Transcript Highlights:

• Including a plan for the studied mechanisms to replace the electrically electric vehicle search charges
• </c> comprehensive analysis of electricity comprehensive analysis of electricity used<00:03:35.120><c
• </c> mechanisms to replace the electrically mechanisms to replace the electrically electric<00:05:01.919
• </c> thing with electricity? thing with electricity? &gt;&gt; Mhm. &gt;&gt; Mhm. &gt;&gt; Mhm.
• In this case, it was electricity. fuel. In this case, it was electricity.

Summary: The working group approved the prior meeting minutes with one correction to reflect Laura Ziggler’s attendance. Staff then outlined the report due February 13, 2026, which must summarize the group’s activities and include findings and recommendations adopted by the group; the report will go to the governor and legislative transportation leaders. The chair emphasized that the group’s charge is broad and includes analyzing electricity used as vehicle fuel infrastructure opportunities and barriers, developing policy and funding recommendations for sustainable transportation funding, and reviewing other states’ laws and policies. Discussion focused heavily on how to replace declining gas tax revenue as more vehicles become electric. The chair framed the issue as a fairness and implementation challenge, noting that EVs are a growing share of the fleet and that the group should consider both policy and funding, not just one or the other. Members and guests raised several ideas already submitted, including a road user charge, changes to the EV charging tax, ending or modifying the EV surcharge, broadening the tax to publicly owned charging stations, reducing the charging level threshold to level 2, ending sales tax on electricity, addressing off-road use, and expanding the definition of auto parts to include charging equipment. Representative Elkins argued that charging based on electricity used at home is impractical for most vehicles, that public charging is already much more expensive than home charging, and that the current sales tax plus surcharge amounts to double taxation for public-charging users. He said a mileage-based user charge modeled on Utah’s approach is workable, could be phased in, and could preserve privacy by allowing a voluntary or alternative method for home charging estimates. Senator Howe responded that home electricity use can be estimated similarly to mileage deductions on taxes and said the state should tax all electricity used as fuel, regardless of charger level, if it can be identified. Other speakers echoed that all road users should pay a fair share and that the main challenge is implementation. Tony Kis of Quick Trip asked that a late letter be included in the record and urged clarification of the sales, use, excise tax, and collection rules to avoid double taxation and reduce administrative burden, noting the current monthly collection date and suggesting the group should streamline collection methods. No final policy decisions or votes were taken beyond approval of the minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• But the fact is it's got nothing to do with electricity, and why we bury this in the electric rates is
• But the fact remains is that the electric payers in my towns should not be paying higher electric rates
• and why we bury this in with electricity and why we bury this in the<00:09:38.959><c> electric</c><00
• </c><00:11:20.560><c> bill</c> bad so we hide it in the electric bill bad so we hide it in the electric
• They produce electricity.

Committee: House Science, Technology and Energy

Transcript Highlights:

• Need to expand the electric grid.
• Yeah, you know, so my electric bill dropped a lot.
• It's a great program between RAR and Koto Electric.
• Costs for basic services like electricity are hardest on low-income Minnesotans, and electric cooperatives
• I think that was just for potentially rural electrics.

Committee: House Energy Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• . electricity. electricity.
• electricity.
• </c> Maryland's electricity? Maryland's electricity?
• </c> on electric bills. on electric bills.
• </c> electric buses. electric buses.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> Bachelor of Science degree in electrical Bachelor of Science degree in electrical engineering<00
• </c> and promote the adoption of electric and promote the adoption of electric vehicles<00:03:33.040>
• </c> trips in electric vehicles. trips in electric vehicles.
• </c> electric vehicles, is less than 30,000. electric vehicles, is less than 30,000.
• </c><00:14:13.760><c> Um,</c> electric vehicles. Um, electric vehicles.

Summary: The Budget Review Subcommittee on Transportation met with a quorum, approved the June 3, 2026 minutes, and then heard a presentation from Mike Proctor of Evolve Kentucky on electric vehicles and charging infrastructure. Proctor described Evolve Kentucky as a nonprofit formed in 2016 to promote EV adoption and charger deployment, said the group has helped place more than 135 chargers at 65 locations, and reported that Kentucky EV registrations have grown rapidly but still represent about 1% of the state’s roughly 3 million vehicles. He also outlined the group’s view that EV drivers and charger operators already contribute to state revenue through annual vehicle fees, charger taxes, utility taxes, and related business taxes, and cited figures showing rising revenue collections as EV adoption increases. A major theme of the presentation was that EV owners are paying their “fair share” rather than being overcharged. Proctor said the current $126 annual EV fee is roughly comparable to the fuel tax a typical gasoline vehicle would pay, and noted that public charging can add additional tax burdens for drivers who cannot charge at home, such as those living in apartments or condos. He also argued that EVs provide broader benefits, including lower noise and air pollution, grid-stabilizing nighttime charging, tourism spending at destination chargers, and reduced road wear for passenger EVs compared with much heavier vehicles. Members questioned Proctor about whether EV owners are paying more than their fair share, how the fee compares with gasoline taxes, and whether apartment and condo residents are disproportionately affected because they rely on public chargers. Proctor responded that the fee was intended to bring EV owners into parity with gas vehicles, not to overcharge them, and said some public chargers are free while others are used by drivers who cannot charge at home. No additional votes or formal actions were taken beyond the minutes approval.

Transcript Highlights:

• bikes, e-bikes, and electric motorcycles.
• And currently there isn't a good classification for an electric motorcycle. of other layers whether it
• </c> electric bikes, e-bikes and electric electric bikes, e-bikes and electric motorcycles.<00:03:34.840
• </c> So an individual could be driving an electric motorcycle, get into an accident like happened to
• So I hope that's what electric assist.

Summary: The committee took up House File 3785, a bill from Representative DePauw dealing with classification issues for electric bicycles and electric motorcycles. DePauw said the bill responds to concerns raised by a constituent, the Department of Public Safety, insurance companies, and law enforcement about the lack of a clear category for electric motorcycles and the need for clearer rules on where these vehicles may be used and how accidents and liability are handled. Several members spoke in support of the bill’s safety and education benefits, while also noting that the issue is still evolving and may need further work before final passage. The committee first considered and adopted the DePauw A11 amendment, described as a technical amendment to allow the Department of Natural Resources to use appropriated money or license-fee revenue for signage. Fiscal staff explained that the DNR has a $30,000 cost and $32,000 in offsetting revenue in a special revenue fund, but cannot access that revenue without a direct appropriation, making the amendment necessary. Representative Frazier noted the bill still needs additional work and confirmed with DePauw that further changes would be made before the bill reaches the floor. After discussion, including comments about the growing use of e-bikes by seniors, people with disabilities, commuters, and families, the committee voted to advance House File 3785 as amended. The motion to refer the bill to the general register passed on a voice vote, with no opposition recorded.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, an apples-to-apples comparison is looking at Hawaii's electricity versus the nation's electricity
• across the country use both electricity across the country use both electricity and<00:58:50.799><c>
• </c><00:59:47.040><c> Al</c> finally, Hawaiian Electric Shannon Al finally, Hawaiian Electric Shannon
• Do you are you familiar with what's on the electric bill? Like does What's on the electric bill?
• > electric</c><01:36:23.760><c> vehicle</c> relating to electrical electric vehicle relating to electrical

Bills: HB1617

Committee: House Energy & Environmental Protection

Summary: The committees heard testimony on HB 1949, which would create a public dashboard for the green fee to improve transparency and accountability. Testimony from the Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission, the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development, and many community and conservation groups was generally supportive, with several speakers urging that the governor’s project recommendations remain largely intact and that community-driven projects continue to guide spending. One amendment was suggested to place the dashboard at the Department of Budget and Finance for fiscal expertise, while other testimony favored keeping it with the commission. Members asked about procurement, ETS involvement, recurring hosting costs, and whether the dashboard could be funded from green fee revenues; the commission said it could work with ETS and that green fee funds could reasonably be used. The committees then voted to pass HB 1949 with amendments. The committees also heard HB 2618, which would require the governor to submit a separate bill for amounts tied to any increase in the transient accommodations tax and, in later discussion, was expanded into a broader restructuring of future green fee allocations. Testimony from the Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission, Hawaii Reef and Ocean Coalition, and others supported the bill and emphasized the value of more predictable, dedicated funding for conservation and climate-related work. During decision-making, the chair described amendments creating several special funds under DLNR, including a watershed biodiversity and wildfire risk reduction fund, an aquatic resources conservation fund, a coastal restoration fund, a cesspool conversion revolving loan fund, and a green fee special fund for remaining revenues, with recommended amounts discussed for some of the funds. The committees voted to pass HB 2618 with amendments. The hearing then moved to HB 1644, a consumer protection measure for residential solar sales that would require compliance with consumer protection laws, licensing or contractor affiliation for sellers, and a standardized disclosure form. Testimony in support came from the Hawaii Green Infrastructure Authority, DCCA’s Office of Consumer Protection, Kauai Island Utility Cooperative, the Hawaii Solar Energy Association, and several solar companies and individuals. Supporters said the bill would address complaints about third-party sales practices and improve disclosure, especially around financing. The committee then began hearing HB 2243, which would require electric utilities to provide public, electronic customer bill impact analyses and annual reports to the Public Utilities Commission; the Division of Consumer Advocacy and the PUC offered comments supporting the measure’s intent.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:05:32.720><c> Got</c> Hawaiian electric owned utility. Got Hawaiian electric owned utility.
• </c> 2002 and we're one of about 900 electric 2002 and we're one of about 900 electric cooperatives<00
• And also electric vehicle adoption.
• </c> quarter of electric sales in the state. quarter of electric sales in the state.
• </c> electric long haul semi-truckss a week. electric long haul semi-truckss a week.

Bills: SCR48 , SCR28 , SCR74 , SCR62 , SCR60 , SCR89 , SCR147 , SCR179 , SCR182 , SCR59 , SCR54 , SCR180

Keywords: affordable housing, housing credits, perpetual credits, development, Hawaii Housing Finance, Vietnam veterans, commemorative medal, recognition, working group, Hawaii, no-bid contracts, emergency procurement, audit, state agencies, public funds, accountability, emergency response, disability access, 911 systems, life-saving measures

Transcript Highlights:

• non-emitting electric generation and electricity from renewable resources for the same end uses.
• non-emitting electric generation and electricity from renewable resources for the same end uses.
• A major concern is the availability and reliability of electricity.
• A major concern is the availability and reliability of electricity.
• , which is a path, if you can find the electricity.

Summary: The Environment and Energy Committee heard testimony on House Bill 2537, which would change how energy-intensive, trade-exposed facilities (EITEs) are treated under the Climate Commitment Act. Committee staff and the bill sponsor explained that the measure would require Ecology to update its post-2034 report to include proposed allowance-reduction methods, leakage-risk adjustments, and consignment recommendations, and would add new reporting and decarbonization-planning requirements for EITEs to continue receiving no-cost allowances. The committee also briefly took up House Bill 2245, a separate Clean Energy Transformation Act bill, and later voted the proposed substitute out of committee on an 11-8 vote with 2 excused, after debate over exemptions for certain utilities and market customers. Supporters of HB 2537, including The Nature Conservancy, NRDC, Washington Conservation Action, Climate Solutions, Clean and Prosperous Washington, Ecology, and some utility representatives, said the bill would provide needed clarity, better data, and a path for long-term industrial decarbonization while helping prevent emissions leakage. They argued that EITEs receive substantial public value through free allowances and should be required to document emissions sources, energy needs, and feasible reduction pathways so the state can design a post-2035 policy consistent with climate goals. Ecology said it generally supports the bill, though it recommended streamlining duplicative reporting and noted the work would require significant agency resources not included in the governor’s budget. Opponents, including the Association of Washington Business, the Northwest Pulp and Paper Association, the Association of Western Pulp and Paperworkers, WISPA, the Alliance of Western Energy Consumers, Food Northwest, Simplot, Kaiser Aluminum, and Newcor Steel, warned that the bill could increase compliance burdens, expose sensitive business information, and worsen leakage risks by making Washington less competitive. They said many facilities have already made major investments and face high capital costs, limited clean electricity supply, permitting delays, and technologies that are not yet commercially viable at scale. Several speakers pointed to recent plant closures and job losses in pulp and paper, food processing, and metals as evidence that leakage is already occurring, and urged the committee to preserve flexibility, protect confidentiality, and consider targeted funding or other incentives rather than new mandates alone.

Transcript Highlights:

• So this will not raise electricity bills at all in the near term.
• And we know that we cannot continue to accept soaring electricity rates.
• Kent Cal, San Diego Gas & Electric, in support.
• This is because we are going to curtail less clean electricity.
• Joe Zanzi of San Diego Gas & Electric in support. Joe Zanzi of San Diego Gas & Electric in support.

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Utilities and Energy convened with a quorum and first heard SB 254, a major utility affordability and wildfire package authored by Senator Becker and coauthored by Assemblymember Petrie-Norris. The bill was described as combining wildfire mitigation reforms, $6 billion in securitized financing for future fire-mitigation capital spending, a public ownership/transmission financing program, tighter scrutiny of utility profits, clean energy permitting streamlining, stronger customer connection timelines, and a successor wildfire fund/continuation account to replace the current fund. Supporters, including the Governor’s office, TURN, labor, clean energy groups, utilities, and public advocates, said the measure would lower bills, stabilize utilities, protect fire victims, and reduce wildfire-related bankruptcy risk. Opponents and some local government groups raised concerns about affordability impacts, the volumetric wildfire fee, strict liability, and provisions they said could affect local control. After discussion, the committee approved SB 254 on a 16-0 vote and sent it to the floor. The committee then held an informational hearing on AB 825, which would enable California to participate in a West-wide electricity market. The authors said the proposal could save ratepayers up to $1 billion annually, improve reliability by allowing California to draw on a larger regional supply, reduce curtailment of renewable power, and lower greenhouse gas emissions. Support came from environmental organizations, labor, utilities, community choice aggregators, large energy users, and the Public Advocates Office, all emphasizing cost savings, reliability, and cleaner energy integration. TURN opposed the measure, warning that last-minute amendments removed safeguards against subsidizing out-of-state fossil generation and could expose California ratepayers to unwanted costs. Members questioned governance, exit rights, CPUC oversight, and local control, and the authors responded that the bill includes multiple safeguards, legislative reporting, the ability to exit without penalty, and continued local consultation. No vote was taken because the hearing was informational only.

Transcript Highlights:

• And particularly for accepting suggested languages from CUB in order to protect electric rate payers
• My name is Ryan Hentges, and I'm the CEO of Dakota Electric Association, located in Farmington.
• Dakota Electric is a not-for-profit electric cooperative that serves over 115,000 members across Dakota
• The data center industry is committed to paying its full cost of service for electricity.
• As we continue to invest in our power grid to serve a growing electric load.

Bills: HF2928 , HF2912 , HF2297

Committee: House Energy Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• We deliver these tons to three Basin Electric facilities.
• I'm a Capital Electric member, so Basin Electric rates to Capital Electric is really important to me.
• Why did this electricity kick off?
• Then Basin Electric took over in 1988.
• I'd like to visit McKenzie Electric.

Summary: The committee met at the Coteau Freedom Mine in Mercer County, approved the June 2 minutes, and heard an overview of the mine from Coteau Properties president Andrew Hawbaker. He described the Freedom Mine’s production history, customer mix, safety record, reclamation practices, workforce, community involvement, and economic impact. Members asked about how long land stays in production before reclamation, how quickly it returns to agriculture, labor shortages, groundwater impacts, and which skilled trades are hardest to fill. Hawbaker said the mine typically disturbs land for three to five years, reclamation returns much of the land to agricultural use, and the biggest hiring challenges are electricians, welders, mechanics, operators, engineers, and accountants. The committee then heard from Public Service Commission Chairman Randy Christman on coal mining reclamation. He reviewed the history of North Dakota and federal reclamation laws, the PSC’s permitting and inspection authority, bonding requirements, contemporaneous reclamation standards, and how the state handles topsoil, subsoil, drainage, and revegetation. He emphasized that North Dakota’s program is well regarded, with frequent inspections and no corrective-action issues in recent federal reviews. Christman also discussed problems caused by federal coal ownership that can delay mine plans, and he answered questions about reclamation timing, wildlife easements, wind and pipeline reclamation, and whether similar bonding concepts could apply to data centers. In the afternoon, the committee received an update from Lignite Energy Council President and CEO Jonathan Fortner on the lignite industry. He highlighted the industry’s long-term role in providing reliable electricity, jobs, and tax revenue, along with North Dakota’s low electricity rates and strong grid reliability. Fortner discussed severance and conversion tax revenues, federal regulatory changes, litigation over EPA rules, carbon capture, critical minerals, and the potential for large-load customers such as data centers to support new coal generation. He said the industry sees a window of opportunity for growth and expressed support for new large-load development, while noting that diversified energy companies are also pursuing natural gas and other resources. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken beyond approving the minutes and adjourning for the tour.

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill, you heard a proposed substitute at the time, and that required each electric utility with an
• It clarifies that electric utilities must explain rather than demonstrate a decision to exclude an element
• It removes all requirements for the Department of Commerce, the UTC, electric utilities, and data centers
• law language that requires no-cost allowances to reflect the increased scope of coverage in the electric
• And it also repeals the sales and use tax exemptions... ...coal-fired electric generating plant.

Summary: The Senate Environment, Energy, and Technology Committee took executive action on 11 bills. It advanced SB 624 on an Appliance Affordability Index study with an amendment excluding consumer electronics, and SB 6284 on artificial intelligence systems with a proposed substitute adding definitions, developer requirements, exemptions for some entities, and clarifying enforcement. The committee also moved forward SB 5609 on cultural resource protection under SEPA after rejecting an amendment to the proposed substitute, and SB 6172 on coal plant treatment under cap-and-invest after adopting an amendment related to emergency federal orders. Several energy and climate bills were also approved, including SB 6246 on emissions-intensive trade-exposed facilities, SB 5932 on alternative jet fuel production, SB 6269 on the definition of motor fuel, and SB 6223 on community-scaled weatherization projects. On SB 5975 concerning lead in cookware, the committee rejected one proposed substitute and adopted another that bans intentionally added lead in cookware beginning in 2027 and directs future regulation through the Safer Products program. The committee then considered SB 5466 on electric transmission reliability and capacity, taking up multiple amendments to a proposed second substitute. Amendments addressing wildfire risk, corridor identification, landowner consultation, eminent domain, and wildfire liability were all rejected, and the bill was advanced on a due pass recommendation. In each case, the committee’s final action was to pass the bills or substitutes subject to signatures, with several measures referred onward to Ways and Means or Rules as noted.

Transcript Highlights:

• As explained, this bill would increase the electric rates paid by customers of Pacific Gas and Electric
• Reed Addis, on behalf of the Electric Vehicle Charging Association.
• We're already having trouble selling electric vehicles.
• I'm testifying on behalf of Pacific Gas and Electric.
• Colleagues, since 2022, PG&E has raised electric rates by 40%.

Summary: The committee heard several energy, water, and utility bills, with extensive testimony on cost, ratepayer impacts, and climate or reliability goals. SB 919 by Senator Grayson would extend the biomethane monetary incentive program through 2030 and support renewable natural gas development by reducing interconnection cost barriers. Supporters said RNG helps methane reduction and organic waste diversion, while opponents, including TURN and environmental groups, argued the bill could shift costs to ratepayers and subsidize combustion-based fuels, especially dairy digesters. The author said committee amendments removed the rate-basing provisions and instead urged the CPUC to act quickly on its pending decision; the bill was left for a later vote. SB 931 by Senator Laird would reauthorize the Diablo Canyon Community Impact Mitigation Program through 2030. Supporters said San Luis Obispo County and local schools rely on the funding for emergency preparedness and public safety, while TURN argued the extension would add about $47 million in statewide ratepayer costs and should instead be paid from existing PG&E deal revenues. Members discussed the bill as a continuation of the 2022 Diablo Canyon agreement, and the author said the measure simply restores the five years omitted from that deal. The committee also heard SB 1215 by Senator Cortese, which would direct the CPUC to set deployment targets for EV charging in multifamily housing. Supporters said renters and apartment residents are largely shut out of home charging, and that prior utility programs showed the model can be cost-effective and beneficial to ratepayers. The bill was amended to address affordability, ratepayer benefits, and limits on major system upgrades. SB 1295 by Senator Stern would create a framework for using distributed batteries and other local resources to solve grid constraints more cheaply than traditional infrastructure. Supporters said it could improve reliability and reduce costs by targeting batteries where they provide the most grid value, while utilities said they were open to continued discussion. SB 1359, also by Senator Stern, would require the CPUC to more carefully evaluate major gas infrastructure investments and alternatives such as electrification before approving new spending. Environmental groups supported the bill as a guardrail against stranded assets, while gas utilities opposed it, warning it could undermine the obligation to serve, create safety and reliability risks, and retroactively change the rules for approved investments. On water policy, SB 1125 by Senator Menjivar would create a statewide low-income water rate assistance program upon appropriation. Supporters said about 1.6 million households have water debt and that affordability is a statewide issue, not just a problem for disadvantaged communities. Some members raised concerns that the bill lacked a funding source and that state mandates, such as chromium-6 treatment requirements, already strain local water agencies; the author and supporters responded that the bill includes administrative caps and transparency measures and is intended to work alongside future funding. The committee then heard SB 1098 by Senator Pérez, which would restrict the use of utility memorandum and balancing accounts by requiring exceptional circumstances, adding sunset dates, and creating cost-sharing or lower-return rules for certain spending. TURN and other supporters said the accounts allow utilities to recover costs after the fact with too little discipline, while Edison and PG&E opposed the bill, arguing that some costs are unpredictable and that the CPUC already has a formal review process. SB 1125 was moved to Appropriations with a roll call, and the roll was left open for additional votes; the other measures were discussed with no final committee actions announced in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> on the generation of electricity. on the generation of electricity.
• </c> form of much higher electricity prices. form of much higher electricity prices.
• </c> electricity bills. electricity bills.
• </c> Marylander who pays an electric bill. Marylander who pays an electric bill.
• </c> bill rates for for electric payers. bill rates for for electric payers.

Transcript Highlights:

• AFTER NEARLY TWO DECADES OF RELATIVELY FLAT ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION THE U.S.
• DATA CENTERS REQUIRE A LARGE AMOUNT OF ELECTRICITY.
• SIMILAR TO WHAT WE HAVE SEEN WITH ELECTRIC VEHICLE FORECASTS.
• WATER, ELECTRICITY, IT SCALED BACK TO A DEGREE.
• IF YOU USE AIR COOLING YOU WILL USE MORE ELECTRICITY AND LESS WATER.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><03:20:16.800><c> vehicle</c> prevent an autoclass electric vehicle prevent an autoclass electric
• I'm asking you guys, can you just take out the electric and have an electric component in there?
• </c> electric dirt bikes, if you will. electric dirt bikes, if you will.
• And we were able to define the difference by neighborhood electric vehicle ... neighborhood electric
• </c> commission as a low-speed electric bike. commission as a low-speed electric bike.

Committee: House Transportation

Transcript Highlights:

• Demand for electricity associated with large computing facilities is growing rapidly across our country
• And national forecasts project record electricity demand in 2026 and 2027, driven in part by data center
• Electricity demand from data centers alone is projected to triple by 2030.
• It addresses electric rates, holding Vermont ratepayers harmless. It addresses water usage.
• >> You may. >> Madam Speaker, Vermont's electric rates Madam Speaker, Vermont's electric rates are being

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh you can put you can do electric cars.
• Particularly with data centers coming online that use a lot of electricity, the demand for electricity
• </c><00:12:15.040><c> rates</c> make sure you know that electric rates make sure you know that electric
• </c><00:12:25.920><c> the</c> online that use a lot of electricity the online that use a lot of electricity
• </c><00:12:33.279><c> electricity</c> we keep our electric electricity we keep our electric electricity

Transcript Highlights:

• Joe Zanzi with San Diego Gas & Electric and SoCalGas.
• Madam Chair and members, Kent Cowse with San Diego Gas and Electric in opposition.
• This means that electricity during those periods is cheaper than zero.
• Valerie Vlahos with Pacific Gas and Electric Company. We do have an opposed position on this bill.
• Hello, I'm Lourdes-Sayon with San Diego Gas & Electric.

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Utilities and Energy met without a quorum at first and proceeded as a subcommittee, then later established quorum and took up three bills. AB 1715, by Assembly Member Schiavo, would require the CPUC to create a searchable online database of utility advice letters, responses, and resolutions dating back to 2020, and add quarterly reporting on taxpayer-funded loans and grants to investor-owned utilities. Supporters, including TURN, said the bill would improve transparency and accountability around utility financing and ratepayer savings; no formal opposition testified, though SDG&E and SoCalGas said committee amendments addressed their main concerns. The bill was moved do pass as amended to Appropriations and ultimately passed 16-0. AB 1761, by Assembly Member Rogers, would improve transparency around the PCIA charge paid by community choice aggregators and other departing load customers by allowing advance access to data used in the calculation through an existing CPUC nondisclosure process. CalCCA, several CCAs, local governments, and clean energy groups supported the bill, arguing that current PCIA-setting practices are opaque and can cause rate shock; IOUs opposed, citing concerns about market-sensitive data and noting an existing CPUC process they said had not been fully used. After discussion of confidentiality protections and the committee amendments, the bill passed 15-0 to Appropriations. AB 1787, by Assembly Member Schultz, would require the CPUC to direct the large investor-owned utilities to offer optional dynamic rate tariffs once smart meter and related system upgrades approved on or after January 1, 2027 are in place. Supporters said dynamic pricing can help customers shift usage to lower-cost, cleaner periods and reduce peak demand costs, while opponents from PG&E, SDG&E, and SCE argued the bill was too prescriptive, could conflict with ongoing CPUC proceedings, and might create cost or implementation issues. The author said he would continue working with opponents and accepted committee amendments; the bill passed 13-0 to Appropriations. All three measures were reported out, and the committee adjourned.