Transcript Highlights:

• No. 2 on Resources, Environmental Protection and Energy.
• Catherine Chu with APEN, the Asian Pacific Environmental Network.
• Catherine Chu with APN, the Asian Pacific Environmental Network.
• , environmental justice, public transit, and public health organizations. 45 environmental, environmental
• Good morning, Greshina Mohabir with California Environmental Voters.

Summary: The joint hearing focused on CARB’s proposed April amendments to California’s cap-and-invest regulations, adopted under AB 1207 and SB 840. Committee members repeatedly framed the issue as a balance between climate ambition, affordability, leakage prevention, and the Legislature’s budget priorities. Several senators argued the proposal would weaken the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF), reduce funding for transit, affordable housing, drinking water, wildfire prevention, and other programs, and potentially undermine the Legislature’s intent in last year’s reauthorization. Others emphasized that the program’s core purpose is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and that any changes should preserve the cap’s integrity and the state’s climate targets. CARB Chair Lauren Sanchez said the amendments were designed to implement legislative direction while responding to public comment and economic uncertainty. She described four main changes: increasing electric bill credits, expanding the manufacturing decarbonization incentive (MDI) to $4 billion, adding about $800 million in additional compliance support for industry, and removing post-2030 allowance allocations from the current rulemaking. CARB said the proposal would still maintain declining caps aligned with 2030 and 2045 targets, provide near-term affordability relief, and support businesses and jobs while reducing emissions. In response to questions, CARB said the MDI has guardrails, is limited to emissions-reducing projects, and would require reporting and repayment if projects do not materialize. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the amendments are significant and could affect several legislative priorities. LAO highlighted that the MDI would add allowances above the cap, creating uncertainty about environmental ambition and 2030 compliance, while also shifting more allowances to industry and fewer to the GGRF. LAO said the proposal could significantly reduce GGRF revenues and noted that, if revenues fall to CARB’s estimated level, some tiered programs could go unfunded. The Department of Finance explained that GGRF revenue estimates are updated three times a year and are difficult to predict because they depend on auction outcomes and market conditions. Senators pressed both agencies on whether the proposal would raise consumer costs, whether industry savings would be passed through, and whether the Legislature should receive updated revenue estimates before voting on the budget.

Transcript Highlights:

• and basically said everybody at a high leakage risk.
• I'm California Director for Environmental Defense Fund.
• That's what is at play here, and that's also what's at risk.
• Noam Elroy, here on behalf of CRNR and R Environmental Services.
• California must continue to lead or risk falling behind.

Summary: The hearing was a select committee discussion on the transportation costs and impacts of California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), with opening remarks from the co-chairs and members emphasizing affordability, climate goals, and the need to explain the program’s benefits to the public. The first panel from CARB and the California Energy Commission described how LCFS works as a market-based, declining carbon-intensity program that rewards lower-carbon fuels, supports zero-emission vehicle infrastructure, and is intended to reduce greenhouse gases and local air pollution. They argued the program has driven billions in private investment, increased alternative fuel use, and that LCFS credit prices are not the main driver of retail gasoline prices, which they said are dominated by crude oil, refining, and distribution costs. Members questioned the panel on the gap between the regulatory target and actual carbon-intensity performance, the role of credit banking, which fuels are generating the most credits, how the 2025 amendments affected the program, and whether LCFS credits are truly additional. CARB explained that banking helps cost-effectiveness and investment certainty, that ethanol, renewable diesel, and biodiesel currently provide the largest volumes while electricity is expected to grow, and that the updated targets were informed by the state’s 2045 carbon-neutrality goals and the 2030 scoping plan. The Energy Commission said its data show environmental programs add some cost to gasoline but do not drive price volatility, which is mainly tied to crude oil and refinery margins. The second panel, featuring academic and research experts, focused on program design, out-of-state credit generation, and broader economic effects. Speakers said LCFS is successful because it ties incentives to emissions benefit, uses life-cycle analysis, and allows flexible compliance that lowers costs compared with more direct regulation. They also said the program’s benefits generally outweigh costs, that it can reduce air pollution disparities and support equity, but that some issues—especially indirect land use change, additionality, and older program assumptions—need more research and may warrant future rulemaking. One researcher noted that while LCFS likely raises gasoline prices somewhat, the effect is uncertain by design and usually smaller than normal market fluctuations, and another warned that limiting credit generation too narrowly could create legal and efficiency problems.

Transcript Highlights:

• Defense Council, California Trout, Trout Unlimited, the Environmental Law Foundation, and the Environmental
• The changes to Section 106.2 would still put water supply reliability at risk.
• , risks that have had an adverse ripple effect on family and throughout our beautiful state. ...risks
• Environmental rules have been met. Water quality standards have been met.
• Without action, we risk losing more than habitat.

Summary: The committee heard several water, wildlife, and land-use bills. AB 2218 by Assembly Member Calóra would establish a state policy directing agencies to recognize and address water-related inequities affecting tribes; tribal supporters said it is a needed step toward restoring a voice at the table, while water agencies and local government groups opposed it as vague and potentially harmful to water supply reliability. The bill was amended in committee and moved forward on a vote, though it was left on call. AB 2032 by Assembly Member Ransom, the Golden Mussel Response Act, would speed agency response to the invasive golden mussel by streamlining permits and research; it drew broad support and no opposition, and passed the committee unanimously to Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials. AB 1712 by Assembly Member Pacheco would let Santa Fe Springs sell its small, contaminated water system through a protest process instead of a municipal election; supporters said it would avoid major rate hikes and improve reliability, and it was moved to Appropriations, though the vote was left on call. The committee also considered AB 1722 by Assembly Member Hadwick, which would create a clearer self-defense exception under the California Endangered Species Act for people facing dangerous predators. The author and a sheriff described a fatal mountain lion attack and argued rural residents need certainty; Defenders of Wildlife withdrew opposition after committee amendments, and the bill advanced to Judiciary on a vote that was left on call. AB 1613 by Assembly Member Wilson would require an off-highway vehicle safety and stewardship certification course before operating OHVs on public lands starting in 2029. Supporters said it would reduce accidents and educate new riders, while Vice Chair Gonzalez raised concerns about fees, penalties, tourism, and impacts on low-income residents in his district; the bill passed on a split vote and was left on call. Later, AB 1808 by Assembly Member Carrillo would expand local permitting authority for Western Joshua tree projects and reduce or waive some fees for homeowners and public works. Supporters framed it as a way to balance conservation with housing and infrastructure needs, while environmental groups opposed changes they said would weaken avoidance and mitigation protections; the bill passed to Natural Resources and was left on call. AB 1894 by Assembly Member Rubio would address imported water deliveries and groundwater recharge in the context of golden mussel restrictions, with supporters arguing for a statewide, science-based approach that preserves water reliability; it advanced to Appropriations with no opposition. Throughout the hearing, members repeatedly emphasized the need to balance competing interests, especially around water reliability, tribal equity, public safety, and environmental protection.

Transcript Highlights:

• Marissa McClinton, Sierra Club Delaware Chapter Environmental Justice Organizer: Good afternoon.
• They do not have the same risk to consumers of being overcharged because you are guaranteed a discount
• We were very intentional when crafting legislation to make sure that there was no risk of cost shift
• Alison, environmental scientist for the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control
• folks and some business folks or all of the business folks and some of the environmental folks.

Bills: SB9

Committee: House Natural Resources & Energy

Summary: The House Natural Resources and Energy Committee met to consider two Senate bills. SB 321, with Senate Amendment 1, would change community solar billing so subscribers receive one consolidated utility bill instead of separate bills from the utility and the solar provider. Supporters said the bill would simplify enrollment and payment, improve customer retention—especially for low-income customers—and include safeguards such as guaranteed savings and an escrow mechanism to prevent cost shifts to other ratepayers. After public testimony from solar developers, the Public Advocate, the Sierra Club, and others, the committee initially lacked enough members present to release the bill, so the vote was circulated to absent members and the bill was later reported out for floor action. The committee then heard SB 9, with Senate Amendment 1, a long-negotiated wetlands protection bill. The sponsor and DNREC explained that it would create a state non-tidal wetlands program with exemptions for certain agricultural, conservation, and routine activities, general permits for some lower-impact projects, and individual permits for higher-value wetlands. Witnesses described the bill as a compromise among environmental, agricultural, development, and local government stakeholders, while some members raised questions about flooding, landowner impacts, wetland delineation, and the role of the regulatory advisory committee. Public testimony was broadly supportive from environmental groups, the Farm Bureau, builders, engineers, and affordable housing advocates. The committee then voted to release SB 9 from committee. At the end of the meeting, members offered thanks and remarks recognizing the chair’s service and leadership on environmental and energy issues. Both bills were ultimately released from committee and reported out.

Transcript Highlights:

• Moderate risk waste: Next, I will give an overview of how moderate risk waste is currently managed in
• As I mentioned before, household hazardous waste is a subset of moderate risk waste.
• Douglas County recently opened a new hazardous, moderate risk waste facility.
• Yet protecting human and environmental health is equally critical for us.
• access are and where the real safety risks exist across the state.

Summary: The committee held an interim work session focused first on carbon capture, utilization, and sequestration (CCUS), then on hazardous waste and extended producer responsibility (EPR). On the CCUS topic, industry and nonprofit presenters described point-source capture, direct air capture, mineralization, and geologic sequestration, emphasizing Washington’s basalt formations and state trust lands as strong candidates for storage. They argued that CCUS can help hard-to-abate industrial sectors, support jobs and investment, and provide a pathway for compliance, while also noting the need for clearer permitting, subsurface rights, pipeline authority, and storage infrastructure. Ecology and Commerce staff explained current state policy touchpoints, including Cap-and-Invest offsets and exemptions for permanently stored CO2, the public comment process underway to define “thousand-year” permanence, and how CCUS might fit within the Clean Energy Transformation Act without counting emitting generation as non-emitting. Some presenters supported more state action and primacy over federal permitting, while others warned about costs, energy use, uncertain capture performance, and the need to ensure real net greenhouse gas reductions and long-term liability protections. Members asked about public meetings, whether mineralized carbon would qualify as exempt under the Climate Commitment Act, the timeline for Ecology guidance, aquifer and water-quality concerns, energy intensity of capture systems, and liability if storage later proves problematic. Responses said Ecology’s guidance process is already underway, public meetings will be virtual, mineralized carbon would likely qualify if it meets the permanence standard, and EPA rules require storage in deep saline formations below drinking water aquifers. Industry speakers said capture energy use varies by source and concentration, and one presenter noted that some states use trust funds funded by injectors to address long-term liability. The second half of the session shifted to hazardous waste and EPR. Ecology staff reviewed existing product stewardship programs for electronics, paint, batteries, and mercury lights, and described moderate risk waste and household hazardous waste management in Washington. They highlighted that E-Cycle and PaintCare are producer-funded, that the battery stewardship program will begin in 2027, and that the mercury lamp program is in transition after its prior stewardship organization exited, prompting enforcement notices and a pending replacement plan. Ecology recommended best practices for future EPR programs, including clear producer and product definitions, full producer funding, convenience standards, annual reporting, and strong agency enforcement and plan approval authority. Local government speakers from King County and Douglas County described rising collection costs, equity and access barriers, rural travel distances, and the need for stable funding and flexible local implementation. King County said it collected over 3 million pounds of hazardous products in 2025 and supports EPR as a way to shift costs from ratepayers to producers, while Douglas County emphasized that rural residents will participate when services are accessible and that future systems should account for geography and local infrastructure.

Transcript Highlights:

• Good afternoon, Raquel Mason with the California Environmental Justice Alliance.
• There's not going to be any environmental effects.
• Raquel Mason, on behalf of the California Environmental Justice Alliance.
• I'm here also with our broad coalition of environmental justice partners.
• And I think environmental communities, environmental justice communities that are here, frontline communities

Summary: The committee first established a quorum, adopted the consent calendar for SB 423 and SB 581, and then heard a series of bills, most of which were presented as streamlining or safety measures tied to transportation, climate, public lands, health care, and higher education. SB 71 by Senator Wiener would extend and expand a CEQA exemption for sustainable transportation projects, adding modes such as microtransit, paratransit, shuttles, and ferries, while also accepting committee amendments that narrowed a Tier 4 diesel rail provision, restored existing right-of-way language with utility protections, and set a new sunset date. Support came from transit agencies, local governments, and advocacy groups; some members raised concerns about the diesel rail language and possible interactions with housing-related legislation, but the bill advanced on a due pass vote as amended. The committee then heard SB 614 by Senator Stern on carbon dioxide pipeline safety. The bill would direct the State Fire Marshal to adopt safety standards for intrastate CO2 pipelines, building from federal draft rules and adding state discretion and possible enhanced protections such as planning zones and more detailed exposure modeling. Supporters argued California needs to fill a federal regulatory gap to advance carbon capture and climate goals, while environmental justice and conservation groups opposed unless amended, citing risks from CO2 leaks and asking for stronger siting restrictions and more specificity. The bill passed on a due pass vote to Appropriations, with members noting the need for continued work on the safety provisions. Senator Arreguín also presented SB 304, which would temporarily lift public trust use restrictions on specific land at Jack London Square to allow the Port of Oakland more leasing flexibility under conditions and annual reporting. The measure was described as a limited, time-bound effort to address high vacancy and revitalize the waterfront, and it drew support from Oakland city and county representatives with no opposition in the room. The committee then approved SB 304 on a due pass vote. Arreguín’s SB 830 followed, creating CEQA streamlining for Sutter Health’s new Emeryville hospital campus and designating the City of Emeryville as lead agency; supporters said it would preserve East Bay hospital access before seismic deadlines, and the bill passed with broad support and no opposition. Finally, Senator Caballero presented SB 486, a higher education planning bill intended to align UC and CSU enrollment growth with regional sustainable communities plans and to remove the need to analyze a no-project alternative in certain long-range development plans. Supporters said the bill would better integrate university enrollment forecasting into regional planning, while opponents warned that eliminating the no-project analysis could weaken accountability for housing and infrastructure impacts around campuses. Committee members expressed mixed views and asked for further clarification, but the bill was moved out on a due pass as amended vote to Appropriations. The transcript then shifted to SB 629, a fire response and rebuilding bill, with the author describing amendments to apply fire safety requirements in wildfire-burned areas, update fire mapping, and require annual defensible space inspections, though the discussion was cut off before any final action was shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:03:38.920><c> challenges</c> solutions for environmental challenges solutions for environmental
• </c><00:27:04.240><c> review</c> from uh our environmental review from uh our environmental review program
• their environmental impacts um I grew up their environmental impacts um I grew up in<00:51:39.079><c>
• </c><00:57:14.920><c> consequences</c> unforeseen environmental consequences unforeseen environmental
• There’s just way too much risk here.

Summary: The joint committees first heard SB 1146, which would appropriate funds to the University of Hawaiʻi to develop an action plan and pre-engineering concept plan for debris management and water quality control in the Ala Wai Watershed. Testimony was largely supportive from DLNR, a UH student, and a special improvement district representative, while one speaker suggested the work should be coordinated with existing efforts to avoid duplication. Committee discussion focused on the multi-jurisdictional nature of the watershed, existing debris-trap work that captures only about 20 to 30 percent of debris, the role of the university in capstone projects and recommendations, and the relationship to the existing Geni project and other community efforts. Members also asked about costs, tracking progress, and the difference between water-quality improvements and the larger debris problem. The committees then voted to pass SB 1146 with amendments, including blanking out the appropriation and deferring the effective date to July 31, 2050. The motion passed in both committees, with votes recorded in support and no opposition noted during the decision-making. The committees also heard SB 321, which would deem certain fee simple privately owned lands transferred to adjacent property owners or community associations if specified conditions are met. Testimony was in support from several individuals, but members raised concerns about the lack of input from counties and the state, and about how the bill might affect roads already used by the public or maintained by local governments. After discussion, the committees voted to advance SB 321 unamended to the next committees, with the measure adopted in both committees despite one recorded no vote in the Water and Land committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• They said we’ve identified a particular risk, and there are options to address that risk.
• We find risks, then we work with the grower and all available options to mitigate that risk so that the
• They said we’ve identified a particular risk, and there are options to address that risk.
• They said we’ve identified a particular risk, and there are options to address that risk.
• We find risks, then we work with the grower and all available options to mitigate that risk so that the

Transcript Highlights:

• We're studying both in that environmental document.
• And we're studying both in that environmental document.
• So you can imagine it's a lot larger now if you factor in inflation and risk.
• risks and discuss probability and what kind of... ...of folks to identify those risks and discuss probability
• I would note that the risk estimating models, we do have 100 risk, you know, over 100 risk factors that

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:

• By allowing a challenge to the investigation itself rather than the discipline, we risk inconsistency
• In environmental justice communities, we have seen CEQA work.
• Closier on behalf of California Environmental Voters, in support.
• There's, of course, also no litigation risk when you don't have to do CEQA.
• But I really want to get back to the risk as to manufacturing jobs.

Committee: Senate Labor, Public Employment and Retirement

Transcript Highlights:

• Protection Information Center, and the Environmental Action Committee of West Marin.
• Grishina Mohovi with California Environmental Voters in support. Thank you.
• Grushina Mohabir, regulatory advocate with California Environmental Voters.
• Grishina Mohabir, California Environmental Voters, in support.
• and litigation without necessarily producing better environmental outcomes.

Committee: House Natural Resources

Transcript Highlights:

• Urban wildfire risk is real.
• So by integrating environmental risk with housing and affordability considerations, this bill helps us
• So by integrating environmental risk with housing and affordability considerations, this bill helps us
• it's a risk the community is taking because in the end of the day, the fire risk associated with new
• Yeah, I know fire department will assess the low-risk regular area or high-risk fire zones, but that

Committee: Senate Local Government

Summary: The committee heard several bills focused on wildfire resilience, land use, and local government transparency. SB 911 by Senator Becker would require notification to fire enforcement agencies when a home in a high fire severity zone is sold with an agreement for the buyer to bring the property into defensible-space compliance; the California Association of Realtors said it would drop opposition if the bill is amended to use the preliminary change of ownership report, and the bill passed 4-0 to Appropriations. SB 994 by Senator Cabaldon would bar local officials from signing nondisclosure agreements that prevent them from sharing information with the elected decision-makers of their jurisdiction; supporters framed it as a transparency measure, and it also passed 4-0 to Appropriations. SB 1041 by Senator Riggins would expand PACE financing for wildfire home-hardening improvements and add consumer protections, but it drew strong opposition from homeowner advocates, county treasurers, bankers, and others over predatory lending and lien concerns; it passed 3-2 and remained on call. The committee also considered SB 1075 by Senator Reyes, which would require local governments in AB 617 communities to consider air-quality reduction measures in land-use approvals for industrial and commercial projects. Environmental justice groups supported the bill as a way to implement community air plans, while counties, cities, business groups, builders, trucking interests, and others opposed it as duplicative of CEQA and a barrier to investment and jobs. After debate over local control and environmental justice, the bill passed 3-2 and remained on call. SB 958 by Senator Cabaldon would advance the Midway Rising redevelopment project in San Diego, replacing a former arena and parking lots with housing, affordable units, parks, and a new entertainment venue; with no opposition voiced, it passed 3-0 to Appropriations. Another wildfire-related measure, SB 1182 by Senator Allen, would require local governments to consider insurance availability in safety planning for development in high fire hazard areas and direct state technical guidance on the issue. Supporters said insurance access is now a key indicator of risk, while some members questioned whether the bill would add useful information or burden local governments; the bill received a 1-1 vote and remained on call. The committee then began hearing SB 1116 by Senator Caballero, a starter-home/infill housing bill creating a streamlined ministerial path for small projects up to 10 units, but the transcript cuts off before testimony or a vote on that measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm with the Department of Fish and Wildlife and an environmental scientist.
• I'm a senior environmental scientist at DTSE and a member of CAPS UAW 1115.
• Grishina Mojavear, California Environmental Voters, in support.
• And I really wanted to appreciate seeing the environmental community here.
• And I really wanted to appreciate seeing the environmental community here.

Committee: Senate Labor, Public Employment and Retirement

Transcript Highlights:

• However, it's very much worth noting that the environmental permitting, including the California Environmental
• Well, you know, one is earthquake risk in the Delta.
• So that earthquake risk is relatively well known.
• And have underwriters look at what the risks are.
• , we would be getting an environmental benefit.

Transcript Highlights:

• Wildfire risk is fundamentally a community-level risk, not just a parcel-by-parcel issue.
• on risk.
• You got to reduce the risk. You got to reduce the risk. You got to reduce the risk.
• Oh, well, it's not risk reduction.
• Oh, well, it's not risk reduction.

Summary: The committee heard three major insurance-related bills. SB 1209 by Senator Allen would give the Insurance Commissioner new authority to require insurers to implement corrective actions found in market conduct and financial exams, with penalties for failure to comply. Supporters, including Commissioner Ricardo Lara and his deputies, said current law leaves CDI without a direct way to compel remediation of repeated violations or obtain needed financial information, while opponents argued the bill expands CDI authority too far, could duplicate existing penalties, and should be limited to legal violations rather than recommendations. After discussion, members and the author agreed to narrow the bill through amendments, including tying it to legal violations, applying penalties per exam rather than per policy, and clarifying accounting language; the committee then passed the bill 5-1 to Appropriations, with one member on call. SB 1301, also by Senator Allen, would reform residential property insurance non-renewals by requiring clearer written explanations, giving homeowners a chance to mitigate correctable issues, and prohibiting certain unfair non-renewal bases such as claims below deductible or claims not paid by the insurer. The author and supporters said Californians face unusually high non-renewal rates and often receive vague notices that make it hard to keep coverage, while opponents warned the bill’s original 180-day notice period and reporting requirements were too burdensome and could worsen availability. Senator Richardson said he would support the bill after the author agreed to reduce the notice period to about three months and continue working on a mitigation-based process; the committee then approved the bill 4-1, with one member on call. The committee also considered SB 1026 by Senator Gonzalez, which would strengthen regulation of bail fugitive recovery agents by allowing CDI to suspend or revoke licenses without a criminal conviction, expanding prohibited conduct, and tightening insurance and appointment requirements. Supporters, including Commissioner Lara, said the 2022 licensing law left loopholes that allow misconduct to continue and that the bill would improve public safety and accountability. Opponents from the bail industry and crime victims groups argued the bill requires unavailable or impractical insurance coverage, including coverage for willful acts, and could reduce the number of recovery agents and delay justice. Members raised concerns about the insurance language and availability, and the author said the bill was still being worked on with opposition; the committee passed it 4-1, with one member on call. Finally, the committee heard SB 982 by Senator Wiener, the Affordable Insurance and Recovery Act, which would let the Attorney General seek recovery from fossil fuel companies for climate-related costs affecting the Fair Plan and private policyholders. The author said Californians are paying rising insurance and disaster costs while fossil fuel companies that contributed to climate change are not, and witnesses from flood and wildfire communities and climate policy experts supported the bill as a way to fund recovery and resilience. Opponents, including business and labor representatives, argued the bill would impose broad liability, invite litigation, and harm jobs and energy affordability. The hearing included extensive testimony, but no vote was taken on SB 982 in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• We commend our environmental and environmental justice counterparts for working with the public utilities
• It's a fiscally and environmentally responsible agreement...
• The Environmental Priorities Coalition is made up of 26 statewide environmental organizations.
• The Environmental Priorities Coalition is made up of 26 statewide environmental organizations who collaborate
• Caskey Jose Bonneville Environmental Foundation.

Summary: The committee first suspended the five-day notice rule and then heard House Bill 2521 on firearm background check fees. Staff explained that the bill would remove the $18 fee cap and allow Washington State Patrol to set fees based on actual program costs, which could be about $33 to $35 per check. Supporters said the change was needed to keep the background check system operating and avoid delays and layoffs; opponents argued it would burden lawful gun owners and amount to an unconstitutional tax or barrier to a constitutional right. No vote was taken in the hearing. Members then heard Substitute House Bill 2475 on language-accessible public programs, which would direct the Office of Equity to develop uniform language-access guidelines, address interpreter and translator shortages, and require agency implementation reporting. Testimony was strongly supportive, emphasizing the need for consistent access for limited-English-proficient residents and the benefits for schools, families, and state services. The committee also heard Second Substitute House Bill 2479 on wage recovery, which would create a wage recovery fund to provide partial advance payments to low-wage workers with meritorious unpaid wage claims and adjust wage penalty provisions. Employers, labor advocates, and legal services representatives largely supported the bill as a bipartisan, worker-protection measure funded by penalties rather than the general fund. The committee next took up Engrossed Third Substitute House Bill 1960 on renewable energy tax incentives, which would replace existing property tax and excise tax provisions with a new state and local renewable energy excise tax structure and related grant programs for local governments and tribes. Counties, utilities, developers, and tribal representatives generally supported the bill’s goal of stabilizing tax treatment for renewable projects, though several witnesses said they wanted amendments to address rates, timing, and late-stage project impacts. The committee also heard Substitute Senate Bill 5932 on alternative jet fuel incentives, which would change the timing and duration of existing tax preferences; supporters said it would provide certainty for emerging sustainable aviation fuel projects, while one refinery sought clarification and a broader county threshold. Later, the committee heard Engrossed Substitute House Bill 2238 on statewide food security, directing the Department of Agriculture to monitor food system performance and develop a statewide food security strategy. Agricultural groups, grocers, anti-hunger advocates, and farmers supported the bill as a coordination effort to improve food access, affordability, and supply chain resilience. The committee then heard Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill 1903, which would create a statewide low-income energy assistance program through the Department of Commerce; supporters said it would address growing unmet need and complement existing utility programs, while opponents said it did not address the root causes of rising energy costs. Finally, the committee heard Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill 2416 on waste-to-energy facilities under the Climate Commitment Act and Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill 2515 on large energy-use facilities (data centers), both of which drew mixed testimony centered on balancing emissions, ratepayer impacts, reliability, and environmental or tribal concerns. No final votes were taken in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm an environmental health specialist with Lewis County Public...
• It doesn't ban agriculture. ...and put our families at risk.
• We believe this bill addresses many of these risks.
• Let's not put them at risk with House Bill 2515. Thank you.
• So think about what we're risking and think about what for.

Summary: The committee heard House Bill 2343, which would require the Department of Fish and Wildlife to obtain CAFO or individual discharge permit coverage for its game farms, and to treat game farms with at least 5,000 birds as large CAFOs. The prime sponsor and local officials from Centralia said the WDFW pheasant farm has contributed to nitrate contamination in a critical aquifer, affecting drinking water and public health, and argued the state should be held to the same standards as private operators. WDFW testified that it has already voluntarily secured the permit the bill would require and is working with Ecology and local partners. Testimony from county health and residents largely supported the bill, citing elevated nitrate levels and health risks, especially for infants and pregnant people. The committee then heard House Bill 2301, which expands Washington’s paint stewardship program to cover additional paint-related products, aerosol paints, and certain non-industrial coatings. The sponsor and industry supporters said the existing paint recycling program is working well and should be broadened to keep more materials out of landfills and reduce local hazardous waste costs. Local government witnesses supported the expansion but asked for changes on convenience standards, packaging coverage, and reimbursement for local collection costs. Ecology supported the overall concept but raised implementation concerns, including the need for uniform standards, full reporting, and more time for rulemaking. A wood preservatives industry representative opposed including wood preservatives, saying they are not paint and have different handling requirements. The committee also took testimony on House Bill 2515, a proposed substitute addressing emerging large energy use facilities, defined mainly as large data centers and virtual currency mining facilities. The bill would require utilities to adopt tariffs or policies to protect other ratepayers, require long-term contracts, demand response or curtailment provisions, reporting on energy and water use, and new clean energy targets for these facilities, while also changing how no-cost allowances under the Climate Commitment Act are allocated and creating an annual fee for the facilities. Supporters, including environmental groups, community action agencies, some utilities, and labor and tribal representatives, said the bill would protect ratepayers, improve transparency, and keep Washington on track for climate goals. Opponents, including data center and business groups, some ports, and several labor organizations, argued the bill is too prescriptive, could raise costs or discourage investment, may affect existing contracts and other large industrial loads, and could reduce construction jobs. No votes or final actions were taken in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• Less risk.
• Wildfire risk is fundamentally a community-level risk, not just a parcel-by-parcel issue.
• take on risk.
• take on risk.
• You got to reduce the risk. You got to reduce the risk. You got to reduce the risk.

Committee: Senate Insurance

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm deeply alarmed that we're inserting ourselves into this, opening ourselves to this risk with very
• Embers, the chair risks to recognize and wish Anthony Almon.

Bills: HB3327 , HB3711 , HB4104 , HJR1077 , HB3329 , HB4322 , HB4202 , HB4203 , HB4457 , HB3983 , HB3660 , HB3802 , HB2933 , HB2955 , HB2956 , HB3781 , HB3521 , HB3794 , HB3796 , HB3800 , HB3183 , HB4316 , HB4484 , HB3469 , HB3464 , HB3173 , HB3989 , HB3016 , HB2979 , HB2988 , HB2288 , HB3062 , HB3315 , HB3372 , HB3530 , HB3622 , HB3755 , HB4266

Keywords: State Board of Education, Oklahoma education board, board appointments, school governance, education reform, governor appointments, legislative appointments, speaker of the house, president pro tempore, senate confirmation, board vacancies, removal for cause, public education, state superintendent, school board training, board member qualifications, emergency clause, Oklahoma statutes 70 O.S. 3-101, school funding, transparency

Transcript Highlights:

• They warn of unintended health and environmental consequences.
• They warn of unintended health and environmental consequences.
• Geological cycles being disrupted, and rainfall changes and drought risks.
• In addition to the environmental issues, them.
• In addition to the environmental issues, Falling on our land right now.

Committee: House Environment, Energy and Technology