Transcript Highlights:

• We have several on the docket today, uh, for school building aid or school building structures.
• We have several on<00:53:09.599> the<00:53:09.760> docket<00:53:10.079> today<00
• :53:11.359> uh<00:53:11.520> for<00:53:12.000> school on the docket today uh for
• school on the docket today uh for school building<00:53:12.559> aid<00:53:13.839> or<00

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee took up several school building aid bills. HB 295, which would make school building aid program funds non-lapsing, drew debate over whether the program is effective and whether funds should be allowed to carry forward. Supporters argued the program is underfunded and that even small leftover amounts should remain available for building aid; opponents said non-lapsing funds limit future budget flexibility and that the program creates winners and losers. The committee voted 4-3 to recommend HB 295 inexpedient to legislate (ITL). The committee then considered HB 366, which would increase school building aid for eligible projects and include retroactive funding for projects completed in the past. The motion to ITL was supported on the grounds that retroactive payments would be unfair to districts still waiting in line and that the legislature should focus on future projects. Supporters of the bill said the increase was modest and that districts that built during a prior moratorium on aid were left with long-term fiscal burdens. The committee again voted 4-3 to recommend ITL. The discussion also broadened into special education funding and a retained bill, HB 742, concerning catastrophic special education aid and the source of funding. Members debated whether the education trust fund should cover the aid and whether the committee should act now or wait for a separate commission studying special education costs. Several members emphasized that special education costs are rising, that more data is needed on student identification and funding formulas, and that the commission’s report may provide better guidance. The chair said the subcommittee’s recommendations would go to the full committee, and the next meeting was expected to be rescheduled from November 4 to later that week because of election-related conflicts.

Transcript Highlights:

• If you could also send us the docket number or how you know where that complainant is to identify it
• us<00:33:41.120> the<00:33:41.600> uh<00:33:42.159> the<00:33:42.480> docket
• could also send us the uh the docket could also send us the uh the docket number<00:33:43.600>

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Discussion of the KentuckyWired Network 00:00:55 Discussion of the Water Resource Information System 00:35.40 Discussion of Geographic Information Systems 00:52:30 Discussion of Committee Report to LRC 01:15:05, 958, all

Summary: The Information Technology Oversight Committee met with a quorum, approved the prior meeting minutes, and then heard a presentation from Leadcore representatives Jimmy Bird, Mike Murray, and Rebecca Moss on the Kentucky Wired network. Leadcore described its role as the design-builder and service provider under the KCNA contract, saying the network was built with roughly 13,200 feet of fiber, mostly aerial, and that the use of non-armored cable was a Kentucky-side decision made to reduce cost. They also said aerial construction and non-armored cable increase maintenance challenges, including storm damage and squirrel-related damage, and reported FY25 service activity of 104 break-fix events, 30 maintenance replacements, 64 storm-damage events, and nearly 13,000 feet of fiber replaced to date. Committee members questioned whether the original project anticipated this level of replacement and whether any forecast existed for maintenance under non-armored cable. Leadcore said it did not do a formal forecast and could not say whether the replacement rate was above or below norms, though it acknowledged the decision not to use armored cable came from the Kentucky side of the contract. Members also asked about whether replacements caused network degradation; Leadcore said it tries to replace cable at existing splice points to avoid degradation and, where needed, uses armored cable for replacement sections going forward. The committee then explored Leadcore’s relationship with Excel and KCNA. Leadcore said it has a service-level agreement for KCNA-related fibers but not for dark fibers used by Excel, and that Kentucky Wired fibers get priority on service requests. It said outages are reported through a 1-800 number and that it was not aware of any access problems to the huts. On the tech refresh, Leadcore said its understanding is that maintaining the network is its responsibility, but the technology refresh is not; it said only a very limited amount of refresh has occurred and that this did not match the original contract intent. Leadcore also said it had not been asked to defer maintenance. The chair closed by saying the testimony would inform a committee report and that he intended to recommend clawing back or withholding some previously authorized Kentucky Wired and refresh funding until an audit is complete, with the committee to vote on a report later.

Transcript Highlights:

• over for a later bill to be laid over [Music] Chair: “Good morning, and thanks for being last on the docket
• <01:07:52.960> the Leave roll out so that'll be on the Leave roll out so that'll be on the docket
• 53.799> members<01:07:54.480> with<01:07:54.680> that<01:07:54.799> we docket
• for tomorrow members with that we docket for tomorrow members with that we are<01:07:55.039> adjourned

Bills: HF110, HF111, HF263, HF105

Keywords: HF110, Adrian Independent School District, Independent School District No. 511, school construction, sales tax exemption, use tax refund, refundable exemption, construction materials, capital improvements, school roofing, playground remodel, retaining walls, plumbing, bathroom remodel, locker room remodel, window replacements, local tax relief, general fund appropriation, Minnesota chapter 297A, retroactive tax refund

Transcript Highlights:

• We also look at the eviction docket available through OJD.
• In the court docket, we found a story of a woman living in Bend.

Keywords: 907, all

Summary: The committee met for a series of information sessions focused on housing stabilization, rental assistance, senior housing, and heat resilience. In the first panel, OHCS and NOAA described the state’s affordable housing preservation work, including the $35 million in 2025 stabilization funding used to reduce debt and keep distressed affordable rental projects operating, plus manufactured home park preservation efforts. OHCS said the portfolio remains under strain, with about a third of projects at debt coverage ratios of 1.0 or less and rising insurance and operating costs. NOAA urged faster closings on the stabilization awards, more funding in 2027, and broader rent assistance and process reforms. Committee members asked about the gap between current appropriations and need, and OHCS explained that the new Article 11-Q bond preservation program is structured differently and requires full refinancing rather than simple cash infusions. The committee then heard a detailed discussion of the state’s eviction prevention and rental assistance program, ORDAP. OHCS said the program is administered through community action agencies, prioritizes households at imminent risk of eviction, and is now funded at a much lower level than in the prior biennium, reducing expected service to about 8,200 households this biennium. The Oregon Law Center, a county community action agency, and Multifamily Northwest all agreed the program prevents homelessness and is effective, but they differed on whether assistance should be tied so closely to eviction court. Legal aid and community action witnesses said the current system is underfunded and that eviction filings are the clearest indicator of need, while Multifamily Northwest argued the process can push people into court unnecessarily and should be moved earlier when possible. Legislators raised questions about whether a pre-eviction model could be developed and about the costs of court involvement; one member shared a personal story about how rental assistance helped keep their family housed. Next, the governor’s office, OHCS, and OHA presented on the new senior housing initiative and healthy homes work. The governor’s housing director said Oregon is making progress on homelessness and housing production, with reductions in homelessness outside Multnomah County and an estimated 50,000 future units added to the pipeline through recent state actions. OHCS outlined the senior housing programs launched in May: a debt-financing program using elderly and disabled bond authority, an older adult housing development program funded through the senior property tax deferral revolving account, and a rehousing program for older adults that will use bridge funding and services to move at least 400 unsheltered older Oregonians into housing. OHA also described its Healthy Homes Grant Program, including $24.6 million already awarded, a new $5 million grant round for seniors and people with disabilities, and examples of home repairs and weatherization that help people remain safely housed. The final information session focused on home cooling and heat resilience. OHA presented data showing rising extreme heat days, more heat-related emergency visits, and likely undercounted heat deaths, especially among older adults, people with disabilities, low-income communities, and people without access to healthy homes. ODOE reviewed implementation of Senate Bill 1536, including a cooling needs study that found 58% of surveyed households in the studied housing types needed permanent cooling, with estimated statewide costs of $582 million to $1 billion. ODOE said its rental home heat pump and community heat pump programs have supported 4,638 installations so far, with a temporary reopening planned using remaining funds. The session ended with a remote presentation from a Community Action Partnership of Oregon representative, continuing the discussion of how community action agencies help deliver energy and anti-poverty services.

Transcript Highlights:

• challenging for a judge to perform the court's primary adjudicative responsibilities for managing a large docket
• challenging for a judge to perform the court's primary adjudicative responsibilities for managing a large docket

Bills: SB330, SB663, SB1020, SB1152, SB1164, SB1896, SB2111, SB2196, SB2383, SB2581, SB2797, SB2798, SB2371

Keywords: county funding, prosecutors' offices, elections, law enforcement, local government, community supervision, budget approval, corrections department, strategic plan, judicial oversight, SB 1020, Texas, personal bond office, pretrial release, electronic monitoring, GPS monitoring, global positioning system, bond conditions, probation, parole

Summary: The committee heard several criminal justice bills, with testimony largely focused on public safety, court procedures, and local criminal justice administration. SB 2371 would expand mandatory skimmer-reporting requirements from gas pumps to ATMs, point-of-sale systems, and virtual currency kiosks, with the Texas Financial Crimes Intelligence Center saying centralized reporting would improve investigations, preserve evidence, and help identify organized criminal groups. SB 2581 would repeal a special law governing commissary funds in certain large counties; the sponsor and the Sheriff’s Association said it would restore parity with other counties while keeping spending subject to audit and inmate-benefit limits. Both bills were laid out and left pending after testimony, with no public witnesses opposing them at the hearing. The committee also heard SB 330, which would require voter approval before counties over a certain size reduce prosecutor funding, similar to an existing law for law enforcement budgets. Supporters argued prosecutors are essential to public safety and need stable funding, while an opponent from the Texas Civil Rights Project said the bill would restrict local budget flexibility and impose costly elections. SB 663 would remove district judges’ approval role for community supervision and corrections department budgets, replacing it with judge review after TDCJ-CJAD approval; probation officials said the change would reduce delays and confusion without reducing judicial oversight. SB 1020 would require more immediate sharing of ankle-monitor violation information and clarify that such records are not judicial work product; the Harris County DA’s office and Crime Stoppers supported it, citing inconsistent local practices and delays that can hinder prosecutions. The committee then took up SB 1164 on emergency detention and court-ordered mental health services. The bill, from the Texas Judicial Commission on Mental Health, would update emergency detention forms, clarify officer duties, allow filings in the county where a person is apprehended or located, and add a factor related to a person’s inability to recognize symptoms or appreciate treatment risks. Supporters included family members, law enforcement, and mental health and judicial witnesses who described cases where earlier intervention might have prevented tragedy; opponents warned the broader language could be misused and emphasized due process and the need for dangerousness to remain the standard. SB 2111 on indigent defense would expand access to counsel at first hearings, strengthen managed assigned counsel programs, create internships and fellowships, and adjust other defense-related procedures; the Texas Indigent Defense Commission and county defense program leaders supported it, while the committee substitute removed some provisions to reduce fiscal impact. Finally, SB 2383 would let recently retired DPS officers return to work in limited roles to help address staffing shortages, and SB 2797 would create reciprocal discovery requirements for criminal cases; prosecutors and some committee members said it would reduce trial surprise and improve truth-seeking, while others questioned whether the bill fully matched the state’s disclosure obligations and whether it could burden defense rights. Several bills were left pending after testimony, and the committee established a quorum later in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• They're here in the room; they can talk to you about their dockets and what they're available to do.
• They're here in the room; they can talk to you about their dockets and what they're available to do.
• They're here in the room; they can talk to you about their dockets and what they're available to do.
• ><00:35:58.560> you<00:35:58.720> about<00:35:58.880> their<00:35:59.040> dockets
• <00:35:59.440> and can talk to you about their dockets and can talk to you about their dockets

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• think, except for the, uh, number in the upper left-hand corner and actually then if you look at the docket
• c><00:07:50.400> for<00:07:50.560> the<00:07:50.720> bill if you look at the docket
• for the bill if you look at the docket for the bill uh<00:07:51.360> ended<00:07:51.680> up
• Um I took a minute to look at the old bill docket passed in 2010. So, I've been here so long.
• Um I took a minute to look at the old bill docket passed in 2010. So, I've been here so long.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Let's go on to the next bill which we have for the docket today. It's a work session.
• <00:27:19.440> the the next bill which we have for the the next bill which we have for the docket
• <00:27:21.120> So, docket today. It's a work session. So, docket today.
• are<01:16:26.080> not<01:16:26.400> supporting<01:16:27.120> CTE our docket
• We we are not supporting CTE our docket.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up SB 209, which would require schools seeking building aid for construction or reconstruction projects to use an owner’s project manager. The chair explained an amendment that would remove the bill’s requirement that the manager be engaged before application and instead revert to current law, while updating the project threshold from the older $1 million figure to a more current amount and clarifying that the manager’s role is to protect the project owner’s interests. Members asked about the cost of hiring a project manager over several years before a project is funded, the 1.5% fee in rule, and whether the rules already define the manager’s duties. The chair said the amendment addressed those concerns by leaving the timing to current law and relying on existing administrative rules for qualifications and responsibilities. The committee then voted 18-0 to adopt the amendment and 18-0 to recommend SB 209 OTPA, placing it on the consent calendar. The committee then moved to SB 99, which concerns allowing students enrolled in career and technical education programs at receiving comprehensive high schools to take additional academic courses there. The chair said the bill was intended to make it easier for students to access CTE without being blocked by scheduling conflicts in their sending schools, and to clarify how agreements between sending and receiving districts would work. He described concerns about the bill’s cost formula, transportation, part-time versus full-time status, and whether the proposal could unintentionally create open-enrollment or athletic-transfer issues. He said the amendment would mirror existing treatment for homeschool and charter school students, use a familiar funding model, and limit participation to students already enrolled in one or more CTE classes at the receiving school. The chair also emphasized that comprehensive high schools already have a statutory definition and that the bill would help more students participate in CTE, which he said currently reaches only a relatively small share of students statewide. He noted that transportation would be covered only when a CTE bus is available, otherwise students would be responsible for arranging travel as under current practice. After brief discussion, the committee voted 18-0 to adopt the amendment and 18-0 to recommend SB 99 OTPA, also placing it on the consent calendar.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Washington State Office of Administrative Hearings docket number is 401-645.

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: The Washington State Office of Administrative Hearings held oral argument before the Legislative Ethics Board in the matter of Tara Simmons, docket 401-645, on a respondent-filed motion for summary judgment. Judge T.J. Martin identified the issues as whether Simmons violated the Ethics Act by using her legislative position for the benefit of others and by holding outside employment that conflicted with her official duties, under RCW 42.52.070 and RCW 42.52.020, and, if violations were found, what penalties or sanctions would be appropriate. The judge clarified that board staff had not filed its own summary judgment motion, only a response to Simmons’ motion. Attorney Doug McKinney argued that the complaint and board staff’s allegations were legally insufficient because they did not allege a personal benefit to Simmons, only benefits to her employer, EEC, or to others. He contended that the Ethics Act has historically required a benefit to the legislator herself, that employees do not automatically have a disqualifying interest in their employers, and that the board’s position would create a new bright-line rule and unfairly change the law as applied to Simmons. He also addressed allegations involving a contract provision, a campaign surplus donation to AEG, a subcontract dispute involving AEG and EEC, and text messages with Anthony Powers, arguing none showed a special privilege or conflict of interest for Simmons. Assistant Attorney General Julia Eisenhower, for board staff, argued the motion should be denied because the record sufficiently alleged violations of both statutes. She said Simmons’ involvement in securing funding for EEC, her employment duties involving stakeholder and legislator connections, her donation of campaign surplus funds to AEG to help secure a job for someone she knew, her role in the AEG-EEC subcontract dispute, and her text messages referencing her official capacity all supported the allegations. A board member asked whether the allegations were sufficient to show a special benefit, and Eisenhower responded that the facts were enough at the summary judgment stage. After rebuttal by McKinney, the ALJ closed the hearing and the board went into deliberations; no ruling was announced during the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, yes, I've looked through the ORES docket.

Keywords: 993, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Energy and Telecommunications Committee, chaired by Senator Kevin Parker, considered several Public Service Law bills and advanced each one to the Rules Committee after brief discussion and recorded no votes or without-recommendation votes on some measures. The bills included proposals to prohibit utilities from using ratepayer funds for certain activities (1012A), establish minimum standards for payment plans for eligible customers (1327), adjust residential fixed charges (1329), require the Public Service Commission to consider economic impacts when setting rates (1847), require utilities to adopt PSC-authorized equity ratios and returns on equity (1896), create the Rate-Hike Notice Act (5553C), suspend certain utility rate changes while allowing retroactive revenue recovery (5593), allow consideration of non-economic losses in penalty determinations (7165A), change the composition of the Public Service Commission (7328A), and let utilities retain revenues above authorized returns on equity (7693). Members asked questions about who would be affected by the bills, including whether fixed-charge reductions would apply to vacant units or vacation homes and whether economic-impact considerations could affect customers differently depending on where they live; the chair and sponsors generally explained the measures as territory-wide or applicable to all residential customers, with no occupancy or income-based circuit breaker in the text. The committee then heard testimony from Alexandra Fasulo, introduced as an entrepreneur and farmer in Schuylerville, about her concerns regarding the Office of Renewable Energy Siting (ORES) and utility-scale solar development on farmland and grasslands. She argued that solar developers were pressuring landowners, including older and lower-income property owners, into long-term leases, that ORES approves most projects despite local opposition, and that the process lacks transparency, with redacted documents and limited public access to information. She also criticized the siting of solar projects on productive farmland and said decommissioning rules could leave equipment buried in the soil. Committee members responded that the Legislature has already taken steps to protect high-quality soils, that ORES was created by statute and operates within the Public Service Department, and that DEC and ORES are supposed to work together rather than ORES superseding DEC. Several senators said they were sympathetic to concerns about farmland and community engagement, but also emphasized the need to expand renewable energy and balance that with land preservation. Members suggested that specific complaints about ORES transparency or solar siting could be addressed through future legislation or by inviting ORES and PSC officials back for further discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• attorneys, and everyone involved in the system came into her courtroom at one time when she heard this docket

Bills: SB502, SB513, SB622, SB670, SB731, SB732, SB916, SB961, SB1122

Keywords: SB 502, Texas peace officers, Health and Human Services Commission, HHSC Office of Inspector General, OIG investigators, law enforcement classification, Schedule C, state employee benefits, injury benefits, peace officer status, commissioned officers, state auditor classification, Government Code, Code of Criminal Procedure, human services, health and human services, law enforcement compensation, public employee benefits, Texas state law enforcement, child welfare

Transcript Highlights:

• We operate on dockets<02:55:14.080> and<02:55:14.399> if<02:55:14.560> you<02:55
• and if you have a problem with dockets and if you have a problem with your<02:55:15.920> utility,
• counter and have a proceeding docketing counter and have a proceeding on<02:56:13.200> and<02
• Uh, we also have a pending docket to decide this matter with a different form or flavor, so to speak.
• Uh we also have a pending docket rules.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Senate Bill 1735 is a cleanup bill that aligns the oversight of the technology centers and career tech

Bills: SB710, SB843, SB1317, SB1338, SB1410, SB1477, SB1489, SB1593, SB1614, SB1630, SB1632, SB1633, SB1670, SB1726, SB1734, SB1725, SB1735, SB1894, SB1975, SB346, SB2045

Keywords: teacher preparation, teacher education, teacher shortage, teacher workforce, educator pipeline, alternative certification, apprenticeship, residency program, paraprofessional pathway, high school to teacher pathway, nontraditional teacher candidates, Commission for Educational Quality and Accountability, TeachForwardOK, higher education, public school districts, workforce development, grant program, technical assistance provider, mastery-based assessment, emergency clause

Transcript Highlights:

• Cleanup program.
• Early stages of us figuring out cleanup.
• Early stages of us figuring out cleanup.
• These are sites where Ecology either conducts the cleanup or supervises the cleanup by another party
• levels and plans and assessing the efficacy of cleanups?

Summary: The I-900 Subcommittee held a public hearing on the State Auditor’s performance audit, Community Engagement During Contaminated Site Cleanups. Auditors said Ecology directly conducts or supervises cleanup at only about 8% of active contaminated sites, while most sites are handled by third parties or have no cleanup plan yet. The audit found that Ecology generally met legal requirements at the sites it oversees, but community engagement varied, was not consistently tailored to local needs, and lacked a systematic “lessons learned” process. Auditors also found inconsistent coordination between Ecology and the Department of Health, and limited guidance for staff on when to collaborate. Tribal feedback was mixed: some tribes said engagement met their needs, while others wanted earlier and more tailored outreach. Committee members pressed the auditors on why many third-party-managed sites appeared to have little or no public involvement, and whether Ecology has broader authority to require public engagement and oversight. The auditors responded that their review focused on community engagement requirements, not the full cleanup permitting process, and said the gap they identified was the lack of required oversight for third-party engagement. Members also asked about tribal engagement, exposure scenarios, and the meaning of “active” and “planless” sites. Ecology officials said they agreed with many of the findings, were already taking steps to improve community research, lessons-learned reviews, tribal guidance, and coordination with Health, and had recently launched a public email notification system for site status changes. They also said some recommendations would require additional funding or staff resources. Public testimony supported stronger community engagement and more resources for Ecology. Washington Conservation Action said contaminated sites disproportionately affect communities of color and low-income communities, praised the audit for highlighting the need for better site-specific engagement, and urged full funding for MTCA-related work. The hearing ended with the chair inviting written comments and adjourning the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• liable party to conduct the cleanup.
• cleanup.
• About 80% of cleanup sites are privately owned, and most of these cleanups are conducted voluntarily
• Next are federal facility cleanups.
• Cleanups pending in dark blue on the bottom, cleanups in progress in the middle blue, and no further

Summary: The committee first heard updates on the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) and related funding. Department of Ecology staff explained how MTCA and the hazardous substance tax support cleanup, prevention, stormwater, and local assistance programs, but said forecasted revenues have declined while appropriations and transfers have outpaced incoming funds. Ecology said the operating account will require underspending to stay balanced this biennium and that the problem is ongoing, with further reductions possible if forecasts worsen. Ecology also reviewed the state cleanup program, noting there are more than 14,500 cleanup sites in Washington and that new sites continue to be discovered faster than they are cleaned up. A question from Representative Lee raised the long-term issue of declining fossil-fuel-based revenue, and Ecology agreed that this is a future structural concern even though the current shortfall is driven more by forecasts and transfers than by fuel-use decline. The Pollution Liability Insurance Agency described its underground storage tank and heating oil programs, saying it has modernized from a reinsurance model to a financial assurance model with stronger state oversight and cleanup milestones. Russ Olson said the agency’s dedicated petroleum tax account is in strong financial condition, but emphasized the importance of preserving that funding source. He also discussed the loan and grant program for historic commercial releases and a new heating oil loan/grant program, while noting the agency is working on equity concerns where liens can be disproportionate to property values in smaller communities. Practitioners and advocates then offered differing views on MTCA’s performance: one attorney urged a collaborative review process to make cleanups faster, less expensive, and more certain, while another consultant argued the program is too conservative and process-heavy and should focus more narrowly on actual exposure and realistic cleanup standards. Environmental and community groups countered that MTCA is essential for cleanup, pollution prevention, stormwater control, and public participation, and that it is especially important for environmental justice communities such as the Duwamish Valley. Port and city representatives stressed that MTCA grants and cleanup funding are critical for large redevelopment projects, but said long timelines, permitting delays, and funding uncertainty can slow projects and jeopardize commitments. The committee then shifted to utility wildfire risk. Staff summarized recent legislation, including requirements for utility wildfire mitigation plans, creation of a wildfire mitigation standards work group, authorization for captive insurance by local governments and PUDs, securitization authority for disaster costs, and the existing wildfire response and resilience account. Chelan County PUD and Puget Sound Energy described extensive mitigation efforts such as vegetation management, grid hardening, undergrounding, AI smoke cameras, weather stations, enhanced operating settings, public safety power shutoffs, and community outreach. Both said wildfire risk is rising and insurance costs are increasing, and Chelan PUD asked the Legislature to restore funding to the wildfire response and resilience account. The Office of the Insurance Commissioner said a 2022 utility liability market study found insurance availability is tightening as perceived risk rises, and reported that a 2025 work group recommended restoring community resilience funding, requiring insurers to share wildfire risk scores and mitigation steps with property owners, and creating a grant program based on insurance industry wildfire standards. A PNNL scientist added that wildfire probability is increasing in parts of Washington and that mitigation requires long-term, landscape-scale coordination. The final speaker began describing California’s approach to wildfire risk, but the transcript cuts off before that presentation concluded.

Transcript Highlights:

• Many states administered cleanup programs that for years experienced similar cleanup delays, but then
• To create proper incentives for private parties to perform cleanups, their share of cleanup costs must
• I've done work under Superfund cleanups, RECRA cleanups, state voluntary cleanups, and there's really
• I'm going to ask you, I'm assuming that you've done cleanups for Superfund sites and cleanups for private
• or state level cleanups.

Keywords: presidential nominations, EPA, environmental policy, Fish and Wildlife, committee meeting

Summary: The committee meeting focused on the presidential nominations of Brigadier General Brian Nesvick as Director of Fish and Wildlife and Jess Kramer and Sean Donahue as assistant administrators at the EPA. Each nominee presented their qualifications and experiences in their respective fields, with an emphasis on their commitment to uphold the laws passed by Congress. The discussion highlighted the nominees' dedication to addressing environmental issues and their proactive stances on regulatory matters. After deliberation, votes were held to report the nominations favorably, despite some members voicing concerns regarding their qualifications and potential conflicts with environmental interests.

Transcript Highlights:

• I actually didn't—we weren't in that docket, but it looked like a reasonable exercise under 374-G.
• ><01:25:24.639> weren't<01:25:24.960> in<01:25:25.120> that<01:25:25.440> docket
• , didn't we didn't weren't in that docket, didn't we didn't weren't in that docket, but<01:25:26.480

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Going on into today's docket, here we have HB 1557, 1563, and 1835.
• Going on into today's uh docket. Okay. Going on into today's uh docket.
• You know, there are certain things which we had on the docket before.
• You know, there are certain things which we had on the docket before.
• You know, there are certain things which we had on the docket before.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And, uh, small claims cases, it could take one to two years to even get docketed.
• And, uh, small claims cases, it could take one to two years to even get docketed.
• And, uh, small claims cases, it could take one to two years to even get docketed.
• And, uh, small claims cases, it could take one to two years to even get docketed.
• And, uh, small claims cases, it could take one to two years to even get docketed.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all