Transcript Highlights:

• Our litigation efforts before the PUC resulted in $2.2 billion in savings for Texas consumers.
• Yeah, I know, I, I talked to the PUC this morning.
• The PUC I asked them about, and I'd like to ask you the same question I asked them.
• Um, you'll see the red is taken mostly from OAG and PUC and.
• So we would ask you to make that change and work with the PUC to reflect that change.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we used existing PUC databases.
• So PUC oversees ERCOT.
• It's in the PUC filing receipt.
• PUC-specific questions.
• participation from the industry on the PUC survey.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The PUC and ERCOT had said, hey, the most electricity we'll use on any given day is is 86, 87 gigawatts
• And the PUC and ERCOT came in and said, well, it's changed.
• That will be approved automatically in 180 days if the PUC and RCOT hadn't made a decision. and it's
• So SB 6 puts into place some practices, and it'll be through rule makings and things of the PUC. but
• PUC approval process, it's a reliability check, and if they, if, and they, if they're. don't rule in

Bills: SCR5, SCR13, SB3, SB6, SB10, SB12, SB13, SB15, SB17, SB18, SB19, SB24, SB35, SB57, SB65, SB112, SB284, SB290, SB388, SB400, SB402, SB412, SB495, SB499, SB502, SB509, SB621, SB706, SB740, SB815, SB842, SB854, SB875, SB893, SB917, SB974, SB1025, SB1061, SB1073, SB1106, SB1268, SB1281, SB1300, SB1362, SB1379, SB1447, SB1451, SB1555, SB1902, SJR36, SJR12, SCR13, SCR25, SCR5, SCR22, SCR12, SCR24, SB495, SB412, SB10, SB18, SB565, SB372, SB842, SB765, SB62, SB19, SB666, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB706, SB847, SB290, SB13, SB1248, SB740, SB14, SB1006, SB504, SB917, SB925, SB388, SB1902, SB1121, SB995, SB857, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB35, SB6, SB815, SB3, SB1281, SB1379, SB1300, SB1497, SB1499, SB1498, SB1451, SB1061, SB15, SB65, SB241, SB304, SB402, SB499, SB621, SB974, SB1023, SB1024, SB1025, SB1106, SB686, SB112, SB371, SB204, SB400, SB609, SB1447, SB670, SB502, SB427, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1555, SB1362, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB987, SB1539, SB893, SB447, SB875, SB406, SB509, SB985, SB965, SB17, SB1119, SB1505, SB12, SB24, SB57, SB1194, SB1253, SB1215, SB1532, SB1268, SB1302, SB856, SB650, SB583, SB673, SB840, SJR57, SCR8, SB213, SB681, SB1172, SB1252, SB378, SB610, SB918, SB1343, SB608, SB487, SB955, SB957, SB988, SB990, SB1019, SB1021, SB1120, SB251, SB958, SB535, SB761, SB1, SB541, SB315, SB379, SB1018, SB1737, SB266, SB1415, SB3, SB6, SB15, SB35, SB290, SB706, SB842, SB917, SB1281, SB1451, SB1902, SB12, SB13, SB17, SB19, SB388, SR261, SR265, SR276, SR277, SR281, SR286, SR293, SCR5, SCR13, SB2425, SB2880, SB10, SB12, SB13, SB17, SB18, SB19, SB388, SB412, SB495, SB2425, SB2880

Keywords: SCR 5, Senate Concurrent Resolution 5, Texas School for the Deaf, TSD, Robert Rives, gymnasium naming, building naming, honorary resolution, commemorative resolution, deaf education, hard of hearing, Gallaudet University, alumni hall of fame, football coach, school facility naming, education K-16, State Affairs, Texas Legislature, public school tribute, water rights

Transcript Highlights:

• we do is require, uh, 60 days' notice to the CCN holder before they opt out and it provides that the PUC
• The PUC cannot consider the utility's ability to serve the area, infrastructure and water resources in
• the same situation within the same CCN while the PUC proceeding was in process.
• So that's underway right now with the PUC.
• Members, we do have a resource witness from the PUC.

Bills: HB 937, HB 2078, HB 2080, HB 3322, HB 3350, HB 4212, HB 4630, HB 4896, HB 4951, HB 5348, HB 5675, SB 565, SB 971, SB 1662, SB 2124

Keywords: special districts, notice requirements, Water Code, government transparency, public meetings, meeting notice, transparency, public engagement, notice, elections, groundwater management, water conservation, joint planning, environmental impact, desired future conditions, groundwater, conservation district, environmental quality, regulatory review, water utility

Transcript Highlights:

• organize and maintain a database of these mobile units and their locations in cooperation with the PUC
• The PUC and the utilities that have these assets.
• The way we read this bill, it's the PUC handing us a pole attachment program.
• That's the meat of the bill that requires PUC to set standards, uh, for poles.
• If no, do you have a plan approved by the PUC to get into compliance? Yes, no.

Bills: HB 45, HB 755, HB 1232, HB 1555, HB 2460, HB 2702, HB 2973, HB 3120, HB 3225, HB 3314, HB 3356, HB 3371, HB 3634, HB 3638, HB 4247, HB 4283, HB 4290, HB 4302, HB 4503, HB 4511, HB 4565, HB 4581, HB 4627, HB 4632, HB 4660, HB 4668, HB 4960, HB 5042

Keywords: housing, affordable housing, rent control, landlord-tenant laws, housing rights, lobbying, public entities, expenditures, government code, transparency, Texas Ethics Commission, government regulation, lobbying restrictions, government accountability, taxpayer money, HB 1232, whistleblower, whistleblower protection, public employee, retaliation

Transcript Highlights:

• organize and maintain a database of these mobile units and their locations in cooperation with the PUC
• The way we read this bill, it's the PUC handing us a pole attachment program, so if we...
• That's the meat of the bill that requires the PUC to set standards for poles.
• With the standards that the PUC sets based on Section 3 of the bill.
• If no, do you have a plan approved by the PUC to get into compliance? Yes or no.

Bills: HB45, HB45, HB755, HB 1232, HB1555, HB2460, HB2702, HB2973, HB3120, HB3225, HB3314, HB3356, HB3371, HB3634, HB3638, HB4247, HB4283, HB4290, HB4302, HB4503, HB4511, HB4565, HB4581, HB4627, HB4632, HB4660, HB4668, HB4960, HB5042

Keywords: flooding, disaster response, emergency preparedness, state guidance, public safety, housing, affordable housing, rent control, landlord-tenant laws, housing rights, lobbying, public entities, expenditures, government code, transparency, Texas Ethics Commission, government regulation, lobbying restrictions, government accountability, taxpayer money

Transcript Highlights:

• I've not found a<00:27:39.040><c> PUC</c><00:27:39.960><c> reg</c><00:27:40.440><c> um</c> a PUC reg
• They're going to that's they're PUC.
• So, um the energy and the PUC.
• </c> information with the PUC yesterday. information with the PUC yesterday.
• </c> of Energy, gave them 5 years to use PUC of Energy, gave them 5 years to use PUC rules,<00:30:43.080

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The meeting began with quorum and seating issues, including the temporary appointment of Representative Shaw to fill in for a House member, followed by approval of the previous minutes and the consent calendar. Two items were then postponed to next month: Mechanical Licensing Board item 25-241 and Board of Veterinarian item 25-223. The committee then took up Department of Energy rulemaking on distributed energy resources interconnection procedures, including items 25-220 and related sections on fees, additional controls, and equipment. The Department explained revised language to address concerns that the original draft improperly suggested agency or PUC approval of utility fees; under the amended language, utilities would set fees designed to recover costs, with complaints handled through existing complaint procedures. Committee members and the Department discussed the statutory basis for that approach, including cost responsibility versus fee-setting authority. Public testimony was mixed. A small solar developer argued the rules still exceed statutory authority, impose unfair costs on customer generators, and allow utilities to shift transmission-related study costs onto interconnecting customers. Clean energy advocates supported the Department’s revised language but asked for clearer limits on charging customers for later-added controls, arguing costs should be tied directly to the customer’s interconnection and not to later utility-driven changes. Eversource supported the revised fee language, said most prior concerns were resolved, and recommended conditional approval, while also suggesting a minor wording change in the “Additional Equipment” section to clarify that only operational performance is covered.

Transcript Highlights:

• This would require a detailed review by the PUC in a proceeding to work out tricky details.
• And normally, when a PUC proceeding is required to implement a bill, it gets a very high fiscal estimate
• Getting them involved in that gives the PUC another thing to regulate when they're already over...
• Getting them involved in that gives the PUC another thing to regulate when they're already overburdened
• Let's keep them on that job and not throw customers under the bus with a lot of PUC regulation for this

Summary: The Assembly Appropriations Committee met on May 21, 2025, with 86 bills on the agenda. The committee first approved two consent motions covering a group of bills eligible for the Assembly floor consent calendar and another group of unanimous bills not eligible for floor consent. Several bills were then heard individually, with authors and supporters emphasizing that many had no or minimal state costs and were aimed at climate, health, or regulatory improvements. Among the bills discussed were AB 39 on local planning for electrification and EV charging infrastructure; AB 1129 allowing local health jurisdictions to opt into reporting birth defects and early-life health conditions; AB 1332 to allow narrow direct shipment of medicinal cannabis to seriously ill patients; AB 1056 phasing out transfer of certain gillnet permits except for a one-time family transfer; AB 408 creating a new Medical Board health and wellness program for physicians; AB 546 requiring health plans to cover portable HEPA air purifiers for vulnerable people during wildfire emergencies; AB 942 revising rooftop solar subsidy rules to reduce costs for non-solar ratepayers; and AB 967 expediting licensure for out-of-state physicians. Supporters generally framed these bills as improving access, equity, public health, or affordability, while opponents on AB 942 and AB 967 raised concerns about implementation, workload, contract issues, and impacts on existing programs. The committee took action on each bill after testimony and questions. AB 39, AB 1129, AB 1332, AB 1056, AB 408, AB 546, AB 942, and AB 967 were all moved out of committee on roll call votes, with some members voting no or not voting on certain measures. The suspense calendar was then read and deemed approved, and the committee opened general public comment, where speakers voiced support for bills including AB 715, AB 1138, AB 782, AB 98, AB 53, AB 258, AB 330, AB 650, AB 649, AB 1048, and AB 425. The meeting adjourned after public comment.

Transcript Highlights:

• and justify it, but this is going to DOE, not PUC.
• and justify it, but this is going to DOE, not PUC.
• and justify it, but this is going to DOE, not PUC.
• and justify it, but this is going to DOE, not PUC.
• and justify it, but this is going to DOE, not PUC.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The hearing focused on House Bill 610, which would fold the Office of the Consumer Advocate into the Department of Energy rather than fully eliminate consumer advocacy functions. The prime sponsor argued the current office is small, funded by a special assessment on ratepayers, and duplicative of DOE work. He said moving the function to DOE would streamline energy policy review, reduce bureaucracy, and better focus the larger agency on lowering residential energy costs. He also disputed claims that the Consumer Advocate is independent, saying the office is appointed through a political process similar to DOE leadership. Committee members and the sponsor discussed whether the bill would actually relocate existing positions or replace them, and whether the Department of Energy would absorb the cost of the transferred staff. The sponsor said the fiscal note shows roughly a million-dollar reduction in both revenue assessment and spending, and that the bill would effectively reduce the office from five positions to three. He also defended his cost estimates for energy-code-related housing impacts and said the Consumer Advocate has sometimes supported policies he считает increase costs, such as energy-efficiency measures and building code changes. He argued the office should focus more on energy supply and generation, including natural gas and nuclear, rather than efficiency alone. Representative Wendy Thomas testified in opposition, saying the Consumer Advocate is an important, fair, and impartial voice for ratepayers and warning that the bill was fiscally irresponsible because the incumbent could still be owed salary and benefits if the office were repealed. She also said the bill’s drafting was confusing and that the Consumer Advocate’s role is to push back on utilities on behalf of consumers. Other members raised questions about whether the DOE would simply inherit the same political appointment structure and whether the bill would meaningfully lower bills. No vote was taken in the excerpt; the chair indicated additional testimony would follow, and the Department of Energy was present to answer questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh currently, uh the their PUC rules.
• </c> accordance with the PUC rules. accordance with the PUC rules. um<05:17:45.760><c> our</c><05:17:
• Does it move that from the PUC to the DOE?
• </c> um, now make the DOE instead of the PUC um, now make the DOE instead of the PUC the<05:24:49.280
• that from the PUC to the DOE?

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So the PUC makes decisions on expenditures of the utility. We have a cycle of general rate cases.
• What happens is they are approved by the PUC for collection of a certain amount.
• So the ISO determines the need, then the permitting at the PUC. The cost recovery happens at FERC.
• So for item 10, we have PUC and state operations and local assistance: California Lifeline.
• Unfortunately, the PUC and CEC's IRP model...

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• of the bill, the analysis says that this bill requires the electric distribution utilities under the PUC
• what I guess I'll call the policy implications, or policy implementations, excuse me, and then the PUC
• The PUC undertook an investigation and then a judicial proceeding to consider that at the time.
• He says he would leave that up to the department and the PUC to decide how to proceed with it.
• Connecticut PUC, which is still an active docket number 21515 re 03.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And if they wanted to take that option forward to the PUC, then they would do that.
• In that conversation, and if something was to come forward, we're subject to going forward to the PUC
• Those words to the statute to allow us to go to the PUC with a proposed we really had no other way of
• We're going to be back at the PUC, which is where we always go.
• And just with respect to PUC, the...

Bills: HB 13, HB143, HB144, HB145, HB366, HB470, HB805, HB912, HB13, HB143, HB144, HB145

Keywords: emergency communication, infrastructure, first responders, grant program, interoperability, Texas Interoperability Council, local governments, HB 143, Texas Railroad Commission, Public Utility Commission of Texas, Natural Resources Code, oil and gas, well site, surface facility, electrical power line, National Electrical Code, NEC, electrical safety, utility disconnect, service disconnection

Transcript Highlights:

• Reminder, this program is expected to work the same as the current rules already set out by the PUC.
• As far as the PUC, for step one, they'll evaluate the system-wide new capacity after 2026.
• So on January 1st of 2027, the PUC will look back at the new generation built during 2026 and see if.
• PUC or ERCOT, any questions regarding anything? All right. Y'all stick around.
• Or dismissed last three: Thomas D'arte, Werner Roth, who's with PUC, and Larry Lynn Schmidt.

Bills: SB388, SB455, SB917, SB925, SB1006

Keywords: dispatchable generation, electricity, natural gas, ERCOT, energy credits, utilities regulation, renewable energy, arbitration, insurance contracts, surplus lines, Texas law, insurance policy, boiler inspection, boiler safety, inspection report deadline, certificate inspection, authorized inspector, inspection agency, Health and Safety Code, board of boiler rules

Transcript Highlights:

• accepted local exchange carriers, VoIP providers, and IP-enabled services, for the expenses of the PUC
• Today, the PUC is working on the Save the 603 numbering effort.
• This is the first time I had seen in a while that it was very clear in the law the PUC can assess the
• I have one company that hasn't heard from the PUC except the filings, and all they do is file these and
• then the PUC sends these filings to the FCC.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So the PUC has something called Rule 21, which mandates specific timelines by which utilities need to
• Despite these existing requirements, the PUC has yet to enact meaningful enforcement actions.
• PUC staff. And that is two minutes. So I'll let you finish up. You good? Yeah, two quick things.
• PUC staff are obviously well-intentioned, smart people, but they feel powerless.
• So we have been trying to put pressure on PUC. I don't disagree with the tenor of your questioning.

Summary: The committee met as a subcommittee because quorum was initially lacking, and the state auditor gave an update on his office’s workload, including several JALAC audits in progress, other statutory audits, staffing growth, and capacity to begin additional audits. Members also announced that one audit request on Prop. 28 was being held and that the PUC request would be moved off consent for presentation. After quorum was later established, the committee took up and approved several audit requests, including the DMV license revocation audit on consent, the CPUC utility interconnection timeliness audit, and the Caltrans SR 710 extension project audit. The fusion centers audit was approved on call, while the Orange County Board of Education audit was still being discussed when the transcript ended. Senator Cervantes presented the fusion centers audit request, arguing that California’s fusion centers operate with little public oversight and may collect, share, and retain sensitive information without adequate legal authority, privacy protections, or accountability. Supporters, including former FBI agent Mike German and an ACLU representative, said the centers function as opaque intelligence-sharing hubs and have a history of inaccurate or biased reporting. The state auditor said the audit would examine the State Threat Assessment Center and two local fusion centers, focusing on oversight, legal authority, data quality, disclosure controls, use of private vendors, funding, and performance metrics, while noting possible access and public disclosure limits because of intelligence-related information. The request drew sharp criticism from one member, who called it politicized and unnecessary, but it ultimately advanced on call. Senator Allen’s CPUC audit request focused on the commission’s enforcement of Rule 21 interconnection timelines for customer-sited solar and storage projects. Supporters said utilities routinely miss deadlines, causing delays and added costs for schools, nonprofits, businesses, and homeowners, while CPUC staff said the commission has public reporting, workshops, and an active proceeding to address the issue. The auditor said the review would examine CPUC monitoring, enforcement tools, and data on why utilities struggle to comply, estimating about 3,500 hours of work. The committee approved the request after discussion about whether an audit or legislative oversight would be the best tool. Senator Perez and Assembly Member Fong presented the Caltrans 710 corridor audit request, describing tenant complaints about mold, pests, deferred maintenance, inconsistent pricing, unclear communications, and delays in the affordable sales program created under the Roberti Act. Caltrans said it had completed many sales, was moving additional properties, and remained committed to transparency and compliance. The auditor said the review would examine whether Caltrans is complying with the Roberti Act, how it sets affordable prices, appraisal and appeal practices, communications with buyers, rent accounting, property maintenance, and follow-up on prior audit recommendations. The committee also heard Senator Umberg’s request to audit the Orange County Board of Education over transparency, contracting, litigation spending, charter oversight, and whistleblower issues; supporters argued the board’s actions warranted scrutiny, while board representatives said there was no factual basis for an audit and that complaints, enforcement actions, and legal challenges were minimal or absent.

Transcript Highlights:

• And we have a number of other programs, demand-side grid support that we lean on, and also PUC has a
• But the PUC, through its IRP, has also looked to other states for some additional resource base.
• When the extension of Diablo was done, it was done in a way that directed the PUC to do planning, so
• The PUC actually started looking at the reliability implications of the winter load peak.
• The PUC actually started looking at the reliability implications of the winter load peak.

Summary: The committee first heard AB 1026 by Assembly Member Wilson, which would require investor-owned utilities to provide clearer front-end information and follow more consistent timelines for post-entitlement energization applications tied to housing projects. The author and supporters from the Housing Action Coalition and Mission Housing said utility delays can hold up approved housing, add costs, and create uncertainty, and they argued the bill would align utility processes with recent state efforts to streamline local permitting. PG&E and Southern California Edison opposed the bill, saying existing CPUC timelines and the ongoing energization rulemaking already address the issue, that the bill could be duplicative or premature, and that some proposed timelines were too short. The committee discussed the bill’s relationship to the CPUC’s September 2024 decision, and AB 1026 was ultimately approved on a 15-0 vote, with the consent calendar also passing. The second half of the hearing was the committee’s annual oversight hearing on electric reliability. Representatives from the CPUC, CEC, CAISO, and DWR reviewed lessons from the 2020 and 2022 heat emergencies, emphasizing that California has since added significant resources, improved planning, and created backstop programs such as the strategic reliability reserve. They said the summer 2025 outlook is cautiously optimistic, with no expected shortfalls under traditional planning conditions and a projected surplus, though wildfire and extreme heat remain risks. The agencies also described major changes in planning and operations, including more battery storage, updated resource adequacy rules, expanded transmission planning, and reforms to the interconnection queue. Members asked about data center load, Diablo Canyon’s future, the strategic reliability reserve, demand response, wildfire mitigation costs, affordability, and regional market expansion. Witnesses said data center demand is a major variable but can be managed through better forecasting, flexible service arrangements, and siting in areas with existing capacity; they also said firm clean resources remain valuable while planning continues around Diablo Canyon’s scheduled retirement. On affordability, they said the agencies try to balance reliability with least-cost procurement, and that new resources can lower market prices even as they require upfront investment. CAISO also highlighted the value of the Western Energy Imbalance Market and the planned day-ahead market, saying regional coordination improves both reliability and cost savings.

Transcript Highlights:

• $300,000 per accident, and third, to require a joint study from the Department of Insurance and the PUC
• And so, did the PUC to come up with a comprehensive regulatory framework for what was then a completely
• And so the legislature did pass a variety of bills, the PUC took actions, but one of the key ones was
• The PUC would adopt rules to implement the program by July 1, 2027.
• We also are funded by the PUC to manage the connected capital area broadband consortium to close the

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Pearson had said maybe we should be doing this through the PUC in a public process there.
• The PUC is not elected.
• Pearson had said maybe we should be doing this through the PUC in a public process there.
• The PUC is not elected.
• The PUC is not elected.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: Representative Craft presented House File 2986, as amended with the DE6, and asked that it be laid over for possible inclusion. He described the bill as an affordability measure centered on virtual power plants, explaining that aggregating distributed energy resources such as solar panels, batteries, EVs, smart thermostats, heat pumps, and water heaters can help utilities reduce peak demand and avoid costly generation and distribution investments. He said the bill would require utilities to reduce system peak through a virtual power plant program by 5% by the end of 2028 and 10% by the end of 2032, using an independent third-party RFP process, with plans incorporated into integrated resource planning and a savings clause if requirements prove infeasible. Testimony in support came from the Department of Commerce, Vote Solar, Solar United Neighbors, Kite Rocket, and Mincia. Supporters said virtual power plants can function like grid-scale resources, lower spot-market and peak costs, improve reliability and resilience, and make better use of existing distribution infrastructure. Commerce said the approach fits an all-of-the-above strategy and noted consumer protections in the bill, including standards for contracts, disclosures, dispatch frequency, notice, opt-out, and compensation. Several supporters cited estimates of significant savings, including a national DOE estimate of 10% to 20% of peak load by 2030 and a Minnesota-specific estimate from Solar United Neighbors of about $63.5 million in savings if 10% of peak demand were met with VPPs in 2030. Committee members raised questions about how much cheaper VPPs are than peaker plants and whether utilities, especially Xcel Energy, are already implementing similar programs. Representative Baker expressed concern that the bill could move faster than the technology or market would naturally develop and asked about the risk of forcing utilities into a mandate before the economics are fully proven. In response, a Solar United Neighbors witness pointed to a fact sheet and Brattle Group-based analysis comparing VPP costs and benefits in Xcel territory, while an Xcel representative said the company has been discussing the bill with Representative Craft for months. The bill was laid over for possible inclusion, and no final vote on the bill itself was taken in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><01:17:22.000><c> recently</c> additional process, the PUC recently additional process, the PUC recently
• The PUC reasoned that the commenced.
• </c> while I'm encouraged to see the PUC while I'm encouraged to see the PUC tackling<01:17:43.840><c
• Representative Grieman, um the PUC Representative Grieman, um the PUC currently<01:38:00.880><c> does
• Why wouldn't we just leave it under the guise of the PUC to let them regulate it?

Bills: HF4059, HF76

Keywords: climate change, greenhouse gas emissions, financing, sustainability, environmental policy, renewable energy, Minnesota Climate Innovation Financing Authority, earned incentive release credit, release credits, supervised release, corrections, Minnesota Department of Corrections, sentence reduction, good time, prison time, incarceration, violent offenses, murder, criminal sexual conduct, sex offenses