Transcript Highlights:

• Blue Ribbon Projects may be located in all future land use and designation and zoning designations.
• It says at least once every five years, the Chief of Domestic Security must review each designation made
• That review of the designation is to see if it is still... ...foreign terrorist organization.
• That review of the designation is to see if it is still should be in place or should not be in place.
• Requires FWC to review. due process is protected, requires FWC to review and approve local ordinance

Transcript Highlights:

• special judicial review available.
• On June 9th, we reviewed the additional proposals received.
• That's how most buildings are going to be designed.
• That's how most buildings are going to be designed.
• design.

Summary: The committee heard first from Ferndale city officials and a representative of FutureWise on annexation planning. Ferndale described its “annexation blueprint” or phased annexation plan as a way to tie urban growth area planning, capital facilities, and eventual annexation together earlier in the process. Speakers argued that counties often allow incremental development in urban growth areas without city-level standards, impact fees, or coordinated infrastructure planning, which can leave cities and taxpayers with higher future costs and make annexation less likely. Members raised questions about fire districts, county revenue loss, and whether annexation incentives or interlocal revenue-sharing agreements could help. FutureWise supported requiring annexation phasing in countywide planning policies, using pre-annexation agreements, and applying city standards in urban growth areas to make annexation more predictable and less contentious. The committee then received a primer and update from the State Building Code Council (SBCC). Staff explained the council’s composition, standing committees, technical advisory groups, and rulemaking process, including normal, expedited, and emergency rulemaking. They described the ongoing 2024 code cycle and the separate work underway on Senate Bill 5491 and related legislation concerning single-stair residential buildings and multiplex housing. Members discussed how the legislature can better direct the SBCC, the difference between prescriptive and performance-based code approaches, and the importance of involving technical experts early. The SBCC also addressed concerns about the wildfire urban interface code, noting that problems arose when code language and maps were developed on different timelines and applied to urban areas in ways that were not anticipated. Several members asked about regional differences, especially energy code impacts in eastern Washington and the role of natural gas. SBCC representatives said the council can use climate zones and appendices for some regional variation, but statewide statutory targets still constrain the energy code. They emphasized that the council is largely reactive to legislative direction and public proposals, and that clearer legislative intent would help avoid ambiguity in future code development. No votes were taken during this portion of the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Recent tax reviews that were not adopted.
• And so we are required to do the lodging tax review in 2027.
• Tax reviews that you'll hear in July. And this is our contact information.
• Best practices we reviewed for regulatory fee design call for mitigating risk of unstable revenue, aligning
• So we'll be looking at... ...outside the timeframe of our review.

Summary: JLARC met on April 8, 2026, with Senator Keith Wagner chairing in person and Rep. Pallett joining remotely. The committee approved the January 7 minutes and honored Marilyn Richter, who is retiring in June after more than 12 years of service to JLARC and the Citizens Commission. Staff then gave a legislative recap and work plan update, noting that the legislature adopted six bills or provisos implementing recommendations from recent JLARC reports, and that JLARC received seven new study assignments, including reviews of state oversight mechanisms for fraud, waste, and abuse and State Patrol toxicology lab delays. The committee approved the updated 2025-27 work plan, including the new assignments and the required 2027 lodging tax review. The committee also heard about a new anonymous post-meeting member survey tied to JLARC performance measures, then considered the final report on ignition interlock device compliance and monitoring. Staff reported that 59% of drivers with ignition interlock requirements had not installed a device as of June 2025, with installation rates rising by income, and found problems in the Department of Licensing’s financial assistance program and in coordination between DOL and the State Patrol. The report recommended clearer goals and responsibilities for DOL, a formal interagency agreement, and a coordinated plan to raise installation rates; both agencies concurred. Members discussed whether noncompliance reflected continued driving or people stopping driving, and agency representatives said some drivers do stop driving while others take the risk. The committee approved the final report. JLARC then reviewed the drug take-back fee setting and expenditures report. Staff said the Department of Health’s oversight costs had outpaced fee revenue because the statutory fee cap is tied to program operator spending, and recommended public reporting of oversight costs and a legislative change to allow full cost recovery. Members debated transparency, the risk of overpricing the program, and whether Ecology might be a better home for the program; the committee adopted a comment urging transparency and a future review of best practices before fee-structure changes, then approved the final report with that comment. Finally, staff presented the scope and objectives for the Clean Buildings Performance Standard study, focused on large state-owned and K-12 buildings due to comply by June 2026. Members asked about fines, funding, workforce constraints, and how costs and energy savings would be measured; staff said the study would examine compliance costs, savings, funding sources, and variation by building characteristics. The meeting adjourned after administrative announcements about upcoming JLARC meetings and the survey reminder.

Transcript Highlights:

• review, objective... ...been used: standards, design review, objective, guidelines, variances, and ascertainable
• The definition of administrative design review.
• The definition of being administrative design review.
• Now, this section of the subdivision statute now requires the use of administrative design review for
• However, it did not define the term administrative design review.

Committee: Senate Local Government

Transcript Highlights:

• using, like, progressive design-build.
• The commission may convene a fatality review committee, which may review crash information and other
• review review.
• injury the bill ...review committee are immune from civil liability for activities related to reviews
• From reviews of crashes resulting in the death of pedestrians and bicyclists thus far, From reviews of

Summary: The committee first received a presentation from NCSL staff on national transportation funding trends and alternative user-fee options as gas tax revenue declines. The presentation covered declining fuel-tax purchasing power, the effects of more fuel-efficient and electric vehicles, and a range of state responses including indexed gas taxes, EV and hybrid registration fees, voluntary and mandatory road usage charges, transportation network company fees, retail delivery fees, and per-kilowatt-hour EV charging fees. Members asked about Virginia’s mileage-fee program, enrollment rates, and whether states had reduced gas taxes alongside new fees; the presenters said they would follow up with additional information. Committee staff then presented a comparison of Washington’s transportation budget with Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, and Utah, focusing on population, lane miles, road condition, fuel taxes, preservation spending, mega-projects, and governance structures. The discussion highlighted Washington’s unique transportation pressures, including ferries, fish-passage obligations, high debt service, and major capital projects. Members asked follow-up questions about debt service, interest costs, CCA impacts on fuel prices, and whether project costs differed by state. The committee held public hearings on three bills. House Bill 2109 would allow vehicles being towed on trailers to use coverings to contain mud, rocks, or debris instead of requiring prior cleaning; the bill’s sponsor and construction witnesses supported it as a practical solution, and the fiscal note showed modest costs to WSP and WSDOT. House Bill 2139 would raise snowmobile registration fees to support snow park and trail grooming; State Parks, DNR, and several snowmobile advocates supported it, while some snowmobile users opposed it, arguing that enforcement of unregistered sleds should be addressed first. House Bill 2192 would expand the Washington Traffic Safety Commission’s fatal crash review authority and allow it to collect certain health data; the sponsor and agency supported the bill as a public-health tool, while one attorney raised concerns about limiting civil discovery and evidentiary access in fatal crash litigation.

Transcript Highlights:

• And the Medicaid review panel was put together in House Bill 345.
• So the review panel has met six times since this bill's passage.
• And then our 50 program design decisions under each program design pillars and then our 50 program design
• So here are program design pillars, as I mentioned, 50 of them.
• The ones that are highlighted here are ones that we just went over with the review panel.

Committee: Senate Health and Welfare

Transcript Highlights:

• And so that is what the new design will be.
• And so that is what the new design will be.
• Plan review processes.
• So think of plan review as the preface.
• So that's getting the designs and everything in place, getting them reviewed by the fire department.

Summary: The committee began with roll call, introductions of a new fiscal analyst and a new member, and approval of the March 19 minutes. The first major presentation was from the Office of Management and Budget on the state’s general fund and special fund status through May. OMB reported general fund revenues were running below the legislative forecast by about $76 million, driven largely by weaker individual income tax and sales tax collections, though the projected ending balance remained positive and above the budgeted level. The budget stabilization fund was above its cap and would transfer excess earnings to the general fund, and the legacy fund balance continued to grow. Members also asked about federal funding uncertainty and mineral leasing revenue variability. The committee then reviewed compliance reports and trust fund analyses, followed by discussion of a bill draft for the fixed-route city transportation network study. The draft would create a $15 million general fund grant program with a formula-based distribution to eligible fixed-route transit cities, intended to support operating and capital needs and help match federal transit funds. Transit officials from Minot and Fargo testified in support, explaining local fare and match structures and the difficulty of replacing aging buses and securing federal matching dollars. Several members questioned whether the program should be limited to the current four cities or broadened to future eligible urban areas, and whether local funding sources should be explored further. The committee did not finalize the bill draft at that point and planned to continue discussion at a later meeting. The committee also approved a bill draft repealing obsolete language related to approval of a bi-state authority with South Dakota, after staff explained that no agreements had ever been implemented and the provision appeared outdated. A roll call vote was taken and the motion carried. Later, the Department of Commerce and the Northern Plains UAS Test Site presented updates on uncrewed aircraft systems initiatives, including the Vantis radar data enclave, the drone replacement program, and efforts to build a revenue model for Vantis. Test site officials said FAA approval had been secured for the radar data program, replacement of noncompliant drones was underway, and future revenue could come from state and external users once pricing and intellectual property arrangements are finalized. Members asked about Chinese-made drones, supply chain issues, automation, and how the system would manage beyond-visual-line-of-sight operations. The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation then presented on the design of a new minimum-security prison and a reentry housing study. Officials said the proposed facility would relocate the minimum-security prison to the penitentiary campus, reduce costs from an earlier estimate, and provide more beds and programming space, with construction potentially beginning in 2027 and opening around 2031. They also described staffing needs, the planned move of women to the New England facility, and possible expansion of men’s housing there. The parole and probation chief described a reentry housing task force studying housing needs for people leaving incarceration, with a goal of developing data-driven recommendations for subsidies and support services; a representative from Protection and Advocacy closed by expressing general support for fixed-route and paratransit funding.

Transcript Highlights:

• These exhibits are in your e-book this morning for review.
• This council awarded planning and design phase.
• on Pueblo-owned property at the design professional's.
• Otherwise, as we mentioned, the design professional has made adjustments to the design to account for
• Our new planning and design manager, Mr.

Committee: House Public School Capital Outlay Oversight Task Force

Transcript Highlights:

• Jurisdictions will still review for... ...permit.
• Jurisdictions will still review for permit.
• If there's design review requirements, what those design review requirements are, and your density limitations
• to the city for almost a brand-new review.
• Review cycles to three formal review cycles to prevent those unnecessary delays unless, of course, there

Committee: House Local Government

Summary: The committee heard a series of presentations on comprehensive plan implementation, permitting reform, and subdivision and infrastructure coordination. Pierce County and the City of Redmond described their recent comprehensive plan updates, emphasizing major efforts to add housing capacity, middle housing, transit-oriented development, climate and shoreline protections, and preservation of existing affordable housing. Both jurisdictions said the work took years and required extensive public engagement, and both stressed that frequent statutory changes, late-issued state guidance, and overlapping review requirements created “implementation fatigue” and added cost and delay. Redmond in particular said mid-course legislative changes forced supplemental environmental review and additional analysis, while Pierce County asked for more technical assistance and more consistent guidance across agencies and neighboring jurisdictions. On permitting, an architect from AIA Washington, WABO, and the Master Builders Association argued that delays in plan review and subdivision approvals are a major driver of housing costs. They described long review timelines, repeated comment cycles, and inconsistent local processes as barriers that increase financing, labor, and weather-related costs and can cause projects to stall or be canceled. Proposed solutions included provisional or phased approvals for certain housing projects, stronger use of pre-application meetings, clearer and more objective standards, self-certification by licensed professionals in limited cases, and limits on repeated review cycles. WABO and local officials cautioned that pre-application and phased-review processes can help but require staff time and careful coordination, and they noted that many delays actually arise earlier in land use, environmental, or utility review rather than the final building permit stage. The Department of Commerce and consultant Clay White presented preliminary recommendations from a task force on integrating special purpose districts into Growth Management Act planning. The task force recommended earlier and broader notification of water, sewer, school, port, and other service providers during countywide planning policy updates, comprehensive plan amendments, permit notices, and grant applications; better coordination of utility and transportation capital projects; possible GIS tools to share capital facility plans; more regular updating of coordinated water system plans; and stronger alignment of school siting and funding with anticipated growth. They said the recommendations were intentionally light-touch because local governments are already absorbing many new requirements and because independent districts are reluctant to give up decision-making authority. Finally, FutureWise and the City of Spokane discussed subdivision reform. They supported administrative approval of subdivisions in urban growth areas, retention of key notice and access protections, and clearer rules for exemptions such as boundary line adjustments and estate-related lot divisions. Spokane described local reforms such as smaller minimum lot sizes, unit lot subdivisions, and reduced-process short plats for simple infill, while warning against additional notice requirements and appeals to city councils for technical plat decisions. Speakers repeatedly urged the committee to avoid adding major new mandates while local governments are still implementing recent housing and planning laws.

Transcript Highlights:

• So that's kind of the starting gun when we start all the review.
• Jurisdictions will still review for permit.
• Jurisdictions will still review for permit.
• If there are design review requirements, what those design review requirements are, and your density
• to the city for almost a brand-new review.

Summary: The committee heard a series of presentations on comprehensive plan updates, permitting reform, special purpose district coordination, and subdivision reform. Pierce County and the City of Redmond described their recent comprehensive plan updates, emphasizing housing production, transit-oriented development, middle housing, preservation of affordable housing, and the need for technical assistance and clearer state guidance. Both jurisdictions said the planning process took years and was complicated by overlapping state requirements, changing legislative mandates, and multiple review authorities. Redmond in particular said mid-course legislative changes forced supplemental environmental review and added significant cost and delay, and both local governments asked for more stability, clearer statutes, and better-aligned timelines. Presenters from the architecture, building official, and development sectors focused on permitting delays and proposed ways to speed housing delivery. Dave Boucher of AIA Washington argued for a provisional construction permit process for projects stamped by licensed professionals, along with mandatory deadlines and fewer stalled review cycles. Tim Woodard of WABO described existing tools such as pre-application meetings and phased approvals, noting they can improve certainty but also require staff time and careful coordination. Representatives from Master Builders and D.R. Horton said permit and subdivision delays add substantial cost to housing, citing studies showing months of delay and tens of thousands of dollars added per home, and urged administrative approvals, concurrent review, self-certification, and limits on repeated review cycles. The committee also reviewed a Commerce-led task force report on integrating special purpose districts into Growth Management Act planning. The task force recommended early invitation and notice to water, sewer, school, port, and other service providers during countywide planning policy and comprehensive plan updates, better coordination on grants and capital projects, updated water system coordination plans, and improved school siting and funding alignment in fast-growing areas. Speakers stressed that the recommendations were intended to be light-touch and focused on better communication rather than major statutory overhaul, while also noting that rural and slow-growing areas should not be burdened with the same requirements as rapidly growing jurisdictions. On subdivision reform, FutureWise and the City of Spokane discussed making more subdivision decisions administrative, preserving vesting, clarifying exemptions, and reducing unnecessary notice and appeal steps. Spokane described local reforms such as smaller minimum lot sizes, unit lot subdivisions, and reduced-process “minor engineering review” for simple plats, while raising concerns about new notice requirements and appeals to city councils for technical plat decisions. Across the hearing, members repeatedly returned to the theme that local governments, builders, and state agencies need clearer, more coordinated rules to reduce delay and uncertainty while still protecting safety and planning goals.

Transcript Highlights:

• First, project review.
• Reviews regularly seem to take two years, and the actual process depends heavily Reviews regularly seem
• Likewise, Caltrans review can drag on for months to years.
• I think the time is more on the design aspect of it.
• Any time a developer comes to us to review a project, then we go through our environmental review process

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Regulatory Authority held its first hearing to examine how California’s regulatory framework affects housing production, affordability, and timelines. Chair Pacheco and Assemblymember Haney framed the discussion around the state’s housing shortage and the need to reduce costs while maintaining environmental, safety, and community protections. The first panel featured housing experts and industry representatives who argued that state regulations, code complexity, utility constraints, and agency review processes add substantial cost and delay to development. Bill Fulton described overlapping state and local land-use authorities and the tension among housing, coastal protection, climate, and wildfire goals. CBIA’s Chris Ochoa and California Apartment Association representative Bob Raymer said building codes, energy mandates, and agency processes have materially increased per-home costs, and they urged more centralized affordability analysis and greater scrutiny of regulatory impacts. The Bay Area Council’s Louis Marante called for a statewide cost target for housing and stronger timelines and accountability for state agency reviews. The second panel brought in state agencies to explain their roles. HCD said its housing element enforcement, streamlining laws, and technical assistance have helped increase production, shorten entitlement timelines, and improve compliance by local governments. CARB said SB 375 is a planning law that does not directly regulate land use, and argued that regional housing assumptions in sustainable communities strategies are not being fully implemented on the ground. The Coastal Commission said it works with local governments to balance coastal protection, sea-level-rise risk, and housing, and noted recent guidance and pilot efforts to streamline housing approvals in the coastal zone. The Energy Commission said its building energy standards are designed to be cost-effective and save consumers money over time, though they can add some design and documentation complexity. Fish and Wildlife and DTSC both emphasized early engagement and collaboration to reduce delays while protecting natural resources and public health; DTSC said it is refining vapor intrusion guidance and using brownfield grants to support redevelopment. The State Water Resources Control Board said it uses general orders and basin planning to provide predictable permitting while balancing water quality, water rights, and housing needs, and noted billions in grants and loans for water infrastructure and site remediation that can support housing affordability. In response to questions from Assemblymember Haney, several agencies described ongoing coordination across departments, including regular meetings among HCD, CARB, the Coastal Commission, and transportation agencies, as well as broader interagency efforts to reduce redundancies and identify pinch points in project delivery. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken during the hearing; the main outcome was informational testimony and discussion of possible future reforms to improve coordination, predictability, and affordability in state regulatory processes.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> review the minutes? I have, Madam Chair. review the minutes? I have, Madam Chair.
• </c> In the spring of 2025, I designated In the spring of 2025, I designated EIDBI<00:04:16.840><c> a
• </c> to uh to improve prepayment review. to uh to improve prepayment review.
• Who designates them as high risk? Sorry. Who designates them as high risk?
• </c> to designate programs as high risk. to designate programs as high risk.

Bills: HF3542

Committee: House Fraud Prevention and State Agency Oversight Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• So with this, the agency was directed to create a new designation, so a new hospital designation or classification
• So with this, the agency was directed to create a new designation, so a new hospital designation or classification
• So we had to review and actually approve their plans.
• We actually have to review and approve it.
• We’re still reviewing those.

Summary: The committee met to receive implementation updates on recently enacted health care laws from AHCA and the Department of Health. AHCA reported on rural emergency hospitals, explaining the new Class 4 hospital designation, rule changes completed June 1, 2025, and that no Florida hospitals have yet converted, though one North Walton/DeFuniak Springs-area hospital has expressed interest. AHCA also reviewed the non-emergent care access plan requirement for hospitals with emergency departments, saying 83 plans had been received since July 1 and 63 approved, with plans emphasizing patient education, referrals to primary care or urgent care, and coordination for Medicaid managed care enrollees through the Florida HIE/ENS system. Members asked about HIE capacity, data collection, and whether the plans would identify shortages or trigger accountability measures; AHCA said it had moved to a new HIE vendor and would continue gathering data. AHCA also updated the committee on the TEACH workforce program, reporting $6.8 million in FY 2024-25 spending across 59 parent organizations and 229 facilities, with more than 1,800 students and nearly 380,000 clinical hours reimbursed, and said a federal 1115 workforce waiver was unlikely to move forward under CMS. On KidCare, AHCA said House Bill 121’s expansion to 300% of the federal poverty level remains blocked by federal litigation and CMS action tied to premium nonpayment rules, and members and public witnesses urged prompt implementation and asked for enrollment/disenrollment data and the rural health transformation funding outlook. Public testimony largely supported the NCAP and TEACH programs and pressed for action on KidCare. Representatives from health centers said NCAP has strengthened hospital-health center relationships and improved care coordination, including reduced recidivism in some hospitals. A Bond Community Health Center physician said TEACH is helping offset the burden of training students and could help address workforce shortages, especially in rural and underserved areas. Advocacy groups urged the committee to push for implementation of the KidCare expansion, citing children in the coverage gap and rising uninsured rates. The Department of Health then presented on several programs from the 2024-25 session. It reported on the Florida Reimbursement Assistance for Medical Education (FRAME) program, including 78 dentists and 15 dental hygienists funded under the dental track and nearly 1,300 medical professionals funded overall, with 123 dental applications and 71 funded dentists in the most recent cycle. DOH also updated the Screening and Services Grant Program, the Health Care Innovation Revolving Loan Program, the statewide telehealth maternity care program, and the swimming lesson voucher program, noting strong participation and outcomes such as reduced ER visits and improved postpartum follow-up in the maternity program. Finally, DOH said implementation of the HIV prevention drug/pharmacist dispensing law is underway, with three certification courses approved and five certifications issued. Members asked about barriers to wider use of HIV prevention drugs, more detailed maternal outcome data, and the dental workforce program report; DOH said more detailed reports would follow.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> review process and updating. review process and updating.
• Right next are the design principles and design considerations that reflected the community's design
• c><00:10:19.480><c> design</c> the design principles and design the design principles and design considerations
• </c> design of the facility. design of the facility. Next<00:10:52.720><c> slide.
• </c> just the planning and design of OCCC. just the planning and design of OCCC.

Bills: SR185 , HB2452 , HB2329 , HB2272 , HB2273 , HB2335 , HB1656 , HB2207 , HB2289 , HB1854 , HB2581 , HB20 , HB2296 , HB1707 , HB2297 , HB1890 , HB2241 , HB2474 , HB1688 , HB2546 , HB1574 , HB1546 , HB2218 , HB1163 , HB1514 , HB1749 , HB2385 , HB1576 , HB1974 , HB2022 , HB1973 , HB2005 , HB1894 , HB1515 , HB1718 , HB1591 , HB2475 , HB1721 , HB1864 , HB1946 , HB1920

Transcript Highlights:

• Our audit work is subject to a rigorous multi-level review.
• These reviews also serve as the peer reviews for those offices.
• These reviews also serve as the peer reviews for those offices.
• notably fire district reviews.
• We actually have QA reviewers that do that work for us.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Auditing Committee met to receive annual overviews of its oversight responsibilities and the work of the Auditor General and OPAGA. Committee staff reviewed the committee’s authority over state and local governments, enforcement of audit-report filing requirements, repeated audit findings, Transparency Florida reporting, and lobbying compensation audits. Auditor General Cheryl Norman described her office’s independence, audit standards, quality control, and major audit areas, including the state’s annual financial and single audits, school district and university audits, operational and performance audits, and attestation work. She also noted staffing shortages, recruitment efforts, and a request for carry-forward funds to study salaries. Members asked about whether audits can quantify recoverable dollars, how school district spending comparisons are handled, and how to raise concerns about DCF-related audits or a local city audit that has been pending for years. Norman said her office can quantify findings when possible, sometimes compares costs across districts in operational audits, and that members can bring specific concerns to the appropriate deputy auditor general or the committee. She also explained that citizen or local-government audit requests may require payment of audit costs. OPAGA Coordinator Kara Collins-Gomez outlined OPAGA’s role as a legislative research unit that conducts studies directed by law, the presiding officers, or the committee, and described its policy areas, methodologies, contract monitoring, and recurring statutory reports. Deputy Auditor General Matthew Tracy explained how to read operational audit reports, including findings, criteria, condition, cause, effect, recommendations, and management responses. Deputy Auditor General Greg Senators explained financial audit reports, including audit opinions, required supplementary information, internal control and compliance findings, federal program compliance, and management letters. The meeting concluded with thanks to the presenters and a motion to adjourn, which passed without objection.

Transcript Highlights:

• They cannot review it until we have that ROD.
• But with the current thoughts of what we're designing, or what we'd be designing for potential movable
• So the designated representative on the program from each state reviews these, and that would be a system
• We are currently in the very early phases of designing.
• Ray had mentioned earlier our legal sufficiency review.

Committee: Joint Joint Oregon-Washington Legislative Action Committee

Summary: The Joint Oregon-Washington Legislative Action Committee met for a work session and public hearing on the Interstate 5 bridge replacement program. Program staff outlined major milestones, including the recent biological opinion, the Coast Guard’s opening of a public comment period on the Navigation Impact Report, expected decisions in early 2026 on navigational clearance and the final supplemental environmental impact statement, and a possible amended record of decision in 2026. They also discussed the Bridge Investment Program grant amendment deadline, the need for an initial finance plan, and ongoing community outreach and contractor engagement. Greg Johnson announced he was stepping down as program administrator, and Carly Francis introduced herself as interim administrator. A large portion of the meeting focused on design and cost questions. Staff said the program is studying fixed and movable spans, single- and double-deck configurations, and one versus two auxiliary lanes, with final recommendations to be made through the federal environmental process. They said the Coast Guard’s decision is central to what bridge configuration is permittable and to the timing of the updated cost estimate, which has not yet been released. Members pressed for more detail on cost drivers, potential impacts to businesses upriver, and whether the states would need to seek additional funding. Staff said they had reached agreements with four impacted river users, but the underlying evaluation materials are protected and not publicly releasable. The committee also reviewed transit-related questions. Staff explained that light rail remains part of the modified locally preferred alternative and that ridership and operations estimates are being updated using federal modeling methods. They said projected opening-day transit operations and maintenance costs have dropped from an earlier estimate of $21.8 million to about $10.3 million annually because the current model assumes lower frequency, with Oregon and Washington shares split by geography and fare recovery. Members raised concerns about TriMet’s financial stability and the need for a funding plan by fall 2027, ahead of a planned federal transit funding application in fall 2028. During public testimony, several speakers criticized the delay in releasing a new cost estimate and argued the project scope should be reduced if costs continue to rise. Testifiers from City Observatory and the Just Crossing Alliance said the project appears to be avoiding bad news, urged the committee to consider scope reductions, and questioned whether the active transportation and freeway components align with the project’s core purpose. The meeting ended with thanks to Johnson for his service and a transition to public hearing testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee 4 will come to order.
• Four of those counties are currently pro-housing designated.
• We are requiring them to become pro-housing designated cities.
• The same with the pro-housing designation.
• review an application, and we are integrating that.

Summary: The subcommittee heard several May Revision proposals related to the state’s housing and homelessness reorganization. On the first item, administration and Finance staff described technical adjustments to move administrative positions and resources between the California Housing and Homelessness Agency, HCD, and Cal ICH, plus authority for a chief deputy director at the new Housing Development Finance Committee. The LAO recommended approval but asked for clarification on funding for the chief deputy position. Several senators questioned whether the staffing shifts would reduce Cal ICH’s capacity and whether adding communications support and a new executive position was appropriate absent new housing funding; the item was held open. The second item proposed a new $100 million CalHFA Disaster Rebuilding Fund, with $56 million General Fund and $44 million in existing National Mortgage Settlement funds, to help disaster-impacted homeowners access construction financing through tools such as a loan loss guarantee and interest rate buy-downs. CalHFA said the fund would help close the gap between insurance proceeds and rebuilding costs and would work through approved lenders. The LAO raised concerns about the lack of alternatives analysis, the broad delegation in the trailer bill, and the General Fund cost. Senators pressed for more detail on the estimated number of homeowners served, lender and homeowner eligibility, equity safeguards, and the role of the Legislature in program design; the item was held open. The third item was trailer bill language for HAP Round 7, including accountability metrics, pro-housing designation requirements for certain large cities and counties, local match requirements, and a mechanism to recapture unspent funds. HCD said the proposal would streamline reporting by using one consistent set of system performance measures and would phase in the new requirements. The LAO questioned the timing, the burden of pro-housing designation, the size and source of the local match, and whether the proposal conflicted with the Legislature’s prior goal of getting funds out quickly. Several senators criticized the added requirements and the lack of new funding, while others said the proposal could improve accountability and reduce administrative burden by reusing existing plans. The item was also held open. The fourth item began a proposal to reduce local development impact fees on state-funded affordable housing projects, framed as a condition on competitive multifamily funding rather than a statewide mandate. The presentation started but the transcript cuts off before questions or action on that item.

Transcript Highlights:

• state design standards.
• </c> options this bill gives a set of design options this bill gives a set of design standards<01:31:
• Madam Chair. possibility open for Road designs that possibility open for Road designs that can<01:35:
• </c><01:42:05.119><c> that</c> cities flexibility to do designs that cities flexibility to do designs
• </c><01:43:20.480><c> standards</c> for having state aid design standards for having state aid design

Committee: House Transportation Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• To establish these criteria, each year the exchange must review market conditions and identify access
• Following the review, the exchange may adopt market factor certification criteria for the next plan year
• Finally, Even when those outputs are reviewed and validated by a clinician.
• That includes a map of the state that designates the number of carriers in each county.
• by the OIC rather than receiving a satisfactory review from the OIC.

Bills: HB2564 , HB2599 , HB1809 , HB2242 , HB2261 , HB2384 , HB2505

Committee: House Health Care & Wellness

Keywords: healthcare, insurance, certification, state regulation, health plan, therapy, psychotherapy, mental health, regulation, professional standards, behavioral health, mental health crisis, crisis response, co-response, co-responder, first responder, EMS, emergency medical services, paramedic, EMT

Transcript Highlights:

• This is really just about following local guidelines, following local design review, but doing it in
• and plan review.
• and plan review. and first phase of the architectural design and plan review.
• designs that are already naturally affordable.
• Designs from some of Habitat's architectural designs that are already naturally affordable and taking

Committee: House Local Government