Transcript Highlights:

• For the minimums, we just looked at the DOC rate of capacity and what the current capacity of those is
• What's the bed capacity? How many maximum-security facilities do you have? What's the bed capacity?
• What's the bed capacity? What's your medium? And what's the bed capacity?
• The capacity data. So all DOC facilities under capacity, but the minimums are most under capacity.
• So all DOC facilities are under capacity, but the minimums are most under capacity.

Summary: The commission on correctional consolidation and collaboration heard testimony focused on how Massachusetts uses custody levels, staffing, programming, and medical release tools, with Prisoners’ Legal Services arguing that the system is overusing expensive high-security settings and underusing step-down options. Dave Rainey said the incarcerated population has dropped substantially over the last several years, but spending and staffing have not fallen in proportion. He argued that DOC overclassifies people into medium and maximum security, relies too heavily on behavioral assessment units that function like segregation, and keeps people in restrictive settings such as Souza-Baranowski and Shattuck Hospital longer than necessary. He also said medical parole is underused and that many people with serious chronic illness or advanced age pose little public-safety risk and should be released through existing legal pathways. Sheriffs and other commission members pushed back on some of those points, emphasizing that staffing needs are driven by the acuity of the current population, that corrections is not overstaffed, and that classification decisions involve serious public-safety judgments. They also stressed that some high-cost medical placements are necessary because people remain under sentence and require care, and that furloughs and other release tools can create security risks if contraband or substance use is involved. The discussion also covered the role of county sheriffs versus DOC in reentry, with several members saying county systems tend to do more day-to-day step-down and release planning, while DOC has more difficulty moving people through lower-security settings before release. Ben Foreman of MassINC offered a more systemwide, data-focused perspective, praising the state’s transparency and arguing that Massachusetts has made major progress in reducing incarceration and increasing public safety. He said the state still has an opportunity to improve by right-sizing facilities, investing in community-based mental health treatment, and using the commission to better understand the capital and operating costs of the current system. In response to questions, he said he was aware of DOC studies on programs like furlough but had not reviewed recent ones, and he noted that total-control facilities like Souza-Baranowski have long been criticized in the research literature for poor outcomes. Nora Wassel of the Women and Incarceration Project then testified that the commission should issue an interim report and scrutinize the planned new women’s prison, which she said is not justified by current population trends or available data. She argued that women are overclassified under DOC’s own tools, that reentry beds and minimum-security placements are underused, and that the system may be failing to account for women’s distinct medical and reentry needs. The meeting ended with continued discussion of reentry, furloughs, day reporting, and whether consolidation should mean fewer facilities, better step-down pathways, or both.

Transcript Highlights:

• And by safe operational capacity, we mean single bunk.
• So, looking forward, what are JR's capacity goals?
• Continued need for additional capacity and staffing. So additional JR capacity, funding, and the...
• Capacity and staffing.
• Additional capacity takes time to bring online.

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 1544, which would require DCYF to study and improve the risk assessment tool used in child abuse and neglect investigations, including better identifying family strengths and needs, substance use-related risk, and service needs, and to certify the tool every three years. Staff explained the bill and noted it had passed the committee unanimously in substitute form last year. The prime sponsor, Representative Rule, said the tool would help reduce bias and support better decisions about child safety. Members raised questions about whether the bill would require new data systems or create a fiscal impact, and DCYF testified that the recertification process would focus on evidence-based literature and fidelity to the tool, though the agency acknowledged limitations in its data system. Support testimony from Partners for Our Children and DCYF emphasized that the current tool is not evidence-based and that the department is piloting the North Carolina Family Assessment Scale. The hearing on HB 1544 was then closed. The committee then received a lengthy work session from DCYF on juvenile rehabilitation. Juvenile Rehabilitation Assistant Secretary Jennifer Redman and security classification administrator Jeff Endermark described a growing JR population that is older, serving more adult-sentence youth, and projected to rise to about 481 by 2031. They said Green Hill School remains crowded, Harbor Heights is being brought online as a short-term option, and Echo Glen is near safe operational capacity. They explained JR’s classification system, behavior management process, and the role of multidisciplinary teams in placement decisions, as well as the expansion of community transition services (CTS), which uses electronic home monitoring for eligible youth. Staff described CTS eligibility, supervision expectations, and examples of successful placements, but also said the program needs more after-hours staffing and community supports. Members questioned the validity and equity of the risk tools, the availability of community resources, the impact of behavior policies and escapes, the use of single bunking, and broader concerns about lawsuits and sexual abuse in the system. JR reported an escape rate increase from 1.78 per 100 youth in 2001 to 3.92 in 2025 and said additional capacity and staffing are still needed. The committee then heard House Bill 2219, which would allow child care centers more flexibility in mixed-age grouping during parts of the day and waive repeated DCYF pre-service orientation for people who have already completed it. The prime sponsor, Representative Ortiz-Self, said the bill is meant to ease burdens on small providers. Testifiers from SEIU 925, a family child care provider, the Washington Child Care Centers Association, a child care center director, and the Children’s Campaign Fund supported the bill as a practical way to improve staffing flexibility and reduce duplicative licensing requirements, though one association asked that the bill’s daily time caps on mixed-age grouping be revised or removed. The committee then heard House Bill 2253, an agency-request technical corrections bill for DCYF licensing. Staff said it would allow child-specific licenses for certain relatives under interstate placements, exempt kinship caregivers from blood-borne pathogen training, remove licensing exemptions for physicians and lawyers, allow termination of inactive licenses, revise crisis residential center staffing ratios, and eliminate state monitoring requirements for the Washington School for the Deaf residential program. Members asked about how inactivity would be defined and whether the School for the Deaf inspections had historically produced savings. DCYF said the bill would help right-size licensing workloads after budget cuts and would let the agency work with stakeholders to define inactivity in rule. Testimony from DCYF, Community Youth Services, and Partners for Our Children supported the bill, especially the staffing ratio fix for crisis residential centers and the child-specific licensing changes for relatives.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're behind in grid capacity. We're behind in water capacity. Pre-AI.
• We're behind in grid capacity. We're behind in water capacity. Pre-AI.
• Our capacity is, I agree.
• Our capacity is, I agree.
• They could have no capacity.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> its Financial capacity its Financial capacity the<00:15:00.680><c> long-term</c><00:15:01.199><c
• </c> Insurance to now expand out the capacity Insurance to now expand out the capacity of<01:00:59.160
• relief and capacity.
• </c> bond because you'll have more capacity bond because you'll have more capacity because<01:37:08.400
• </c> that but you know with your capacity that but you know with your capacity right<01:59:46.960><c>

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> we'll move on to the debt capacity we'll move on to the debt capacity report<00:02:06.880><c> and
• </c><01:20:22.480><c> report</c> day the latest uh debt capacity report day the latest uh debt capacity
• </c><01:20:51.120><c> forecast</c> February debt capacity forecast February debt capacity forecast including
• </c> measure um within our our debt capacity measure um within our our debt capacity guidelines<01:25
• capacity capacity restraint<01:41:05.119><c> um</c><01:41:05.840><c> and</c><01:41:06.000><c> then</

Committee: House Capital Investment

Transcript Highlights:

• Instead of giving cities zero credit toward the RHNA target for zoned capacity on putatively bad sites
• and full credit for capacity on the supposedly good ones—that's more or less how it works today—the
• law... ...for capacity on the supposedly good ones.
• But they were prepared for capacity, and they're pretty much maxed out.
• Like, hey, we're at full capacity right now.

Committee: House Housing and Community Development

Transcript Highlights:

• Excuse me, both of those—the capacity, the load, and the generation capacity—will be ramping up over
• And so, excuse me, both of those, the capacity, the, the, progressing over time.
• capacity will be ramping up over time.
• So as that ramp period over time for those data Capacity purchase.
• There's separate financial agreements with those data centers for that interim capacity.

Committee: House Utilities

Transcript Highlights:

• That is where we get our tax package capacity.
• If there's capacity in gross receipts tax rates, local governments can increase those.
• If there's capacity in property tax rates, local governments can Increase those.
• And if you don't increase taxes, your capacity could be smaller. When your capacity is smaller.
• The frenzy that happens when we react to a capacity bill is always...

Bills: SB240

Committee: House House Taxation & Revenue

Keywords: capital outlay, capital projects, severance tax bonds, general fund appropriations, supplemental severance tax bonds, UNM School of Medicine, University of New Mexico, infrastructure, state buildings, courts, schools, higher education, road improvements, water and wastewater, tribal infrastructure, tribal projects, public safety, housing, emergency services, bonding

Transcript Highlights:

• So they’re saying that they don’t have the capacity to meet all the need?
• They have the capacity, so our funding again is consistent with what their current capacity is.
• Our county cannot absorb these costs and maintain the existing capacity.
• That's impacting our ability to increase our capacity to meet the demand.
• Can you explain a little bit more about whether you have the capacity to do more?

Summary: The subcommittee heard budget and policy updates from the Department of State Hospitals, the Commission for Behavioral Health, and the Department of Health Care Services. DSH described its proposed 2026-27 budget of $3.2 billion, including savings tied to IST solutions, higher patient-driven operating costs, and a small increase in caseload projections. Officials said the department has met court-ordered IST treatment benchmarks, with wait times reduced from a pandemic peak of 1,953 pending placements to about 250, and average treatment initiation now around five days. Members asked about the effects of Proposition 36 and SB 1323, rising outside hospitalization costs, Medicare enrollment, and whether IST solution funding was being overbudgeted; DSH said referrals are slightly down overall, aging and medically complex patients are driving outside care costs, and the IST solution savings reflect slower-than-expected program activation rather than a service gap. The department also outlined proposed funding for CONREP cost increases, a new county-by-county LPS bed allocation model, electrical infrastructure upgrades at Napa and Patton, SB 380 transitional housing feasibility work, and additional dental staffing and space at Metropolitan and Patton. The Commission for Behavioral Health reviewed its role in the Behavioral Health Services Act transition and its new Innovation Partnership Fund. Staff said the commission is shifting from county-level innovation oversight to a statewide grant strategy, with the first $20 million RFA drawing strong interest and awards expected in mid-June. Members asked how “innovation” would be defined, whether grants could be renewed after the initial three-year contracts, and how the state would ensure the money supports real service delivery rather than general outreach or training. The commission also sought a liquidation deadline extension for the Alcove youth drop-in center grants so remaining funds can be spent before they revert, allowing sites to finish implementation and support the final evaluation. DHCS provided an overview of CalAIM and BH Connect implementation, including updated specialty mental health access criteria, new ASAM-based substance use treatment standards, contingency management, traditional health care practices for tribal members, workforce investments, evidence-based practice expansion, IMD participation, and transitional rent services. The department also addressed BHSA implementation, saying it does not track specific local program cuts but will monitor county three-year plans, performance measures, and outcomes as counties shift to the new funding structure. On H.R. 1, DHCS said it is preparing outreach, eligibility simplification, and exemption strategies to reduce Medi-Cal coverage losses, including clinic navigators, a statewide outreach campaign, and possible employment supports through a future waiver. The department also reported that BH-CHIP bond funds have supported 437 infrastructure projects, creating 546 facilities and more than 9,500 residential beds, with additional outpatient capacity and tribal investments. Finally, DHCS outlined a proposed 988 trailer bill to create a statewide designation process for 988 centers and mobile crisis teams, with implementation no earlier than October 1, 2027.

Transcript Highlights:

• And in order for somebody to revoke the document, they have to have capacity; if they don't have capacity
• </c> deficits with lack of capacity. deficits with lack of capacity.
• </c><00:43:38.560><c> And</c> have capacity to make the document.
• And have capacity to make the document.
• And then they have a trust but they cannot revoke it because of their capacity.

Committee: Senate Health and Human Services

Summary: The Committee on Health and Human Services opened its first hearing of the 2026 session and heard testimony on several bills, with the chair emphasizing one-minute testimony, written submissions, and live streaming. For SB 768, relating to an alternative water source income tax credit, the Department of Taxation said a drafting issue needed clarification on the $500 cap and estimated a revenue loss of $6.8 million per year beginning in fiscal year 2028. The Tax Foundation of Hawaii and the Libertarian Party opposed the bill as an unnecessary subsidy and tax-code complication, while one supporter was noted. A member questioned the size of the projected loss and suggested future analysis of net fiscal impacts and methodology. The committee then heard SB 389, which expands a general excise tax exemption to additional health-related providers and purchases. The Department of Taxation said the change would be a minimal code adjustment but would require public education; the Tax Foundation said the bill should be framed in light of the original physician-shortage rationale for the exemption. The Hawaii National Guard and Aloha Care supported the measure, along with several other organizations and individuals, while the Libertarian Party opposed it as favoritism and tax-code complexity. A member asked about administrative burden and potential tax impact, and the department said it did not yet have a calculation but was working on one. The committee also heard SB 877, which would appropriate funds to increase Medicaid in-home services if federal matching funds are maximized, and SB 1139, which would direct DHS to expand Medicaid eligibility for children from birth to age five regardless of household income. DHS stood on written testimony for both bills, and Aloha Care, the Hawaii Medical Association, disability advocates, children’s advocates, and CARES testified in support, arguing the measures would improve access and family stability. The Libertarian Party opposed both bills, warning of higher long-term costs, entitlement growth, and reduced private-sector options. Members questioned the fiscal and programmatic differences between crisis and warm-line services during discussion of SB 787, a bill to fund a Department of Health warm line; the department said the warm line would serve noncrisis callers more cheaply than crisis staffing, and that about 34.7% of 2024 Hawaii CARES contacts were mild issues that could have been routed to a warm line. Supporters cited mental health needs after the Lahaina wildfire and the affordability crisis, while opponents argued the service duplicated existing resources and expanded government involvement.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, Jordan Odo in my individual capacity, and I'm alone.
• Uh Jordan Odo in my individual capacity Uh Jordan Odo in my individual capacity and<00:12:49.120><c>
• </c> technical capacity technical capacity um<00:55:09.440><c> is</c><00:55:09.680><c> one</c><00:55:
• . capacity. capacity.
• </c> So the data reinforces capacity So the data reinforces capacity constraints<00:56:49.280><c> are

Summary: The Speed Task Force met on December 15, 2025, with members participating in person and via Zoom. After roll call and introductions, the chair filed the previous meeting minutes without objection. The chair then gave a report on outreach presentations statewide about the task force’s permitting-simplification work, noting appearances before groups such as the Chinese Chamber, Small Business Regulatory Review Board, General Contractors Association of Hawaii, Hawaii Chamber, and the Land Use Commission. He also introduced the new task force coordinator, Reginald K. T. King, and outlined a January 6, 2026 process for member-submitted recommendations, including first-come consideration and structured debate. No public testimony or member questions were offered on these items. The task force heard a presentation from the Building Permit PIG. The presenter said the group reviewed 79 SWAT recommendation forms over seven meetings, with participation from 15 disciplines and about 270 hours of work. The group’s findings emphasized workforce shortages, inconsistent plan quality, limited departmental resources, and a lack of centralized tools for applicants to self-resolve issues. Recommendations focused on building a workforce pipeline, expanding training on codes and technology, and developing a universal platform, including AI-assisted review tools. The presenter also raised offsite construction, including factory-built, modular, tiny homes, and ADUs, as an area needing clearer state and county alignment to speed permit review and support housing needs. No public testimony or Q&A followed, and discussion and voting were deferred to the January 6, 2026 meeting. The task force then began the Chapter 6E Historic Preservation PIG presentation. The chair described historic preservation as a broad process covering research, protection, restoration, rehabilitation, and interpretation of significant properties, including burial sites and iwi kūpuna, and said Chapter 6E is intended to guide responsible development rather than stop it. The presentation explained SHPD’s role and the complexity of 6E review, including archaeological surveys, monitoring, and preservation plans. Early findings highlighted uncertainty in sensitivity determinations for iwi kūpuna and subsurface resources, repeated review of the same projects, and staffing and technical capacity shortages among SHPD and consultants. Public testimony was closed and no immediate Q&A was allowed; further discussion and voting on recommendations were scheduled for January 6, 2026.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you. ...land but lack financial, legal, and administrative capacity to evaluate and defend against
• to outpace and overwhelm... ...backed developers with the means and the capacity to outpace and overwhelm
• to model the cumulative resources, ...scores, without providing us the capacity to model the cumulative
• There is a lack of resources and a lack of capacity.
• There is a lack of resources and a lack of capacity.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Municipalities and Regional Government

Summary: The Joint Committee on Municipalities and Regional Government held a hybrid hearing on late-filed bills and formal petitions, with testimony focused primarily on two local measures: Senate Bill 3026 concerning voting procedures for a proposed six-town regional school district, and House Bill 5294, a Worthington home rule petition seeking a one-year moratorium on large-scale solar development. Committee members reminded speakers of testimony limits and remote participation rules, then took testimony from local officials, residents, and advocates. On S. 3026, supporters from the Six Town Regionalization Planning Board and local boards said the bill would create a fairer, equal voting process across all six towns for a major regional school district decision. They argued the measure would expand voter access, address concerns about unequal polling opportunities, and help communities respond to declining enrollment and financial pressures affecting school sustainability. Testifiers thanked the bill’s sponsors and urged the committee to advance it. On H. 5294, Worthington officials and residents strongly supported the moratorium, saying it was not anti-solar but a needed planning pause for a small rural town facing industrial-scale solar and battery proposals. Witnesses cited limited municipal staff, volunteer fire and health services, water-supply and groundwater concerns, wildfire risk, decommissioning and oversight costs, land-use and ecological impacts, and the strain on rural communities from state energy mandates. Several speakers said the town needed time to develop zoning and safety regulations before projects moved forward, and they asked the committee to report the bill favorably. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the chair closed testimony after the final speaker.

Transcript Highlights:

• Instead of giving cities zero credit toward the RHNA target for zoned capacity on putatively bad sites
• and full credit for capacity on the supposedly good ones—that's more or less how it works today—the
• do so would be insulated from lawsuits arguing that their housing plans do not provide sufficient capacity
• And I think this is going back and making sure that if our goal is to have the capacity and the zoning
• But they were prepared for capacity, and they're pretty much maxed out.

Summary: The Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee heard several housing-related bills. SB 457 would direct HCD to develop statistical formulas based on historical development data to help cities complete housing element site inventories, with the author and supporters arguing it would make RHNA compliance more realistic and less costly; the California Building Industry Association opposed, and the bill was later approved on a 7-1 vote. SB 904 would codify and expand wildfire-rebuilding coordination and reporting practices used after recent fires, with supporters saying it would speed recovery and opponents questioning the need for additional reporting; it passed 11-1. The committee also took up SB 1091, which would create a state acquisition-and-preservation program for unsubsidized affordable housing to prevent displacement; it drew broad support from housing and tenant groups and passed 9-1, with members emphasizing preservation as a key housing strategy. Members also considered SB 1267, which would require EV charger installers in common-interest developments to indemnify associations during installation and make homeowners responsible for costs arising from use of privately owned chargers. The bill was presented as a follow-up to prior HOA-related EV charging legislation, with support from HOA, EV, and climate groups and opposition from the California Association of Realtors pending amendments; it passed 10-0. SB 1117 would clarify that ADU impact fees above the 750-square-foot exemption are charged only on the portion above that threshold, not the entire unit, and supporters said it would remove a fee cliff that discourages slightly larger ADUs. Cities, special districts, and fire agencies opposed or opposed unless amended, citing infrastructure funding concerns, but the bill passed 10-0 after extensive debate. The committee also heard SB 1361, which would prevent local governments from taking actions to avoid SB 79 transit-oriented housing requirements at existing or planned transit stops. Supporters from L.A. Metro, labor, and housing groups said it would protect transit investments and jobs, while the City of Burbank opposed; the bill passed 9-0. Two consent items, SB 722 and SB 1426, were approved without discussion. Throughout the hearing, members repeatedly stressed the goals of streamlining housing production, preserving existing affordable homes, and reducing barriers to rebuilding and transit-oriented development.

Transcript Highlights:

• identify the anticipated impacts of the successful development of new fission nuclear generation capacity
• It generates approximately 1,200 megawatts capacity, and so you can compare that with approximately 300
• These were for SMRs that are below a certain electric capacity level, and also for SMRs that would be
• Do the SMRs utilize water in any major capacity?
• Do the SMRs utilize water in any major capacity?

Bills: SB5821 , SB6004 , SB6010 , SB5941

Committee: Senate Environment, Energy & Technology

Keywords: nuclear energy, energy strategy, advanced technology, sustainability, state policy, renewable energy, public entities, electric generation, contracting, SB 6010, Washington energy siting, EFSEC, Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council, tribal consultation, government-to-government consultation, federally recognized tribes, energy facility siting, RCW, clean energy, alternative energy

Transcript Highlights:

• Another key concept is adjusted net tax capacity.
• Another key concept is adjusted net tax capacity.
• </c> is um the the value of net tax capacity is um the the value of net tax capacity adjusted<00:05:13.320
• </c> value or the total uh net tax capacity value or the total uh net tax capacity you<00:14:49.000><
• </c> when one thinks about net tax capacity when one thinks about net tax capacity you<00:14:58.839><

Committee: Senate Education Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• Are they going to need potentially additional capacity on the transmission lines themselves?
• I'm going to do, we would actually hold that capacity for them.
• They are at a capacity of...
• right now in terms of capacity? I can share a perspective. No, go ahead.
• Demand has outstripped that delivery capacity.

Committee: House State Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm concerned about the capacity for a one-person office to meet that. Sure.
• It was the size of the home battery unit that put the transformer over capacity.
• Second, there should be no caps on solar capacity. Thank you.
• Second, there should be no caps on solar capacity.
• nationwide demand that should be considered in addition to adding needed capacity.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy

Summary: The hearing focused broadly on solar policy and several related bills, especially S. 2269, S. 2270, H. 3520, H. 3521, and related measures on distributed energy resources, municipal solar caps, permitting reform, and tax credits. Testimony from the Air Force supported S. 2232, which would exempt federal military installations from renewable energy production caps and net metering limits to support energy resilience at bases like Hanscom. Most other witnesses argued that Massachusetts needs to speed up rooftop, municipal, and community solar deployment to address high electricity prices, federal tax credit rollbacks, grid reliability, and climate goals. A major theme was streamlining permitting through automated or “smart” solar permitting, including a statewide platform managed by DOER. Permit Power, SEIA, Vote Solar, 350 Mass, and others said current local permitting is fragmented and costly, and that instant permitting could reduce soft costs and speed installations. Several witnesses also urged changes to interconnection rules, including flexible interconnection, remote inspections, and faster utility approval timelines. Some speakers raised concerns about small towns lacking staff to meet short deadlines and suggested a state-hosted platform to reduce the burden on municipalities. Another major topic was lifting caps on solar deployment. Municipal officials from Lexington and Cambridge said the 10-megawatt municipal cap and regional caps are blocking shovel-ready projects and should be removed, including for behind-the-meter municipal solar and MBTA-community housing. Other witnesses described additional limits on project size, net metering, and residential tax credits, and called for making the state residential solar credit refundable and larger. Several speakers also supported virtual power plants, distributed energy resource targets, solar canopies, microgrids, and expanded access for affordable housing, tenants, and low- and moderate-income customers. No votes were taken. Committee members asked questions about permitting timelines, grid modernization, the rationale for caps, balcony solar, and interconnection delays, and witnesses said they would follow up with additional information where needed. The hearing ended with broad support from industry, municipal, environmental, and advocacy groups for advancing the solar and distributed energy bills, while some witnesses opposed provisions they viewed as overly restrictive, such as mandatory SMART participation for all solar projects.

Transcript Highlights:

• In New York, advanced power flow control added 185 megawatts of transmission capacity, enough to plug
• Unlocking grid capacity with GETS will support continued economic prosperity in Texas when the state
• We say, well, that's the amount of capacity you can move through that line, and that's it.
• But on days when it's 50 degrees, the wind is blowing, and it's cloudy outside, there's more capacity
• However, we don't employ these technologies to utilize that additional capacity. Thank you.

Bills: HB551 , HB 1281 , HB1378 , HB1617 , HB2868 , HB2881 , HB3374 , HB4439 , HB4726 , HB4732 , HB4878 , HB4914 , HB4921 , HB4958 , HB5200 , HB5318 , HB5360 , HB5402 , HB5568 , HB5573 , HB5623 , HJR218

Committee: House State Affairs

Keywords: political contributions, address privacy, Texas Ethics Commission, election transparency, campaign finance, international organizations, World Health Organization, jurisdiction, state law, enforcement, United Nations, World Economic Forum, attorney general, Texas attorney general, state sovereignty, legal enforcement, Texas Attorney General, electric energy storage, municipal regulation, county regulation

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> of our charter schools are to capacity of our charter schools are to capacity they<00:19:09.640>
• elementary school capacity.
• Are they at full capacity?
• Yeah, that school is over capacity. K Middle, over capacity. K High School, over capacity.
• </c><01:49:37.360><c> K</c><01:49:37.800><c> high</c> capacity K middle over capacity K high capacity

Transcript Highlights:

• It's overextended our capacity for us to do their own H and H studies.
• more capacity.
• Can you give some insight into the capacity?
• Maybe just some thoughts on where you were thinking about that capacity.
• We talk about building capacity, but it's not just capacity.

Committee: House House Rural Development, Land Grants And Cultural Affairs