Transcript Highlights:

• to this project and cost communities even more.
• With the pace of inflation in Minnesota and thus increased costs.
• And members, we know—I mean, I honestly can't believe there hasn't been a cost-benefit analysis.
• It is for 10 miles and costs so much less.
• Fuel costs are eating into family budgets.

Transcript Highlights:

• The lien provision likewise increases costs as lenders would Likewise increase costs as lenders would
• I'm happy to share a copy of the analysis with you.
• I've got a copy of the analysis that reflects the originally filed bill, and then I'm happy to do analysis
• or work with our staff to do an analysis on the amended bill.
• We did not take down an analysis. Okay, thanks. Thank you.

Summary: The committee heard and advanced several insurance, financial regulation, and public safety bills. SB 1656, a large Office of Insurance Regulation bill, was taken up with a delete-all amendment and extensive discussion. The bill would increase transparency in insurance rates and mitigation data, update reciprocal insurer rules, limit use-and-file rate filings, expand cybersecurity breach notification, and strengthen oversight of continuing care retirement communities (CCRCs). Residents and senior advocates generally supported stronger oversight to prevent bankruptcies like the Unison case, while CCRC operators and industry groups warned that lien authority, reserve requirements, and other provisions could raise borrowing costs and burden well-run communities. The committee adopted the delete-all amendment and then reported the bill favorably after debate and public testimony. The committee also passed SB 1658 on the public records database for uniform mitigation verification forms, with a clarifying amendment protecting policyholders’ personal information. SB 1612 on financial institutions was reported favorably after an amendment and substitute amendment dealing with credit union investment limits and reimbursement rules for board members. SB 1740, an insurance bill aimed at reducing premiums and insolvency risk, was amended to prioritize rate-decrease filings and prohibit AI as the sole basis for claim denials; it was then reported favorably. SB 1212 on firefighter health and safety was amended to add occupational disease language and other firefighter protections, including safer gear, cancer prevention, and possible telehealth mental health services, and was also reported favorably. Finally, SB 1184 on residual market insurers was amended to preserve existing excess-and-surplus line standards, strengthen consumer disclosures, and clarify Citizens-related appointment rules before being reported favorably. Throughout the meeting, committee members repeatedly noted that several bills were still being refined with stakeholders, and multiple public witnesses testified in support of or opposition to the CCRC and insurance provisions, focusing on resident protection, financial stability, and unintended cost impacts.

Transcript Highlights:

• The examples cited in the analysis don't support the claim.
• The example cited in the analysis don't support the claim.
• The other case in the analysis is The Crew, which was online for 10 years.
• And those costs the licensees so much money to go through that process.
• The Dental Board can enforce to ensure cost transparency.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Costs are borne by the institutions, not the public.
• So any cost to the credit unions would be felt by the members of the co-op.
• So any cost to the credit unions would be felt by the members of the co-op.
• The bill provides that DFPI can bill licensees for the cost of the exams.
• The bill provides that DFPI can bill licensees for the cost of the exams.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• What analysis has been done about the impact of these rules on the cost of our electricity and fuel?
• That analysis was an economic analysis, a practicality analysis.
• of food, cost of utilities, cost of gasoline, and the cost of living.
• about cost here.
• At a cost that is also undefined.

Transcript Highlights:

• The analysis will look at potential program designs, estimated costs, and identify statutory barriers
• And then how much does it cost us?
• And that's only on the housing costs?
• That's what the analysis will touch on.
• Are we, and I know they haven't had an analysis, at least on the H.R. 1, but is there an analysis?

Summary: The subcommittee heard presentations from the Department of State Hospitals (DSH), the Commission for Behavioral Health, and the Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) on budget proposals and implementation updates. DSH outlined its proposed 2026-27 budget, including funding for patient operating expenses, IST solutions savings, conditional release program costs, LPS bed allocation changes, electrical infrastructure projects at Napa and Patton, SB 380 transitional housing feasibility work, and expanded dental services at Metropolitan and Patton. DSH also reported that it has met court-ordered IST treatment benchmarks in the Stiavedi v. Clinton case, with average time to initiate treatment down to about five days and pending placements reduced to roughly 250, while noting that Proposition 36 could increase referrals and SB 1323 may divert some individuals earlier into community-based treatment. Members asked about rising outside hospitalization costs, Medicare enrollment, the timing and structure of capital projects, and whether IST solution funds are being fully used; DSH said the savings reflect slower-than-expected ramp-up of community programs and that the Central California FACT replacement program is still on track for January 2027 activation. The Commission for Behavioral Health described its role under the Behavioral Health Services Act (BHSA), including data, evaluation, grantmaking, technical assistance, and transparency work. It highlighted the new statewide Innovation Partnership Fund, a five-year, $20 million-per-year program with small and large grant categories; the first RFA drew strong interest, with more than 400 questions and over 1,000 bidders’ conference participants. The Commission also discussed a proposed extension to spend down about $4.1 million remaining for the Alcove Youth Drop-in Center grants so sites can finish implementation and Stanford can complete the final evaluation. Members asked about grant duration, whether projects can be renewed, what qualifies as innovation, and whether the fund could support service delivery rather than awareness campaigns or training; the Commission said awards are expected to be three-year contracts and that proposals must be new or meaningfully expanded approaches that support BHSA priority populations. DHCS reviewed major behavioral health changes under CalAIM and BH Connect, including peer support, mobile crisis, contingency management, traditional health care practices for tribal members, updated specialty mental health access criteria, and new substance use treatment standards based on ASAM’s fourth edition. DHCS reported strong contingency management results, with more than 13,000 members served and 95% testing negative for stimulant use during treatment, and said 21 Indian health care providers have been approved to offer traditional health care practices. It also described BH Connect initiatives such as the $1.9 billion access reform and outcomes incentive program, workforce investments, evidence-based practice expansion, IMD participation by four counties, and transitional rent services. On BHSA implementation, DHCS said it is not tracking individual county contract cuts but is monitoring county plans and statewide outcomes, while stakeholders raised concerns about local prevention and service gaps. DHCS also outlined its H.R. 1 implementation strategy, including outreach, streamlined renewals, exemptions for disabled, substance use, and medically frail individuals, and proposed clinic navigator and outreach funding; it said it has not yet produced a focused estimate of H.R. 1 impacts on behavioral health populations. The discussion ended with DHCS noting that B-CHIP bond funding has supported 437 infrastructure projects, creating 546 new or expanded facilities and more than 9,500 residential beds across the state.

Transcript Highlights:

• But that would incur some costs as well.
• So implementation cost get moved around.
• costs go up.
• That was an 18 million other costs.
• We did not like that cost mind you and said we negotiate a lower costs, which is a 10.7 million dollars

Transcript Highlights:

• probably rings more innately to most people than the concept of benefit-cost analysis.
• But benefit-cost analysis is just another version of that internal rate of return displayed another way
• And so in the cost-benefit analysis or, you know, the potential, you know, the useful life, in reality
• in figuring the cost-benefit analysis.
• When the benefit-cost analysis is run, especially for those downstream users, they would...

Summary: The committee opened its third interim meeting with roll call, approved the November 13, 2025 minutes, and the chair reviewed prior committee work, including a denied request for a fertilizer-capacity study and a planned later discussion of the Union Pacific/Norfolk Southern merger issue. Commissioner Doug Goring then presented Department of Agriculture updates on uncrewed aerial systems grants to detect noxious weeds, the state’s irrigation potential, the low-carbon fuels program for ethanol plants, the Environmental Impact Mitigation Fund, model zoning ordinances for animal feeding operations, and fertilizer production and supply in North Dakota. Members asked about funding sources, fertilizer storage and availability, natural gas and water needs for future fertilizer plants, and how the model zoning website would help counties and townships apply setback and odor tools. A substantial portion of the meeting focused on the Department of Water Resources’ economic analysis tool for water conveyance and flood-related projects. Dr. Dwayne Poole explained that the department is proposing changes to better account for end-of-useful-life conditions and updated hydrologic data, while still limiting the model to direct, demonstrable costs and benefits. He said the goal is to make the analysis more realistic and consistent without changing statute, and he provided examples of how project benefits could change as drains age or as rainfall and flood data evolve. Committee members and water-user representatives generally supported continued work on the proposal, while raising concerns about downstream impacts, closed-basin projects, and whether the changes would meaningfully affect project approvals. The committee then heard from John Paskowski, state engineer, on Devil’s Lake, the West End and East End outlets, and the Tolna Coulee control structure. He reviewed lake history, outlet capacities, sulfate and downstream flow limits, and explained that the control structure is intended to prevent a catastrophic uncontrolled release by slowing erosion and head cutting. Members asked about water quality trends, the length of the downstream flow constraint, and whether the Tolna Coulee area had been studied for possible natural overflow or silt buildup. The discussion emphasized ongoing flooding concerns, mitigation for affected landowners, and the need to balance outlet operations with downstream water quality and infrastructure protection.

Transcript Highlights:

• Costs associated with general CTE programs.
• On page eight, you can see the results of that analysis.
• If you're doing CTE, we know it costs about $900 more per student, but if you're doing those high-cost
• rough analysis of those costs. initial estimates from our rough analysis of those costs.
• We could do some additional analysis to figure out exactly what those costs might look like.

Transcript Highlights:

• lower-cost alternative financing.
• of exactly what are the costs of securitization, how much appetite... ...in-depth analysis of exactly
• of exactly what are the costs of securitization, how much appetite in-depth analysis of exactly, what
• are the costs of securitization?
• What is the cost?

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Utilities and Energy heard two bills focused on electricity affordability and utility costs. AB 745, by Assembly Member Irwin, would restructure the California Climate Credit by shifting it from lump-sum payments to direct reductions in volumetric electricity rates and moving the credit to the summer months when bills are highest. The author and UC Santa Barbara economist Dr. Kyle Meng argued this could significantly lower summer rates and better help households during extreme heat. Supporters, including UCS, NRDC, and some labor representatives, favored the concept, with some urging that the gas climate credit also be redirected. No opposition testimony was presented, and the bill passed 18-0 to the floor. The committee then considered AB 825, also presented as an affordability package aimed at reducing electric bills by addressing wildfire mitigation costs, transmission financing, permitting delays, and a review of ratepayer-funded programs. The bill would authorize securitization for undergrounding expenses, remove the first $15 billion in undergrounding capital investments from the rate base for return purposes, create a public transmission financing program using Proposition 4 funds and IBank support, revive the California Power Authority as a public sponsor, and establish a task force to review energy efficiency and demand response programs. The author and witness Matt Friedman of The Utility Reform Network said the bill could save ratepayers billions over time through lower-cost public financing and securitization. Testimony on AB 825 was mixed. Support came from several consumer and clean-energy groups, while utilities and labor raised concerns about the bill’s impact on utility financial stability, wildfire fund participation, liability, and whether the $15 billion securitization cap could discourage undergrounding. Some witnesses also objected to the task force’s potential effect on energy efficiency and demand response programs. Committee members discussed the need to balance affordability with utility creditworthiness and wildfire safety, and several asked for more analysis of market impacts and liability issues. Despite those concerns, AB 825 passed the committee 13-0 and was sent to the floor.

Transcript Highlights:

• Crisis tends to cost more per person.
• their cost plans are.
• more detailed analysis on that.
• Per-individual cost, like the average?
• or equally cost-effective.

Summary: The Health Care Budget Subcommittee took up two bills and then continued oversight discussions with APD and AHCA. CS/HB 27, the Social Work Licensure Interstate Compact, was presented as a way to let Florida social workers practice in other compact states and vice versa; AARP, the Florida Chamber, and NASW Florida supported it, and the bill passed favorably. HB 1127, a child welfare bill, would create a treatment foster care pilot for children with high behavioral needs, improve DCF data collection on commercially sexually exploited children, and expand recruitment for protective investigators and case managers; the bill also passed favorably after brief supportive testimony. The committee then questioned APD at length about the iBudget waiver waitlist, enrollment pace, spending projections, and provider capacity. APD said it had sent more than 1,100 interest letters in categories 3, 4, and 5, enrolled 1,124 people so far this year, and expects to spend about 96.4% of its waiver appropriation, leaving roughly $82 million unspent. Members pressed APD on why prior discussions suggested more reserve was needed, how long the SANS process takes, whether category 6 could be expanded, and whether the agency has enough waiver support coordinators and direct support providers. APD said it has about 1,061 waiver support coordinators statewide, adequate capacity for current enrollees, but would need further analysis if the legislature directed a much larger enrollment increase. Members also asked about outreach, annual maintenance of the waitlist, portability for military families, and whether communication efforts should be privatized. Finally, AHCA walked the committee through the 2023 Achieved Savings Rebate (ASR) report for Aetna and explained how the report is used for financial monitoring, rebate calculations, and transparency. AHCA said the ASR is separate from the medical loss ratio (MLR) calculation, though both are reviewed, and that Florida uses the ASR mechanism rather than an MLR remittance requirement to recover funds from plans. Members asked about related-party disclosures, CVS/Caremark relationships, expanded benefits, encounter data, network adequacy penalties, denials and appeals reporting, interest earned on capitation payments, and whether rate increases were reaching providers. AHCA and the outside auditors said they review the plans’ reported data, reconcile it to underlying records, and can assess liquidated damages for network adequacy violations; several members requested follow-up data on rebates, interest, provider capacity, and related-party reporting.

Transcript Highlights:

• they do a cost-benefit analysis, right, before they close.
• But most people in business do some type of cost-benefit analysis based on their own needs.
• It will increase cost to the association. It will increase cost to the managers.
• And when it increases costs to the association, that ultimately increases costs to the members.
• Even in a high-cost state with notably high housing costs, this is not inevitable.

Summary: The committee heard several housing-related bills, beginning with SB 1003, which would create pro-housing enhanced infrastructure financing districts to help local governments fund infrastructure needed for housing developments. The author and supporters argued that infrastructure costs often prevent projects from penciling out, while the chair expressed support and said the bill would be taken up later when quorum was available. SB 1014 followed, proposing new disclosure requirements for local jurisdictions to provide good-faith estimates of on-site and off-site improvements within 30 days of application, with supporters saying it would reduce late surprises and opposition from several cities citing implementation concerns with the 30-day timelines. The committee then took up SB 802, a Sacramento-region bill requiring a joint powers authority to coordinate housing and homelessness services. Senator Ashby and former Mayor Darrell Steinberg argued that Sacramento’s fragmented system has failed for years and that a JPA would improve accountability, coordination, and use of state funds. The bill drew broad support from local officials, service providers, business groups, and advocates, while some county and city representatives registered opposition or neutral concerns about state-mandated local governance. Several committee members said they were persuaded by the need for regional coordination, though some raised concerns about local control; the chair noted the bill would be moved when quorum allowed. The committee also heard SB 1092 and SB 1093, both focused on mobile home park residents after disasters or park sales. SB 1092 would give residents a right of first opportunity to match a sale offer for a park, with supporters saying it protects vulnerable seniors and preserves affordable housing, while park owners and their representatives argued it would devalue property and raise constitutional and financing concerns. SB 1093 would require more transparent communication, access to property, and consideration of rebuilding or closure after a disaster; supporters cited the long uncertainty faced by Palisades residents, while opponents warned about liability, safety, and burdensome review requirements. Members split along similar lines, with some emphasizing property rights and market impacts and others stressing the need to protect residents and preserve scarce affordable housing.

Transcript Highlights:

• The savings amount reflects a reduction in total contract costs.
• to outside vendors and compare those costs to some of the state contract costs and trying to narrow
• The total cost identified includes costs for all claim types, so it's other programs, headquarters, incarcerated
• the policy in light of new information about these costs.
• the policy in light of new information about these costs.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• On slide 43, there's a trend analysis here.
• This is recommended analysis by the Pew Charitable Trust, and it also is a companion analysis to the
• Okay, moving on to stress testing and trend analysis.
• So what analysis do you have? to make a bullet like that.
• Does our LFC staff do that kind of analysis of tax credits?

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• What's the cost? What's the cost we're handing down?
• What's the cost? What's the cost we're handing down?
• What's the cost? What's the cost we're handing down?
• What's the cost? What's the cost we're handing down?
• What's the cost? What's the cost legit. What's the cost?

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:14:40.480> satisfies being used for analysis satisfies being used for analysis satisfies
• million fund less initial startup costs million fund less initial startup costs the<00:14:56.279
• allocated so there are startup costs allocated so there are startup costs that<00:18:36.880>
• and uh the we have existing analysis and uh the we have existing analysis from<00:55:13.839>
• example is we can show you an analysis example is we can show you an analysis that<01:07:37.640>

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And taxes are a major part of cost. but one of the ways we talk about competitiveness is cost, right?
• We intentionally kept our analysis of this very clean.
• Like the 1%, when you look at the total cost for a family, isn't the real driver the housing costs?
• It is some of the highest energy costs. It is some of the highest labor costs.
• Well, those bonds cost money in terms of interest, and what they cost is based on our credit rating.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on two proposed ballot initiatives: one to reduce the state personal income tax rate from 5% to 4% over three years, and another to revise the state’s tax collection cap/62F process so it would be based on prior-year collections plus wage growth and include surtax revenue. The committee chair and House co-chair outlined the hearing process, and the first witness was Doug Howgate of the Massachusetts Taxpayer Foundation, who testified as the committee’s subject-matter expert on both measures. He said the income tax proposal would lower taxes broadly but would reduce state revenue by about $5.4 billion when fully implemented, with an estimated $800 million hit in FY27, and he discussed possible effects on competitiveness, taxpayer savings, and public finances. On the 62F proposal, he said the revised cap would make refunds more likely, could have produced several large refunds in recent years, and would reduce stabilization fund deposits and constrain recovery after recessions. Committee members questioned Howgate about competitiveness, outmigration, prior tax ballot measures, spending growth, MassHealth, and the interaction between the income tax and surtax. He emphasized that taxes are only one part of the state’s overall competitiveness and that housing, public services, and other factors also matter. He also noted that the surtax is constitutionally restricted but can still support ongoing spending choices. After his testimony, the committee moved to the proponents’ panel. Proponents of both initiatives, including representatives from Taxpayers for an Affordable Massachusetts, the National Federation of Independent Business, Pioneer Institute, and the Mass Opportunity Alliance, argued that the measures would improve affordability, help retain residents and businesses, and support job growth. They cited polling support, outmigration, small-business reinvestment, and comparisons to lower-tax states such as North Carolina. Their economist, Rebecca Paxton, said her model showed smaller revenue losses than critics claim and projected that the revised revenue cap would not create additional annual revenue losses while producing more regular taxpayer refunds. Committee members pressed the panel on competitiveness, prior ballot initiative implementation, and whether the measures would actually address broader affordability pressures; the hearing ended with the committee continuing to take questions from the proponents.

Transcript Highlights:

• They could read the Senate analysis.
• Since this PCS staff analysis has come out.
• Since this PCS staff analysis has come out.
• Johns County's cost of living is skyrocketing. St.
• rising insurance costs.

Bills: S0332, S0464, S0576, S0830, S0964, S0984, S1096, S1296, S1298, S1612, S1656

Keywords: public records, public meetings, property rights, transcripts, settlement negotiations, Veterans Day, K-12 schools, holiday observance, education, Florida statutes, cybersecurity, local government, grant program, data-sharing, Florida Digital Service, ransomware protection, county administrators, city managers, exemption, privacy

Summary: The committee first heard a committee substitute for SB 332, which creates a narrow public meetings and public records exemption for certain pre-suit settlement communications in Bert Harris claims involving local governments and private property rights. The sponsor said the change is intended to allow confidential legal strategy and negotiation during the 90-day pre-suit period while keeping settlements and outcomes public. The strike-all amendment was adopted, supportive testimony was waived in, and the bill was reported favorably. Members then approved several other measures, including SB 464 requiring K-12 schools to formally observe Veterans Day as a school holiday; SB 984 on firefighter cancer benefits and prevention, which was amended to add a statement of important state interest and reported favorably after testimony from firefighters both supporting the bill and urging a longer benefit window; SB 576 on local government cybersecurity, which was amended to route the program through the Florida Digital Service and strengthen state-local coordination; SB 964 clarifying how certain gift and honoraria disclosures are filed with the Commission on Ethics; SB 1612 requiring local governments to accept electronic payments with a delayed effective date; SB 830 creating public records exemptions for certain local government administrators and their families; SB 1096 clarifying the filing deadline for employment discrimination complaints; and SB 1656 designating the SS American Victory as Florida’s official state flagship. All were reported favorably. The committee also considered a slate of appointments, including a separate vote on Jeffrey Aaron to the Public Employees Relations Commission, which was recommended favorably after Senator Polsky objected to the appointment and cited concerns about political ties and prior work. The remaining appointees on tabs 12 through 30 were also recommended favorably. After a recess, the committee took up SB 1296 on the Public Employees Relations Commission, as substituted by a committee PCS. The PCS would change union certification and recertification rules, require stronger showing-of-interest and voting thresholds, limit paid union leave in some cases, require equal access to employer communication spaces, and speed up impasse procedures for state-funded salary increases. The bill drew extensive testimony, with supporters arguing it would improve accountability, transparency, and taxpayer fairness, and opponents—many of them teachers, bus drivers, and other public employees—saying it would weaken collective bargaining, burden workers, and function as union busting. Members raised constitutional concerns about the single-subject rule and collective bargaining protections, and debate was ongoing at the end of the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:58:53.160> branch I'm the rate and policy analysis branch I'm the rate and policy analysis
• <01:11:31.440> pursuant auditor for a sunrise analysis pursuant auditor for a sunrise analysis
• needed a sunrise analysis for this um needed a sunrise analysis for this um would<01:19:34.239> that
• guess 2005 there was a sunrise analysis guess 2005 there was a sunrise analysis and<01:20:00.360
• <01:20:46.080> I the auditor to do a sunrise analysis I the auditor to do a sunrise analysis

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee on Consumer Protection and Commerce met on January 30, 2025, and heard testimony on several condominium-related bills, beginning with HB 70. HB 70 would require a budget summary disclosure for condominiums. Supporters, including Community Associations Institute, a real estate broker, and several condominium owners, said the bill would improve consumer protection by giving owners and buyers a clearer, more understandable snapshot of an association’s financial health and reserve compliance. One supporter noted the bill should help reduce confusion caused by lengthy reserve studies and emphasized the importance of accurate disclosure. A testifier also urged the committee to hear other condominium bills quickly, including measures related to an ombudsman, managing agents, parliamentarians, and attorney’s fees. The committee then heard HB 106, which would change the process for condominium fines and disputes. Phil Nery of CAI and other supporters said the bill would strengthen due process by requiring clearer notice, allowing an internal board appeal, and then permitting small claims court review without attorney’s fees unless the fine is upheld. They argued this would prevent fines from escalating into costly legal disputes and provide a more linear, fair process. Some supporters suggested amendments, including clarifying that the statute controls over association documents and refining refund language. During questioning, members raised concerns about small claims limits and whether associations would be represented by volunteers or attorneys. One testifier initially in support later said he would not support the bill as written after hearing HPD’s concerns. HB 224, relating to property rights, drew opposition from the Department of the Attorney General and the Honolulu Police Department. Both agencies said the bill would improperly push law enforcement into a quasi-judicial role and could short-circuit existing due process procedures for occupants of residences. A realtor who had initially been listed in support changed his position after hearing the opposition testimony. The committee also heard emotional testimony from a resident describing a long-running squatter and utility theft problem at a neighboring property, which he said took years of court action and police involvement to resolve. No votes or final committee actions were taken during the portion of the meeting reflected in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• Can you explain to what extent you've done any analysis on how cost is passed on to the riders, to consumers
• might be raising the cost of TNC service.
• Yeah, what are your general cost drivers?
• Can you just give us an analysis of what that looks like?
• We've been seeing the cost go up.

Summary: The hearing focused on transportation network companies in California, with the chair framing it as an informational hearing on the history, regulation, safety, climate, accessibility, and data issues surrounding Uber, Lyft, and smaller or autonomous TNC services. The CPUC described its decade-long regulatory role, including safety rules, background checks, insurance requirements, reporting obligations, and two major legislative programs from 2018: the Clean Miles Standard and the Access for All program. Members asked about complaint trends, data collection and disclosure, program implementation, and how the CPUC uses annual reports for policymaking, compliance, and program oversight. Uber and Lyft said the statewide framework has supported growth while providing safety and access benefits, but both companies emphasized that insurance is a major cost driver and argued that California’s UM/UIM requirement is unusually high compared with other vehicles. They said the Clean Miles Standard is pushing electrification but faces headwinds from EV affordability and charging infrastructure, while Access for All has expanded wheelchair-accessible service but still needs continued support. They also discussed transit partnerships, wildfire response, and the potential role of autonomous vehicles, with both companies saying human drivers will remain important and that future regulation should account for new technology. The final panel, including the San Francisco County Transportation Authority and UC Berkeley researchers, presented evidence that TNCs have increased congestion and reduced transit ridership, especially in dense urban areas. They described prior research showing TNCs contributed to congestion growth in San Francisco and noted that this work helped spur local taxes on ride-hailing trips to fund safety and transit improvements. The panel also discussed the CPUC’s evolving data-disclosure decisions, arguing that public access to TNC trip data is important for understanding transportation impacts and informing local policy.