favorably to the full House and sent to the Committee on Local and Consent Calendars by an 11-0 vote. House Bills 1407, 1520, 1535, 2970, 4153, 291, 3663, and 3915 were also reconsidered or laid out as pending business, with committee substitutes adopted where needed and each bill reported favorably, generally by unanimous vote, to the full House and then to Calendars or Calendars/Calendars-related referral as applicable. The committee then heard House Bill 4530, which would expand the Texas Water Trust framework to include groundwater rights, require Texas Water Development Board review and approval of groundwater dedications, and notify local groundwater districts when groundwater rights are placed in the trust. The bill’s author and witnesses from the Environmental Defense Fund, The Nature Conservancy, and Chispa Texas supported the measure as a conservation tool and a way to create a clear process for voluntary donations; a Texas Water Development Board witness testified neutrally. The bill was left pending. House Bill 4931, relating to an aquifer storage and recovery project in Medina County, drew support from the author, the Medina County judge, and a regional water alliance witness, who described severe stress on the Edwards Aquifer, low levels at Medina Lake, and the need for a local water-supply tool. The bill was left pending. House Bill 5559, which would clarify enforcement of drought contingency plans for investor-owned water utilities and involve the PUC in model plan development, received support from groundwater district representatives but also concerns from water company and utility witnesses about enforcement authority, approval procedures, and potential conflicts with existing obligations to provide continuous service; the committee substitute was withdrawn and the bill was left pending. House Bill 5560, which would raise the maximum civil penalty for certain groundwater conservation district enforcement actions from $10,000 to $25,000 per violation, prompted debate over whether current law is already sufficient; supporters said the higher cap would better deter overpumping, while opponents argued existing penalties are already severe. That bill was also left pending, and the committee adjourned subject to call of the chair.

Transcript Highlights:

• At PSC, we're weird because we're centrally assessed.
• Like Matt said, Pacific Corp is also a centrally assessed state utility by the Department of Revenue,
• We're one of those weird centrally assessed entities.
• Okay, so Representative Jacobsen, the centrally assessed utility...
• streamlines that assessment process by valuing our utility company as one operating unit. ...that assessment

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:

• They would, what would their ability be to assess fees?
• They don't have an ability to assess fees.
• They don't have a constituency to assess fees.
• The Children's Services Council can't assess fees. Who are you going to assess your fee on?
• The Children's Services Council can't assess fees. Who are you going to assess your fee on?

Committee: Senate Appropriations

Summary: The Committee on Appropriations took up SJR 2-F, the proposed constitutional amendment on property tax relief, which would reduce assessment growth on non-homestead property, expand homestead exemptions, create a new exemption for new homesteaders, and direct counties, cities, and school districts to use property tax revenues for specified core services. Senator Avila presented the measure as the governor’s plan to provide historic relief and argued that local governments should tighten budgets and prioritize core functions. Senators raised concerns about the lack of fiscal scoring, the breadth and ambiguity of the permitted uses, the effect on special districts and local services, and whether the proposal would shift costs to fees or other taxes. The committee adopted several amendments, including Avila’s amendment clarifying that ad valorem revenues could be used for county and municipal operations and administration and other expenditures not prohibited by law, and Trumbull’s amendment removing school board ad valorem taxes from the proposal. Other amendments failed, including proposals to allow user fees and non-ad valorem assessments, add a sunset, redirect tourism development taxes, narrow the small-business provision, and change the ballot title to reference local service reductions. Grall’s amendment removing the constitutional trust fund requirement was adopted, while the committee also rejected Berman’s title-change amendment and Smith’s sunset and tourism-tax amendments. The committee then returned to the bill as amended for questions, including extended debate over whether the proposal would affect noncitizen residents, the impact on local government finances, and whether local governments would respond with higher fees or special assessments. The meeting ended with the bill still under discussion after the final round of questions, with Avila saying he would continue working with the governor’s office on the language before the next vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Department of Water Resources used the fourth assessment in their vulnerability assessments and state
• Sixth Assessment.
• The Department of Water Resources use the fourth assessment and their vulnerability assessments and state
• into the sixth assessment.
• Assessment, is all about doing that interagency gap analysis and needs assessment, but also doing that

Summary: The subcommittee heard extensive testimony on the governor’s proposed sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) tax credit, which would provide a $1 to $2 per gallon credit against the diesel excise tax for SAF sold for use in California from 2026 to 2036. The Department of Finance and CARB argued the proposal would help decarbonize aviation, support a long-term transition in the fuel sector, and encourage in-state investment and jobs. The Legislative Analyst’s Office and several outside witnesses recommended rejecting the proposal, saying it is a relatively expensive way to reduce greenhouse gases, could have uncertain or limited net climate benefits, and may shift limited feedstocks away from renewable diesel rather than create additional fuel supply. A major point of debate was whether the credit would mainly benefit California refineries and workers or instead subsidize out-of-state producers while reducing revenue for transportation programs. Supporters, including union members, refinery workers, airlines, Boeing, and airport representatives, said SAF is one of the few viable near-term options for aviation, that California should keep fuel production and jobs in-state, and that the credit would help maintain refinery operations and support the industry’s transition. Opponents, including the LAO, trucking and fuels groups, environmental organizations, and county/road advocates, warned that the proposal could raise gasoline and diesel prices, reduce diesel excise tax revenue for highways and local streets and roads, and provide limited climate benefit compared with other uses of state funds. Some members also raised concerns about feedstock availability, food-system impacts, and whether the policy should be more narrowly targeted if the goal is to support a specific refinery. No vote was taken. The chair stated at the outset that all items on the agenda were being held open for a future hearing, and public comment was taken after the first item because of the level of interest. The hearing then continued with public testimony, which was split between strong support from labor and industry and strong opposition from environmental, transportation, and local government groups.

Transcript Highlights:

• Do you know how those buildings or how those facilities are currently assessed?
• So the assessor would still be assessing, classifying the properties as it was before.
• If it is being used in a residential fashion, then it is assessed residentially.
• Clay County, and you do not have time to try to set up a meeting with them before you go out and assess
• That's the. before they even do the assessment. I see. Okay.

Committee: House Special Committee on Property Tax Reform

Summary: The committee held a public hearing on Senate Substitute for Senate Committee Substitute for Senate Bills 1066 and 1088, sponsored by Sen. Ben Brown, dealing with the property tax classification of single-family short-term rental homes. Brown argued the bills would stop counties from reclassifying short-term rentals as commercial property and taxing them at the higher commercial rate, saying such homes remain residential in use under Missouri case law, IRS guidance, and zoning principles. He said the substitute language was narrowed to single-family homes owned by individuals, partnerships, or LLCs, and further limited to owners with 15 or fewer short-term rental properties. Members questioned how the bill would affect local zoning and assessor practices, including mixed-use buildings and the requirement that assessors conduct an in-person consultation before reclassifying property. Several lawmakers said the bill should preserve local control over zoning while preventing inconsistent tax treatment. Some members also raised concerns that the consultation language could interfere with assessors’ work, and Brown said he was open to revisiting that provision because it was added by another senator and was not central to the bill’s intent. Supporters testified that short-term rentals are often family homes used to generate needed income, not commercial enterprises, and that higher commercial taxation could be financially devastating. One witness described using a family home as a short-term rental to help pay for a mother’s care and support a granddaughter with special needs. Opponents, including the Missouri Hotel Lodging Association, argued that short-term rentals function as businesses because they collect sales tax and compete with lodging providers, and they said the 15-property limit was ineffective because owners can place homes in separate LLCs. The association said it could suggest alternative language to better target large-scale operators. No vote was taken, and the hearing concluded after testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• We think it’s going to really help the Fair Plan mitigate assessments.
• So then we could be at an assessment without even having a large event.
• We ended up assessing for a billion dollars.
• It's not the first time we've had to assess.
• , but at least slowing down the need for an assessment.

Summary: The Assembly Insurance Committee held an oversight hearing on the California Fair Plan, focusing on its rapid growth, financial stability, rate adequacy, and role in the homeowners insurance market. Committee members described the Fair Plan as increasingly functioning as a “safety net” rather than a true insurer of last resort, while Fair Plan representatives said the plan was created by statute, is privately funded by member insurers, and is now taking on more business because of non-renewals and limited availability in the admitted market. They emphasized that the plan offers residential and commercial coverage, but not a full HO-3 homeowners policy, and said expanding into that product would require major new staffing, vendor, and claims infrastructure. A major topic was pricing and assessments. Fair Plan officials said their rates have historically lagged their projected costs, especially because reinsurance costs were not fully recoverable in rates until recently. They reviewed recent filings, including a 2023 filing that was reduced from an estimated 80% need to a 35.8% request after working with the Department of Insurance. They also discussed the plan’s reinsurance tower, a new catastrophe bond, and the $1 billion assessment triggered by the 2025 Los Angeles fires after losses exceeded available capital. They said AB 226 helped secure a $600 million line of credit to reduce assessment risk, and they thanked lawmakers for supporting that measure. Members raised constituent concerns about coverage limits, underinsurance, and misinformation from agents. Fair Plan officials said they do not deny applicants because their homes exceed the plan’s $3.3 million limit; instead, policyholders can combine Fair Plan coverage with excess insurance. They said broker training and webinars are being expanded to address misunderstandings, and they noted that raising the cap would depend on achieving actuarially sound rates and sufficient financial capacity. Members also asked about smoke claims from the 2025 fires; the Fair Plan said it has paid covered smoke claims under California law, reviewed closed claims, and removed the “sight and smell” language from its policy form after litigation and CDI action. Public commenters from the insurance industry, builders, agriculture, and nonprofit service providers largely urged faster depopulation of the Fair Plan, more adequate rates, and reforms to the clearinghouse process. Some warned that the Fair Plan is now competing with the admitted market because it can be cheaper in some areas, while others said the plan is still essential because the private market is not serving high-risk or specialized properties. The hearing ended without a vote or formal action, but committee members and Fair Plan representatives agreed to continue working on rate, transparency, and depopulation issues.

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 2007 authorizes the use of competency-based assessments and specified graduation pathways.
• Thank you. ...based learning and assessments, that is inherently very student-centered.
• I have a personal testimony and experience of the benefits of competency-based assessments.
• I have a personal testimony and experience of the benefits of competency-based assessments.
• I have a personal testimony and experience of the benefits of competency-based assessments.

Bills: HB2007 , HB2360 , HB2369 , HB2432 , HB2440 , HB2534 , HB2557

Committee: House Education

Keywords: competency-based assessment, graduation requirements, education reform, student opportunity, pathway options, albuterol, asthma, inhaler, rescue inhaler, respiratory emergency, school nurse, student medication, self-administration, anaphylaxis, public schools, private schools, charter schools, tribal compact schools, K-12 health, medication policy

Transcript Highlights:

• The penalties you collect nowhere near match what the penalties will be assessed against the district
• The civil penalties that the court may assess against a violator for overpumping, Chair: unauthorized
• $25,000 and also allows the court to assess a higher penalty as deemed necessary and appropriate by
• Of what the fees would be assessed. Chair: I'm not sure about the sliding scale exactly.
• You can assess a penalty of $10,000 per day, per day.

Bills: HB 4530 , HB 4931 , HB 5559 , HB 5560

Committee: House Natural Resources

Keywords: water rights, Texas Water Trust, water bank, environmental conservation, water quality, instream flows, aquifer, water injection, Edwards Aquifer, environmental regulation, groundwater, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, water conservation, drought, utility regulation, water use restrictions, Public Utility Commission, civil penalties, drought contingency, environmental protection

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair, I move to strike the assessment of all fines and costs against members who were absent without
• Chair, I move to strike any assessment of fines against any member for August 6th, August 7th, August
• Cole: 3 and 4 permit the assessment only of costs. Ms.
• Cole: And they cannot lawfully be assessed against members under Rule 5.
• Cole: to DPS's own backup documents, the deduction removes costs that cannot lawfully be assessed.

Committee: House House Administration

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> 10-year time period for this assessment 10-year time period for this assessment is<00:45:55.839>
• </c> the town on how they're going to assess the town on how they're going to assess these<00:46:45.920
• Um, our what their assessed value is.
• </c><00:47:53.359><c> value</c> period existing the total assessed value period existing the total assessed
• value or the assessment done.

Committee: House Housing

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• and deliver the sixth assessment on time as required by statute.
• The Department of Water Resources used the fourth assessment in their vulnerability assessments and state
• into the sixth assessment.
• assessment, is all about doing that interagency gap analysis and needs assessment, but also doing that
• So we have the whole state covered through this assessment.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , equalize county assessment ratios, and assess properties of intercompany railroads.
• The property tax program is organized in three divisions: county assessed division, assessments practice
• The Assessments Practice Survey Division conducts assessments practice surveys, or compliance audits,
• These audits are critical because county assessors produce an assessment roll for local assessed properties
• The State-Assessed Property Division is responsible for valuing state-assessed public utilities and railroad

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• seasonal reliability assessment and then seasonal risk assessments at the beginning of the summer and
• and then seasonal reliability assessment and then seasonal risk<00:36:48.240><c> assessments</c><00:
• And our risk assessment, MRO's risk assessment, does show three clear realities.
• And our risk assessment, MRO's risk assessment, does show three clear realities.
• able to make that assessment. able to make that assessment.

Bills: HF3296 , HF3802

Committee: House Energy Finance and Policy

Keywords: energy conservation, data centers, electric sales, energy optimization, utility regulations, energy regulation, certificate of need, renewable energy, power production, energy efficiency, Minnesota statutes, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• I will also share that the risk assessment process for high-risk use cases, the way that the risk assessment
• tool is similar to how we do the privacy impact assessments, which is essentially operationalizing the
• And for the high risk, that is when we're requiring the extra steps of the risk assessments.
• So a lot of the pieces, for example, the risk assessments, the accuracy, the inventory, these are...
• So all of those requirements on the risk assessment side don't come into play unless it's a high-risk

Summary: The Technology, Economic Development, and Veterans Committee held its first meeting of the session and began with member and staff introductions, followed by a work session on emerging technology, digital risks, and governance, focused on artificial intelligence in state government. Washington Technology Solutions officials Gretchen Perry, Katie Ruckel, and James Galvin described the state’s approach to balancing innovation with public trust, emphasizing human judgment, transparency, accountability, and the use of AI to augment rather than replace people. They outlined benefits such as automating repetitive tasks, improving fraud and anomaly detection, supporting multilingual access, and improving customer service and internal productivity. The presenters also discussed AI risks, including algorithmic bias, overreliance, hallucinations, and ethical concerns, and explained the state’s governance framework. That framework is based on NIST AI risk principles and includes statewide AI principles, inventory requirements, risk assessments for high-risk uses, accuracy and monitoring requirements, training, data-sharing controls, and restrictions on creating likenesses without consent. They noted the state adopted a statewide AI policy on December 11 and has created an AI community of practice and related subcommittees to support implementation. They also said the policy was bargained with unions where required and that agencies must give notice before consequential AI-related changes affecting working conditions. James Galvin highlighted current AI use cases across state agencies, including visual and spatial analysis for emergency response and flood recovery, the Department of Licensing’s Dolly chatbot for resident services, and an internal contract-assistance tool for staff that is limited to approved materials. Members asked about audit implications, language services and interpreters, the policy’s applicability beyond government, union involvement, return on investment, and whether the state uses off-the-shelf or custom AI models. The presenters said most uses rely on off-the-shelf large language models, that high-risk generative AI is not yet in production, and that the policy is designed to encourage low- and moderate-risk uses while adding more scrutiny for higher-risk applications. No votes or legislative actions were taken; the meeting concluded with committee housekeeping and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Executive function is assessed through a two to five minute assessment done on a tablet, but it's done
• Next week, we'll release the RFP for a new developmental assessment.
• What are you assessing? Why are you assessing executive function in a child at that age?
• The tool itself, the assessment, I think is for children from two to six years old.
• I already alluded to the needs assessment, which is based on community needs.

Committee: House Legislative Health & Human Services Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• When we're only still assessing the final test.
• We're only still assessing the final test because there's nothing in here that says we're assessing.
• So the end-of-year assessment is really the final grade.
• And I would agree with that assessment totally.
• Or for these fines that are assessed.

Bills: SB 1 , HCR 20 , HR 131 , HR 133 , HR 135 , HR 136 , HR 137 , HR 144 , HR 145 , HR 146 , HR 149 , HR 150 , HR 151 , HR 152 , HR 158 , HR 161 , HR 162 , HR 163 , HR 165 , HR 166 , HR 168 , HR 169 , HR 170 , HR 175 , HR 178 , HR 127 , HR 129 , HR 130 , HR 132 , HR 134 , HR 138 , HR 139 , HR 140 , HR 141 , HR 142 , HR 143 , HR 153 , HR 154 , HR 155 , HR 156 , HR 159 , HR 160 , HR 164 , HR 167 , HR 172 , HR 173 , HR 176 , SB 1 , HB 8 , HB 15 , HB 27 , SB 5

Keywords: campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards, memorial, remembrance, legacy, condolences, community, higher education, university merger, research, public health, economic impact, healthcare, insurance, affordability, medical coverage, state regulations

Transcript Highlights:

• Member assessments.
• Assessments, yeah. 500 million or so we can assess companies, basically the companies that write in Texas
• And on the member assessment, so the twin member insurer assessments, those—Chairman Schwartner talked
• Member assessments, $500 million. Also, we can assess companies.
• But on the member assessments, so the insurer, TWIA member insurer assessments, Chairman Schwartz Cortner

Committee: Senate Business & Commerce

Keywords: 1185, senate, all