Transcript Highlights:

• When property is removed from the current use classification, back taxes plus interest must be paid by
• So this would be the total amount of the transaction plus the tax... ...tax amount.
• This proposal is smart and a needed step in the right direction.
• This bill creates a direct tax on construction jobs.
• It will be a direct hit to job creation and worker wages.

Bills: HB2334 , HB2140 , HB2326 , HB2100

Committee: House Finance

Keywords: cash transactions, pennies, currency adjustment, economic impact, consumer protection, tax exemption, governmental transfer, agriculture, land use, property tax, emergency medical services, levies, healthcare funding, local government, taxation, excise tax, large companies, payroll expenses, minimum wage, Well Washington fund

Transcript Highlights:

• What have you, again, it's really directed more towards our beneficiaries' access to loan products so
• This act increases the loan limit for direct loans provided by the Department of Hawaiian Homelands to
• :06.719><c> by</c><01:26:06.880><c> the</c> for Direct Loans provided by the for Direct Loans provided
• Act 130 increased the loan limit for direct loans provided by the DHHL, which increases financial opportunities
• Act 130 increased the loan limit for direct loans provided by the DHHL, which increases financial opportunities

Committee: House Judiciary & Hawaiian Affairs

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 410, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs’ biennium operating budget. OHA asked for a modest increase over its base budget, including $1.2 million to fund 13 new full-time positions for a strategy and implementation team tied to its long-term plan, with emphasis on housing, education, health, and economic resilience. OHA also described a broader effort to work directly with executive branch departments to improve outcomes for Native Hawaiians. Testimony was largely supportive, with several individuals speaking in favor and one testifier expressing strong frustration about Native Hawaiian rights and access to resources. The chair noted there were 38 additional written/supporting testimonies and three in opposition. Members asked about OHA’s funding sources and public land trust revenues; OHA said it is not receiving the full 20 percent share, described a public land trust working group and system issues, and said a related bill would seek funding to begin an inventory. No vote was taken in the portion provided. The committee then considered House Bill 304, which would make the Hawaiian version of a law binding when the law was originally drafted in Hawaiian and later translated into English. The Judiciary supported the bill, saying it reinforces Hawaiian as an official language and looks to the original language for legislative intent. The Attorney General supported the intent but recommended narrowing the bill with a proviso to avoid ambiguities, limiting it to laws originally drafted in Hawaiian that were not later amended, codified, recodified, or reenacted in English. Public testimony was generally supportive, though one speaker raised broader sovereignty concerns. Members questioned how many laws would be affected and whether the proposed amendment would undercut the bill; the Attorney General said the amendment was meant to address uncertainty in interpretation. No final action was reported. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 603, which would direct OHA to administer a Native Hawaiian business marketing program to promote Native Hawaiian-owned businesses through marketing and technical assistance. OHA supported the concept, saying a label or branding program could help consumers identify and support Native Hawaiian-owned businesses, but requested that funding be redirected to a working group to study program design, implementation, enforcement, and long-term viability. The chair noted four supportive testimonies had been received, and a member asked OHA to confirm that its programs serve all Hawaiians, not only those eligible for homelands; OHA said it serves all Hawaiians in the state. The transcript ends before any vote or further action on HB 603.

Transcript Highlights:

• Right now, we're trying to codify this and have some direction.
• Use of resources, direct funds to programs that are most efficient or effective.
• And in 20 plus years of funding this program.
• And how does that affect 30 to 30 plus million Texans on a daily basis?
• To fulfill the statutory directive of Texas Water Code Section 5.

Bills: HB512 , HB2248 , HB2679 , HB2832 , HB3112 , HB3368 , HB3490 , HB3512 , HB3623 , HB3666 , HB3700 , HB3711 , HB3770 , HB3963

Committee: House Delivery of Government Efficiency

Keywords: grievance procedures, state agency, employee rights, workplace regulations, employment law, employees, employment actions, appeal, state employees, workplace rights, disciplinary actions, employment conditions, employment disputes, job protections, public information, transparency, government accountability, information access, notification requirements, federal funding

Transcript Highlights:

• And discretionary, you had also directed us to fund our legislative directed studies out of discretionary
• Infrastructure Revolving Loan Fund.
• infrastructure revolving loan fund. fund to repay the water infrastructure revolving loan fund.
• Our loan application.
• , or loan forgiveness.

Committee: Joint Water Topics Overview Committee

Summary: The Water Topics Overview Committee met to review several interim studies and receive updates from the Department of Water Resources. The committee approved the March 26, 2026 minutes, observed a moment of silence for the late Representative Conmy, and welcomed Representative Hansen to the committee. Staff then reported that the watershed management study and the stormwater/wastewater study had both satisfied the presentation requirements in their study directives, with no further required testimony unless members wanted additional information. The department’s main presentation focused on major water projects and agency operations. Reese Haas and staff updated members on the NAWS project, the Southwest Pipeline Project, Devils Lake outlet operations, low-head dam safety work, floodplain management repository implementation, data center water use, and the 2027 Water Development Plan. Members asked detailed questions about NAWS funding sources, remaining project costs, capacity concerns for All Seasons and other users, and whether current construction is being designed for future demand. The department said NAWS remains on track for substantial completion by October, that remaining NAWS funding will come from a mix of federal, state, and local sources, and that current construction is designed for ultimate capacity while some future components will be adjusted for increased demand. A large portion of the meeting was devoted to the department’s cash management, Resources Trust Fund revenues, carryover balances, and the State Water Commission’s cost-share program. The department reported $340.6 million in carryover remaining, explained that much of it is already obligated to long-term projects, and noted that oil price forecasts and stripper-well exemptions will affect future revenues. Members raised concerns about large carryovers, affordability for local sponsors, and whether the state should continue obligating money multiple bienniums ahead. The department said it is working with the commission on a revised prioritization framework, including high/moderate/low project categories and a two-tier pre-construction/construction approach, to better manage obligations and affordability. The committee also reviewed Deloitte’s finalized studies on regional governance/finance and cost-share policy. Deloitte presented options for Southwest, NAWS, and Red River governance, with stakeholders generally favoring keeping NAWS largely as is, using the current Southwest model with improvements, and pursuing a more structured governance option for Red River. On cost share, the department said Deloitte’s recommended package would cover projected needs through the 2030s, but would require policy changes such as lower percentages for some project types, a 25% replacement-project rate with a cap, and possible bonding or delayed reimbursement strategies. No votes were taken on these policy questions, and the chair indicated the committee would continue the discussion at future basin meetings and the September Water Topics meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's a shared appreciation loan program that provides loans for down payment to qualified homebuyers.
• Upon the sale or transfer of the home, the homebuyer repays the original down payment loan plus a share
• Those are all loan repayments, correct?
• Most of our projects require land loans, backed by construction loans, with equity partners and other
• , it messed up the takeout loans.

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Housing Finance and Affordability held its first hearing of 2025 to examine California’s housing finance system, with opening remarks emphasizing the state’s severe housing shortage, high costs, and the need for practical recommendations to the Legislature and Governor. Co-chairs described the committee as an educational and problem-solving forum focused on financing housing production, first-time homeownership, mixed-income developments, and affordability across the income spectrum. Witnesses from state agencies and the development sector were invited to explain how housing is financed and where the system is breaking down. Panelists from the California Housing Partnership, the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency, the Tax Credit Allocation Committee/State Treasurer’s Office, CalHFA, and Related outlined the “capital stack” used to finance affordable housing, stressing that projects typically rely on multiple public and private sources, including federal and state low-income housing tax credits, tax-exempt bonds, state subsidies, local funds, and rental income. Speakers noted that affordable housing rents generally cannot support full project costs without public subsidy, and that recent federal changes—especially the expansion of the 4% and 9% tax credit programs and the reduction of the bond financing threshold for 4% credits—should allow California to finance substantially more units. CalHFA also described its homeownership programs, including My Home, Dream For All, and disaster-related mortgage assistance, as well as its multifamily lending and bond issuance programs. Several witnesses and committee members emphasized that the system remains too complex, too slow, and underfunded. They pointed to the need for more state funding, a housing bond, a permanent funding source, and better coordination among agencies, while also citing recent streamlining efforts such as AB 434’s SuperNOFA, AB 519’s one-stop-shop working group, and the planned California Housing and Homeless Agency reorganization. Members raised concerns about equity, access, missing-middle housing, gender and racial disparities, and whether current programs adequately serve extremely low-income households and those at risk of homelessness. No formal votes or actions were taken during the hearing; the discussion ended with committee members and witnesses agreeing that both funding and administrative reform are needed to increase production and improve affordability.

Transcript Highlights:

• And we have approved a loan program for some struggling hospitals in California—loans, not grants.
• How did you folks determine the fact that grants would be available for these clinics, but not a loan
• How did you folks determine that these hospitals with these closing maternity wards are getting loans
• But why a grant and not a loan per se?
• They're getting loans. That would have otherwise received any kind of federal funding.

Committee: Senate Budget and Fiscal Review

Summary: The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee heard AB 106, an early-action budget bill providing $90 million one-time General Fund to support reproductive health providers affected by the federal H.R. 1 prohibition on Medicaid funding. Department of Finance staff explained that the money would be administered as grants through the Department of Health Care Access and Information because affected providers can no longer bill Medi-Cal during the federal restriction, which lasts through July 4, 2026. Members also discussed why the amount increased from an earlier $60 million estimate, with Finance saying the figure was updated based on additional claims data and provider information. The committee debate focused heavily on the policy implications of the funding. Supporters argued the bill is an emergency response to a targeted federal attack on Planned Parenthood and related family planning services, emphasizing that the funding would backfill non-abortion services such as cancer screenings, contraception, STI testing, mammograms, and prenatal care. Opponents questioned the use of General Fund dollars, the grant structure versus loans for other distressed providers, the Public Records Act exemption, and the bill’s priority compared with rural hospitals, developmental services, public safety, and other budget needs. Finance clarified that the federal funds at issue do not pay for abortion services and that the grant program would be open to eligible providers meeting criteria set by the department. Public testimony was overwhelmingly in support from Planned Parenthood affiliates, Essential Access Health, Western Center on Law and Poverty, the California Medical Association, family physicians, OBGYN groups, and others, while some commenters used the opportunity to raise unrelated budget concerns such as Medi-Cal dental cuts, IHSS, and CalHome funding. After discussion, the committee approved AB 106 on a 12-4 vote and reported it out. The chair also noted that a later hearing would examine broader H.R. 1 impacts in more detail.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, student loan debt is a concern for Latinas of all ages.
• We're using our legal department to provide direct representation.
• H.R. 1 eliminates Graduate PLUS loans by July 2026.
• Removing access to Graduate PLUS loans will price many students out of medicine, education, and other
• These dynamics have direct consequences for persistence and completion.

Summary: The Select Committee on Latina Inequities met at Los Angeles Mission College in Sylmar, hosted by Assemblymember Celeste Rodriguez and joined by Assemblymember Mia Bonta. Rodriguez opened by framing the committee’s work around the economic status of Latinas and the effects of federal policies on the economy and social safety net, while the college president welcomed the committee and described campus services for undocumented and housing-insecure students. Rodriguez also emphasized the local impact of immigration enforcement in the San Fernando Valley and said the hearing would focus on Latinas’ economic conditions, immigration enforcement impacts on the workforce and safety, and H.R. 1’s effects on the safety net. The first panel featured HOPE’s Maria Morales and Dr. Elsa Macias, who presented findings from HOPE’s National Economic Status of Latinas report. They said Latinas are a major and growing part of California’s population and workforce, but face persistent inequities, including a large wage gap, higher unemployment, high uninsured rates, student debt, and affordability pressures around child care, housing, and education. They also discussed entrepreneurship, noting both the growth of Latina-owned businesses and barriers such as limited access to capital, technical assistance, and retirement and health coverage. In response to committee questions, they said higher education can still offer a strong return on investment, but only if students can complete degrees without being overwhelmed by debt and care costs; they also pointed to policy solutions such as SB 642, mentorship, financial literacy, CalSavers access, and support for community development financial institutions. The second panel focused on immigration enforcement and Latina safety in the workforce. Luis Nolasco of the ACLU described arrests tied to apparent ethnicity and Spanish-speaking, the chilling effect on families, and the loss of wages, school attendance, and mobility. Dr. Amada Armenta said immigration enforcement harms California’s economy, public health, and mixed-status families, and noted that undocumented workers are concentrated in agriculture, construction, and child care. SEIU’s Jen Baca Beltran said raids and school-based enforcement traumatize children and families and highlighted the need for Know Your Rights trainings. Megan Ortiz of IDEPSCA described repeated Border Patrol raids on day labor centers, injuries to staff, and the need to protect worker centers, domestic workers, and street vendors. Inclusive Action’s Shannon Camacho said raids have forced many informal workers to stop working, prompted emergency cash assistance and rent relief efforts, and strengthened advocacy for vendor protections and CDFI support. CHIRLA’s Jeanette Zanipatine said the rapid response network has expanded, documented widespread arrests and detention conditions, and is providing direct support and legal referrals; committee members asked about detention, maternal health, and what the state can do, and panelists urged stronger oversight, more legal representation, and protections for pregnant and detained people.

Transcript Highlights:

• Loan debt information, and then that particular payment goes directly to their loan provider, not to
• It's a loan repayment for service going directly to the student loan provider.
• the loans need to be repaid.
• So that plus living expenses really jumps the loan amount.
• And Madam Chair, we know the turnaround to pay these loans. The loan amount.

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 20, a prior-authorization and step-therapy measure, on a committee substitute that had already incorporated many stakeholder changes. The sponsor and agency witnesses described revisions to definitions of chronic health condition and serious mental illness, shorter prior-authorization periods, and limits on reporting requirements. Supporters, including a nurse practitioner and disability advocates, said the bill would reduce barriers to needed medications and urged broader protections for chronic and behavioral health conditions. Health insurance and pharmacy benefit management representatives remained opposed, arguing prior authorization is an important patient-safety tool and objecting to the bill’s limits on its use. Senator Hickey offered two amendments: one to conform electronic prior-authorization response times to existing law by changing seven days to three, and one to restore the prior-authorization period from 12 months to three years. The first amendment was accepted; the second passed on a 5-4 vote. The committee then approved the amended substitute 6-3. The committee next heard Senate Bill 111, which would expand the confidentiality of personal information held by the Motor Vehicle Division to include sex, gender identity, national origin, and immigration status. Tax and Revenue officials explained that the bill would not change what documents MVD collects, but would limit disclosure of sensitive information contained in scanned records unless a statutory exception applies. Members asked about what appears on licenses, what is stored in MVD’s system, and whether law enforcement access would change; officials said criminal law enforcement exceptions would remain in place and that the bill mainly affects public disclosure requests. The committee voted 8-1 to give the bill a do-pass recommendation. Senate Bill 218, funding a Los Alamos Emergency Operations Center, was presented as a regional disaster-response and training facility for northern New Mexico. Los Alamos County witnesses said the project would support emergency management training and coordination across the region and requested $5 million. Several senators questioned whether the county had explored bonding, intergovernmental agreements, or regional cost-sharing, and raised concerns about Los Alamos’s debt capacity and whether the project was truly regional. Supporters said the county has a long capital backlog and that the center would serve communities from Santa Fe north. The committee ultimately voted 9-1 to advance the bill. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 14, a major health professional loan-repayment proposal. Senator Hickey described it as an effort to recruit and retain physicians, nurses, and other allied health professionals by increasing repayment amounts, prioritizing physicians and doctors of osteopathic medicine for 50% of the fund, and allowing service commitments with some flexibility, including part-time work. Supporters from medical, nursing, and behavioral health groups said the bill would help address workforce shortages and make New Mexico more competitive. Committee members asked about the inclusion of physician assistants, the 90-day start requirement, anti-donation concerns, tax treatment, tribal and IHS providers, and whether the 50% physician set-aside would leave enough for other professions. After discussion, the committee voted 10-0 to send the bill forward with a do-pass recommendation.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> expect to last uh 50 plus expect to last uh 50 plus years<00:19:37.760><c> representative</c><00
• loan loan surges<01:17:41.320><c> lack</c><01:17:41.520><c> of</c><01:17:41.639><c> cooling</c><01:17
• We generally don't make direct payments to households.
• </c> most part we're not making direct most part we're not making direct payments<01:37:20.679><c> to
• </c> payments to to households or direct payments to to households or direct payments<01:37:29.360><c

Committee: House Energy Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• The IOU model is essentially cost-plus and business as usual.
• Three points to conclude about how to deploy the money that we do receive: All else equal, loans are
• Placing any loan funds in a revolving account is a critical piece. IBank has this.
• The first one is the federal DOE loan guarantee program.
• We estimate that the savings to customers over the life of those loans will be $2 to $3 billion.

Summary: The committee first heard AB 13, which would restructure the CPUC to increase legislative oversight, add legislative liaisons, require more detailed and timely reporting on rate-setting decisions, and add a public advocate member. The author and supporters argued the bill would improve transparency, accountability, and geographic diversity in CPUC decision-making amid rising utility rates. Witnesses from TURN, San Joaquin County, SDG&E, and former CPUC Commissioner Loretta Lynch offered support or support-in-principle, while no opposition testimony was presented. Members generally praised the bill’s transparency goals, and AB 13 passed 10-0 to Appropriations, with the roll left open for absent members. The committee then adopted the 2025-2026 committee rules and approved three consent items: AB 61, AB 365, and AB 406. The next bill, AB 99, would cap investor-owned utility rate increases above inflation except for specified costs such as safety, modernization, and fuel/commodity costs. The author and supporters, including a representative of the California Senior Legislature, said the bill was needed to protect ratepayers, especially seniors and low-income customers, from repeated rate hikes. Opposition came from utility labor, utilities, the Chamber of Commerce, and others, who argued the bill was too simplistic, could suppress labor costs, and did not account for major cost drivers such as wildfire mitigation, mandates, and net metering. Several members supported moving the bill forward as a starting point on affordability, while others criticized it as overly blunt. AB 99 passed 11-0 to Appropriations, with the roll left open. The hearing then shifted to an informational panel on strategies to reduce California transmission costs. A Public Advocates Office staffer described a growing backlog of approved-but-unbuilt transmission projects, rising transmission access charges, and long project timelines driven largely by utility pre-application and construction periods. Panelists from Net Zero California and consulting firms presented research suggesting that public financing or public-private partnership lease models could reduce transmission costs by lowering financing, tax, and capital costs, with estimated savings of up to 57% and as much as $123 billion over 40 years. PG&E’s representative said the utility is already pursuing federal loan guarantees, grants, and a public-private partnership with Citizens Energy, but warned that state ownership could create tax, wildfire-liability, and governance risks. Members asked about the CPUC’s role, the causes of delays, and whether public financing could complement existing competitive solicitation processes.

Transcript Highlights:

• But yes, I do think there are several campuses that are looking in that direction.
• The state loan we did take out, we're very thankful for that. I appreciate all of this.
• This question is directed to our CSU representative.
• This question is directed to our CSU representative.
• I urge you to make sure that that funding is directed toward direct instruction and student support.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance held an oversight hearing on the California State University system covering enrollment, core operations, Title IX/civil rights, and basic needs. The Department of Finance said the Governor’s 2026-27 budget does not change CSU enrollment targets from the prior year and proposes a 5% ongoing General Fund increase for core operations as the final year of the compact. The Legislative Analyst’s Office recommended a lower resident undergraduate enrollment target than the Governor’s proposal, separate funding for enrollment growth rather than folding it into base, a smaller or no base increase tied more closely to inflation, earmarking some base funds for capital renewal, retiring deferred payments, and avoiding new multi-year compact commitments. CSU said enrollment has rebounded for three straight years, but growth is uneven across campuses, with several Northern California campuses still facing structural declines tied to demographics and community college pipelines. CSU described a multi-year reallocation plan shifting about 10,000 FTE and $89 million in ongoing funding toward higher-demand campuses, plus $40 million in one-time support, and said seven campuses submitted turnaround plans aimed at recovering enrollment over the next several years. The system highlighted strategies such as dual enrollment, guaranteed admission pathways with community colleges, outreach to high school students, retention and advising efforts, and new degree models for working adults and military-connected students. Members raised questions about how campus targets are set, whether the May Board of Trustees discussion will address a systemwide enrollment framework, and how CSU will manage future deficits if projected out-year funding does not materialize. On core operations and facilities, CSU said it faces about $320 million in mandatory cost increases in 2026-27 and is pursuing shared services, procurement consolidation, campus administrative sharing, and program redesigns to reduce costs. CSU and the LAO emphasized the system’s large deferred maintenance backlog, estimated at $8.6 billion, and discussed whether CSU’s bond/debt capacity is sufficient to address it; CSU requested up to $1.1 billion for deferred maintenance, while the administration did not propose new funding. The committee also heard CSU’s annual Title IX and civil rights update: CSU said it has implemented 15 of 16 State Auditor recommendations, has dedicated Title IX coordinators at every campus, is using a systemwide case management dashboard, and is piloting centralized investigations at five campuses. Finally, on basic needs, the Governor maintained current funding levels for food assistance/basic needs, rapid rehousing, and mental health. CSU reported heavy use of food pantries, CalFresh support, emergency housing, and counseling services, while warning that federal changes to CalFresh and related funding could make it harder to serve students in need.

Transcript Highlights:

• The second, very importantly, would cap the fund for this effort at $10 million plus an additional 10%
• The second, very importantly, would cap the fund for this effort at $10 million plus an additional 10%
• They would apply for either a grant or a loan or any of the funding, just like we do through, say, New
• Lines 53 and 54, we're looking at the veteran home and direct care staffing.
• Lines 53 and 54, we're looking at the veteran home and direct care staffing.

Bills: SB152 , SB145 , SB190 , HB247 , SB152 , SB145 , HB2 , SB190 , HB247

Committees: Senate Senate Finance , Senate House Appropriations & Finance

Keywords: telecommunications, low-income assistance, lifeline, broadband, rural broadband, universal service fund, public regulation commission, PRC, 911 surcharge, telecommunications relay service, VoIP, mobile service, internet affordability, digital equity, digital inclusion, rural internet, broadband infrastructure, eligible telecommunications carrier, ETC, tribal consent

Transcript Highlights:

• There, plus all of the federal disasters.
• If you want to have a loan, you have to have insurance.
• We have about 60 plus diverse members. We've been around since 2004.
• They have no direct benefit from community solar.
• I thought this is going to be the biggest plus.

Committee: House Water & Natural Resources Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• I think key to that is the process the local board directs to go through that.
• Districts that go into receivership don't choose the type of loan that the state...
• Ultimately, it gives them a general fund loan versus a loan through the iBank.
• Obviously, the loan goes out for an extended period of time.
• We believe all elementary educators providing direct...

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> of those bills that volume of work plus of those bills that volume of work plus the<01:06:35.599
• The program only applies to federal student loans; it does not apply to private student loans.
• </c> public service for Public service loan public service for Public service loan forgiveness<05:05:
• </c> house but it before I got my loans house but it before I got my loans forgiven<05:21:56.360><c>
• and clear. direction to the legislative staff but direction to the legislative staff but because<05:

Summary: The committee first dealt with scheduling and housekeeping, including a plan to take a hard break at 2:00 p.m. for an early bill, hold a brief executive session, and then continue with the remaining afternoon bills. The chair also noted the next likely meeting date would be March 12, when the committee expected to take up the remaining bills before crossover deadlines. The main substantive item was House Bill 142, which would recognize the Honor and Remember flag for Gold Star families and related remembrance purposes. Prime sponsor Rep. Michael Moffett described the bill as a bipartisan measure revised to address earlier concerns, arguing that the flag honors fallen service members, can be personalized with names, and complements rather than detracts from the American flag. He said many other states have already adopted it and suggested the committee could amend details such as the number of days and locations for display. He also raised practical issues about flag dimensions and whether the bill should use "shall" or "may" for display requirements. Testimony was divided. Janine Nutter opposed the bill, saying she supports Gold Star families but objected because the flag resembles the Viet Cong flag and because she believes the American flag should remain the sole symbol representing servicemembers. Kevin Grady, representing the State Veterans Advisory Committee under RSA 115:8, also opposed the bill, saying the committee believes the American flag is the only symbol needed, while still praising the work of Honor and Remember in creating personalized flags for families. Committee members asked questions about where the flag would be flown, whether the State Veterans Cemetery in Boscawen is already displaying it, and how the bill’s language would interact with cemetery policies and committee discretion. No vote or final action was taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• My average water bill, plus wages... Wastewater, so this just affects water and wastewater.
• But we could provide them that direction too, correct?
• Yeah, and I'm hoping Bill provides that direction.
• They didn't give us a lot of direction on how much of that- that they owned.
• All through Wise County, people are headed. our direction.

Bills: HB1520 , HB1525 , HB1530 , HB1535 , HB2068 , HB2091 , HB2347 , HB2372 , HB2805 , HB2815 , HB2867 , HB3154 , HB3482 , HB3483 , HB3663 , HB3781 , HB3901 , HB3915 , HB4135 , HB4153 , HB4158 , HB4329 , HB4331

Committee: House Natural Resources

Keywords: Angelina and Neches River Authority, river authority, Sunset Advisory Commission, Texas Sunset Act, Special District Local Laws Code, local government, natural resources, board of directors, director training, board governance, public testimony, open meetings, public information, conflict of interest, ethics, complaint system, general manager, board president, staggered terms, removal of director

Transcript Highlights:

• If you do any other kind of loans, if you pay it off early, you benefit from saving interest.
• If you do any other kind<00:02:23.440><c> of</c><00:02:23.520><c> loans,</c><00:02:23.840><c> if</c><
• , if you pay it off early, kind of loans, if you pay it off early, you<00:02:25.440><c> benefit</c><00
• </c><00:13:22.720><c> early,</c><00:13:23.040><c> you</c> loan or your assessment early, you loan or
• I mean it's been going on for 30 plus years. And um I hope eventually there will be a resolution.

Bills: HF238 , HF3381 , HF3754 , HF1049

Committee: House Taxes

Transcript Highlights:

• We've talked about some of these major loan forgiveness. My father.
• Came to practice medicine after graduating with $200,000 in student loan debt.
• We can help these doctors with their student loan debt because student loan debt is crippling for them
• Idaho was used because of the caps, plus the cost of living adjustments that New Mexico's compromise
• The license fee is $400, plus the $350. So, sorry, that totals $750.

Committee: House Courts, Corrections & Justice Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• And a note on discretionary: you had directed us in our budget bill to fund our legislative-directed
• As of today, the Water Infrastructure Revolving Loan Fund is fully obligated.
• There hasn't been direct cash infusions.
• There hasn't been direct cash infusions.
• On the right, this is more of the direct state involvement.

Committee: Joint Water Topics Overview Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• A direct benefit is funds.
• > and</c> repayable loan or loan guarantee and repayable loan or loan guarantee and shall<01:32:19.840
• But it's basically an investment loan fund for loan guarantees and loans proposed.
• It contemplated a loan fund.
• <01:36:16.480><c> guarantees</c><01:36:17.120><c> and</c> loan fund um for loan guarantees and loan fund