Bills: HB168 , HB 1044 , HB1534 , HB1914 , HB2240 , HB2530 , HB3284 , HB3395 , HB3515 , HB3783 , HB4034 , HB4213 , HB168

Committee: House S/C on Family & Fiduciary Relationships

Keywords: marriage age, minors, family law, void marriage, rights of minors, Texas marriage law, marriage ceremony, authorized officiants, family code, judges, religious leaders, parent-child relationship, Department of Family and Protective Services, legal rights, notice requirements, HB 1914, Texas Family Code, Chapter 156, conservatorship, custody

Bills: HB3976 , HB3000 , HB3001 , HB3003 , HB3004 , HB3066 , HB3904 , HB3644 , HB1687 , HB3920 , SR40

Keywords: rural hospitals, small hospitals, grant program, healthcare funding, Oklahoma health department, cosmetology, barbering, massage therapy, State Board of Cosmetology and Barbering, Service Oklahoma, license renewal, license reinstatement, licensing fees, sunset extension, board membership, human trafficking, victim services, beauty school, barber school, esthetics

Transcript Highlights:

• It'll require a written apprenticeship agreement, mandate structured work processes and classroom training
• Wilmeth articulated by saying an apprenticeship means a formal, structured earn-and-learn training model
• It’s been streamlined to about a quarter of its original structure.
• In that process. to about a quarter of its original structure. In that process.
• Tobacco retail licensing can greatly help enforcement efforts if it's structured properly.

Bills: HB2128 , HB2255 , HB2397 , HB2429 , HB2591 , HB2680 , HB2834 , HB2868 , HB2911 , HB2951 , HB2979 , HB2991 , HB2996 , HB2999 , HB4001 , HB4011 , HB4017 , HB4020 , HB4026 , HB4086 , HB4088 , HB2244 , HB2342

Committees: House Commerce , House House Commerce Committee of Reference

Keywords: homeowners associations, condominiums, open meetings, governance, transparency, Arizona Teachers Academy, teacher preparation, education funding, public schools, scholarships, teacher certification, community colleges, vacation rentals, short-term rentals, state preemption, local government regulation, occupancy limits, civil penalties, apprenticeships, job training

Bills: HB226 , HB24 , HB309 , HB315 , HB272 , HB24 , HB226 , HB309 , HB315 , HB272

Committee: House Ways and Means Education

Keywords: HB226, homestead exemption, ad valorem tax, property tax, property tax relief, widow, widower, unremarried spouse, surviving spouse, senior exemption, elderly, disabled, permanently and totally disabled, blind taxpayer, deed ownership, principal residence, school tax, county tax, municipal tax, Alabama Department of Revenue

Bills: HB20 , HB276 , HB644 , HB812 , HB816 , HB916 , HB1131 , HB1247 , HB1518 , HB1525 , HB1537 , HB1541 , HB1546 , HB1553 , HB1562 , HB1565 , HB1566 , HB1576 , HB1577 , HB1591 , HB1605 , HB1612 , HB1613 , HB1614 , HB1618 , HB1620 , HB1650 , HB1656 , HB1658 , HB1661 , HB1664 , HB1668 , HB1676 , HB1707 , HB1711 , HB1713 , HB1715 , HB1718 , HB1727 , HB1749 , HB1756 , HB1774 , HB1776 , HB1801 , HB1802 , HB1805 , HB1813 , HB1815 , HB1831 , HB1838 , HB1853 , HB1854 , HB1859 , HB1863 , HB1871 , HB1872 , HB1918 , HB1920 , HB1952 , HB1965 , HB1966 , HB1967 , HB1969 , HB1972 , HB1973 , HB1974 , HB1975 , HB1980 , HB1985 , HB2005 , HB2023 , HB2031 , HB2033 , HB2062 , HB2113 , HB2114 , HB2116 , HB2138 , HB2139 , HB2156 , HB2158 , HB2159 , HB2171 , HB2208 , HB2268 , HB2270 , HB2272 , HB2273 , HB2276 , HB2289 , HB2310 , HB2315 , HB2335 , HB2338 , HB2339 , HB2340 , HB2343 , HB2361 , HB2384 , HB2387 , SB2338 , SB2431 , SB2438 , SB2593 , SB2907 , SB2671 , SB2321 , SB3084 , SB2401 , SB3033 , SB2972 , SB3032 , SB2806 , SB3014 , SB2108 , SB2981 , SB2973 , SB2423 , SB2078 , SB2322 , SB2397 , SB2896 , SB2088 , SB2347 , SB2408 , SB2970 , SB2851 , SB2713 , SB2697 , SB2312 , SB2192 , SB2363 , SB2530 , SB3028 , SB2024 , SB3007 , SB2599 , SB2596 , SB2662 , SB2930 , SB3334 , SB2378 , SB3019 , SB3231 , SB2240 , SB2372 , SB2175 , SB2046 , SB2298 , SB2922 , SB2835 , SB3263 , SB2174 , SB2128 , SB2006 , SB2489 , SB3134 , SB2982 , SB2425 , SB2849 , SB2797 , SB2795 , SB2575 , SB2521 , SB2765 , SB2386 , SB2852 , SB2022 , SB2117 , SB2277 , SB2387 , SB2688 , SB2885 , SB3132 , SB3219 , SB2169 , SB2591 , SB2090 , SB2983 , SB888 , SB3249 , SB2611 , SB2429 , SB2463 , SB3154 , SB3131 , SB3152 , SB3315 , SB2448 , SB2054 , SB2140 , SB2520 , SB2377 , SB2986 , SB2010 , SB2189 , SB2026 , SB3010 , SB2818 , SB2002

Keywords: lava insurance, homeowners, insurance market, subsidy, Hawaii, condominiums, annual report, filing fee, real estate, developer, residency, property regime, PFAS, single-use plastics, environmental health, food ware, pollution reduction, local produce, agriculture, Hawaii Revised Statutes

Bills: HB1160 , HB1289 , HB1339 , HB1798 , HB1065 , HB1717 , HB1795 , HB1859 , HB2107 , HB2113 , HB2124 , HB2125 , HB2133 , HB2134 , HB2140 , HB2151 , HB2155 , HB2165 , HB2185 , HB2191 , HB2205 , HB2211 , HB2219 , HB2242 , HB2245 , HB2253 , HB2283 , HB2317 , HB2343 , HB2385 , HB2406 , HB2417 , HB2426 , HB2501 , HB2531 , HB2574 , HB2606 , HB1170 , HB1544 , HB1834 , HB2111 , HB2156 , HB2188 , HB2199 , HB2206 , HB2296 , HB2360 , HB2436 , HB2471 , HB2478 , HB2510 , HB2525 , HB2532 , HB2543 , HB2605 , HB2624 , HJM4012 , HB1759

Keywords: design review, local government, land use, zoning, project permits, housing density, middle housing, affordable housing, parking minimums, single-family zoning, infill development, growth management, comprehensive plan, permit streamlining, objective development regulations, architectural review, administrative review, transit-oriented development, accessory dwelling units, ADU

Summary: The House convened, established a quorum, recited the Pledge of Allegiance, and heard a prayer before caucusing. The chamber then received a Senate message that Substitute Senate Bill 5820 had passed the Senate. Members took up a long series of House bills on second and third reading, with most advancing by wide margins after brief debate and, in some cases, amendments. Among the measures considered, Engrossed Substitute House Bill 2165 on impersonating law enforcement drew the most debate. Supporters said it would address public safety and accountability by prohibiting people from claiming police authority or creating that impression, while opponents argued it could create confusion, overlap with existing law, or interfere with federal-state law enforcement cooperation. Amendment 1521 was adopted to protect ceremonial transfers of badges and identification to families of fallen or retired officers. The bill ultimately passed 56-38. Other bills passed included House Bill 2624 on clarifying property-related definitions for conservancies, House Bill 2385 delaying implementation dates tied to Medicaid reimbursement changes, Engrossed Substitute House Bill 1717 on affordable housing tax remittance, Second Substitute House Bill 1859 on housing development on faith-owned land, Substitute House Bill 2151 adopting national standards for factory-built housing inspections, House Bill 2155 protecting the nursing title, House Bill 2111 on Interstate Bridge toll interest revenue, House Bill 2543 on county clerk fees, House Bill 2606 updating the Office of Privacy and Data Protection’s performance measures and AI-related duties, and House Bill 2417 aligning victim rights for National Guard members. Later, the House considered additional bills on early learning, marine safety, energy devices, nitrous oxide sales, derelict vessels, and a Seahawks-related resolution. House Bill 2317 on early learning assistance was amended to clarify school and community/technical college premises and passed unanimously. House Bill 2436, a technical fix for pilotage-related vessel requirements, also passed unanimously. Substitute House Bill 2296, dealing with distributed energy resource devices and meter-mounted equipment, passed 56-38 after concerns about timing relative to UTC rulemaking. Engrossed Substitute House Bill 2532, restricting nitrous oxide sales with exemptions for medical, dental, and automotive uses, passed unanimously after an amendment clarifying those exemptions. Substitute House Bill 2199, aimed at removing derelict and sinking vessels, passed unanimously. Finally, House Bill 1759 designating December 12 as the “Day of the 12s” in honor of the Seahawks and their fans passed 93-2 after enthusiastic floor remarks and a brief point of order. The House then recessed for caucus until 2 p.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• they evaluate whether the structure is, you know, it can stay or is it affecting the shoreline negatively
• they evaluate whether the structure is, you know, it can stay or is it affecting the shoreline negatively
• they evaluate whether the structure is, you know, it can stay or is it affecting the shoreline negatively
• they evaluate whether the structure is, you know, it can stay or is it affecting the shoreline negatively
• and if there are any erosion shoreline and if there are any erosion control<00:43:10.119><c> structures

Summary: The committee heard several water, land, and natural resources measures. SB 5 would narrow the definition of historic property to properties eligible for the Hawaii Register of Historic Places or with important Native Hawaiian or ethnic cultural value. The State Historic Preservation Division said the bill would tighten the definition and could reduce or streamline reviews, while one testifier warned it could add another layer of review and delay. Support and opposition were both noted. SB 19 would appropriate funds to DLNR’s Division of Aquatic Resources to establish positions, and it drew strong support from DLNR and multiple ocean and reef advocates. SB 145, concerning declarations of water shortage and emergency, was supported by the Commission on Water Resource Management and the Board of Water Supply, which said rulemaking would improve transparency and public input. The chair also noted broader public concern about water use and pricing, especially on Maui. SB 44 would prohibit commercial sale of parrotfish caught by spearing and ban spearing them at night; DLNR supported the measure, while several fishers and gathering-rights advocates opposed it, arguing it would restrict traditional gathering and that resource management should focus on fish populations rather than methods. The committee noted 26 communications in support and opposition combined. SB 427 would bar the state from leasing or extending public land leases to parties in arrears, out of compliance with environmental obligations, or convicted of a crime, and would require gubernatorial certification for certain federal leases. DLNR said existing law and BLNR procedures already address compliance and cure periods, while supporters argued the bill would help ensure accountability for contaminated or poorly managed lands. The committee also began SB 457, dealing with submerged land reclamation and leasing of submerged/tidal lands; DLNR again said current statutes and BLNR protocols were already adequate, describing existing review and enforcement practices for shoreline structures and easements. No votes were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> hardened structures. hardened structures.
• It says shoreline adaptation pathways means structural, non-structural, nature-based, hybrid, temporary
• adaptation pathways means shoreline adaptation pathways means structural,<00:43:17.760><c> non-structural
• ,</c> structural, non-structural, structural, non-structural, nature-based,<00:43:20.160><c> hybrid,<
• </c> structure in front of you. structure in front of you.

Bills: SB3253 , SB2401 , SB3169 , SB17 , SB3014 , SB3032 , SB1432 , SB2002 , SB2972 , SB3247

Committee: House Water & Land

Summary: The Committee on Water and Land heard testimony on SB 5253 SD2 relating to conservation and SB 2401 relating to regional shoreline mitigation district, with the chair emphasizing short testimony limits and the need to finish before session. On SB 5253, DLNR said it stood on its written testimony and answered questions about the bill’s proposed nonprofit endangered species sanctuary. Members asked whether existing entities or agreements, such as land trusts, private landowners, and DLNR safe harbor agreements, could accomplish similar conservation goals without creating a new entity. DLNR said similar work already exists, but it was not aware of a comparable sanctuary model in the state. A member also questioned language suggesting for-profit businesses in the sanctuary, and DLNR said the intent appeared to be sales of outreach or similar materials, though it agreed that such activities could be handled by a nonprofit. The bulk of the hearing focused on SB 2401, which would create a regional shoreline adaptation/mitigation framework. The Department of the Attorney General said it had concerns about inconsistent use of the terms “mitigation” and “adaptation,” warning of possible title-subject issues. DLNR said it was neutral on the terminology and more concerned with the substance, and noted that the bill would not waive permits; any plan would still require environmental review and applicable state and county permits. DLNR also supported OHA’s recommendation to consider impacts on Native Hawaiian traditional and customary practices during regional planning, and said the bill’s language on temporary shoreline protection measures could help address the gap between emergency permits and longer-term planning while avoiding a hardening-only approach. The Office of Planning supported the regional planning concept but noted it is not a regulatory agency and would need to work with DLNR and the Land Board. OHA supported the bill’s planning-based approach but recommended amendments to require assessment of impacts on Native Hawaiian traditional and customary practices during plan development and to clarify that environmental review would still apply at the project level. Testifiers from the Ka‘anapali Steering Committee strongly supported the bill, saying it would provide a regional framework for ongoing erosion problems while preserving full regulatory authority and normal permitting, and they proposed amendments to standardize terminology, create a limited pathway for temporary shoreline protection, and address ownership and maintenance responsibilities. Members discussed the meaning of “mitigation” versus “adaptation,” the scope of shoreline hardening, and whether the bill would help the legislature take a broader, more holistic view of shoreline decisions. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Could the shoreline structures change that, the power of the waves returning out to ocean that also affects
• Could the shoreline structures change that, the power of the waves returning out to ocean that also affects
• Could the shoreline structures change that, the power of the waves returning out to ocean that also affects
• Could the shoreline structures change that, the power of the waves returning out to ocean that also affects
• Could the shoreline structures change that, the power of the waves returning out to ocean that also affects

Bills: SCR8 , SCR40 , SCR83 , SCR179 , SCR90 , SCR94 , SCR159 , SCR165 , SCR177

Committee: House Water & Land

Summary: The committee heard several resolutions related to water, coastal management, and permitting. Early measures included SCR 8 on faster county action for certain home-modification permits for older adults and people with disabilities, SCR 40 on banning disposable body boards, SCR 83 on creating a lithium-ion battery disposal facility, SCR 179 on enforcing Maui fire-code provisions for brush clearance and emergency access, and SCR 90 on kupuna-friendly permit requirements. No testifiers were present for those measures, and the chair moved through them without taking votes in the portion provided. The most extensive discussion was on SCR 94, endorsing Waikiki as a world surfing reserve, and SCR 159, urging shared guiding principles for restoring and maintaining Waikiki’s beaches and shoreline. University of Hawaii testimony said the surfing-reserve designation would bring recognition, could help attract grants, and would require a stewardship committee and management plan, but would not itself block beach nourishment or shoreline restoration. Members asked about possible effects on dredging, beach nourishment, and shoreline structures; the witness said impacts on surfing were not expected to be immediate or significant. For SCR 159, the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development supported the resolution but requested clarifying amendments to broaden references to law, stakeholder collaboration, and coastal science expertise. The Waikiki Beach Special Improvement District Association also supported the measure, emphasizing coordinated maintenance, public access, and the economic importance of Waikiki beaches, while noting that existing legal agreements and court decisions should be reflected in the resolution. The discussion also covered whether the state and private owners share repair and maintenance obligations for Waikiki seawalls; testimony said existing agreements remain relevant but must yield to current law. The committee also heard SCR 165 designating March as Water Month, with support from the Board of Water Supply and others, and SCR 177 requesting DAGS to convene a cooperative working group on state projects needing county permits. Mary Alice Evans said the latter would help expedite permitting, especially for housing and other state projects, and would complement efforts to standardize county permitting processes. No final votes or dispositions were announced in the excerpt provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• The shoreline is set significantly back from where it's fixed by these structures.
• Um in this with shoreline land.
• The shoreline is set of erosion.
• due to shoreline migration.
• </c> shoreline uh due to again shoreline shoreline uh due to again shoreline migration.<00:32:45.360>

Committee: House Water & Land

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several shoreline easement resolutions and a water-supply study resolution. For the easement measures, the Department of Land and Natural Resources supported each item, and testimony also came from affected landowners and community members. Members asked about why some easements were granted gratis to public agencies, with DLNR explaining that those cases involved public infrastructure such as stormwater management and did not require bonds or rent. For private properties, DLNR described the standard process of monthly rent during the legislative approval gap, followed by a one-time appraised payment for a 25-year easement once the appraisal is completed. A substantial portion of the discussion focused on shoreline erosion and whether hardened shoreline structures or seawalls were contributing to beach loss. On one measure, DLNR explained that a large sandbag shoreline structure was tied to a nearby boat harbor that had altered sand movement over time, causing flanking erosion on adjacent unarmored property. On another, DLNR said a wall built under a valid 1960s permit was originally a boundary or landscaping wall, but now functions as a seawall as the shoreline has migrated landward. Members raised concerns about fairness, public beach access, and whether adjacent owners should share costs, and DLNR responded that shoreline matters are handled parcel by parcel under existing statute. The committee also heard support for a resolution creating a task force or study on desalination. DLNR’s Commission on Water Resource Management supported the intent but asked for more time to complete a comprehensive report, noting the work would require substantial staffing and coordination. The Board of Water Supply and CARES also testified in support, with CARES emphasizing future water-supply needs, cultural and historic preservation concerns, and the importance of coordinating with other agencies. DLNR said it would rely on existing studies and work with county agencies and the Department of Health. No votes or final committee actions were taken during the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• to shoreline work.
• </c> government to pursue regional shoreline government to pursue regional shoreline planning.<01:04:
• This bill creates a fair, risk-based funding structure that aligns coastal exposure with long-term shoreline
• </c><01:26:00.320><c> Um</c> would set that up structurally. Um would set that up structurally.
• </c> the the shoreline related disclosures. the the shoreline related disclosures.

Bills: SB2982 , SB2367 , SB2818 , SB2944 , SB2022 , SB2240 , SB2986 , SB2547 , SB2401 , SB3031 , SB3035 , SB3032

Committee: Senate Water, Land, Culture and the Arts

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several measures, beginning with SB 2982 on campaign finance, which would prohibit foreign entities and foreign-influence businesses from making contributions and expenditures. The Attorney General’s office testified first, followed by the Campaign Spending Commission, which supported the bill but asked for clarification on constitutional review authority and additional implementation time for certifications, forms, and procedures. Common Cause also supported the measure, arguing it would help protect elections from dark money and foreign influence. No vote was taken. The committee then took up SB 2367 on a state boating facilities lease program for the Ala Wai small boat harbor. DLNR supported the bill, while UPW opposed it, warning about privatization of a public asset and possible job displacement. Several members of the public supported the concept but urged amendments to protect public access, affordability, youth ocean programs, and state employee jobs. Committee members questioned DLNR about the scope of the lease, the role of the Board of Land and Natural Resources, and whether public access and existing concessions would remain protected. DLNR said current leases would remain, the board would retain approval authority, and employees would not necessarily be displaced, but members indicated more discussion and possible amendments were needed. For SB 2818 on boating penalties, DLNR testified in support and there was no opposition testimony. The committee also heard SB 2944 on conservation, which would require wildlife viewing guidelines that substantially conform to NOAA guidance and reporting requirements; DLNR said it stood on its written testimony. SB 2022 on water code penalties drew support from DLNR’s Commission on Water Resource Management, which said the bill’s two-tiered penalty structure would preserve deterrence while keeping the current $5,000 penalty for first-time or non-harmful violations. The Board of Water Supply submitted comments, and Ulupono Initiative supported the measure as a needed enforcement tool. Committee members discussed whether the higher penalty ceiling should be phased in and asked for stakeholder input on the amount of the penalties. Finally, the committee began SB 2240 on land use, which would require water availability certification from the Commission on Water Resource Management before a district boundary amendment proceeds to the Land Use Commission. DLNR supported the bill and said it often reviews project documents that lack sufficient information on water needs and availability, so the measure would allow earlier review and comment. The committee also indicated it would seek amendments and further feedback on the water penalty bill before it moved to the next committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> shorelines are public for the public. shorelines are public for the public.
• </c> is to minimize uh shoreline hardening. is to minimize uh shoreline hardening.
• the shoreline in one place.
• the shoreline in one place.
• </c><00:51:29.359><c> Um,</c> shoreline in one place. Um, shoreline in one place.

Bills: HB1846 , HB2205 , HB1802 , HB1571 , HB2047 , HB2434 , HB2426 , HB2361 , HB2395 , HB1712 , HB2544 , HB1619

Committee: House Water & Land

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 1846, relating to shoreline mitigation districts. DLNR and the Office of Planning opposed the bill, arguing it would improperly shift regulatory roles between the agencies and prioritize private land interests over public trust and natural and historic resources. Supporters, including the Shoreline Preservation Coalition, Kahana Bay residents, and Hawaii Realtors, said regional planning is needed to address severe erosion, especially in Kahana, and that better coordination between state and county agencies could help move stalled projects forward. Testifiers emphasized that shoreline conditions vary by area and that science-based, region-specific solutions are needed. Members asked questions about whether existing law already allows regional planning and emergency shoreline responses. DLNR said it already has authority to process regional projects and cited an existing draft EIS for Kahana Bay that would proceed through normal permitting and public hearing channels. Supporters responded that the bill would provide a clearer regional planning framework and help communities facing urgent erosion impacts. No vote was taken on HB 1846 in the portion provided. The committee then took up HB 2205, relating to emergency erosion mitigation. DLNR opposed the bill, saying it already has authority to issue emergency permits and had recently done so quickly for a collapsed sidewalk at Queen Surf Beach, and warning that the bill’s language could weaken Act 16 by changing a prohibition on shoreline hardening to a requirement to merely minimize it. Kahana Bay representatives and other supporters argued the bill would create a limited, regulated short-term pathway for emergency shoreline solutions while long-term plans are developed, and said current permits have expired or stalled, leaving dangerous sandbags and no practical relief. Additional testimony from a private homeowner stressed that erosion is threatening homes and that private owners are often bearing the cost of protecting public shoreline access. The discussion remained focused on balancing emergency protection, public access, and long-term shoreline management, and no final action was taken in the excerpt provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• is not situated on a shoreline parcel or a parcel that is impacted by waves, storm surges, high tide
• proclamation; and the reconstructed structure shall be similar to its original footprint or overall
• is not situated on a shoreline parcel or a parcel that is impacted by waves, storm surges, high tide
• </c> to chapter 127a provided the structure to chapter 127a provided the structure is<00:09:30.320><c
• </c><00:09:36.959><c> erosion</c> surges high tide or shoreline erosion surges high tide or shoreline

Committee: Senate Judiciary

Summary: The Judiciary Committee met in decision-making only session and took up a series of bills, mostly approving them with amendments. SB 1032 on campaign finance passed with amendments to change the certification process for business entities, add a severability-type provision if foreign-influence conditions are struck down, and note a related Minnesota federal case. SB 401 on firearms passed with amendments to exclude shotguns, grandfather legally registered devices in place as of the effective date, and add committee report findings; SB 382 on procurement confidentiality passed as is; SB 598 extending deadlines for administrative driver’s license revocation review decisions passed as is; SB 771 on HHFDC board leadership passed as is; and SB 1318 clarifying water pollution enforcement jurisdiction passed as is. The committee also approved SB 1657 with an amendment removing authority to condemn public property, SB 1102 with an amendment making the Fire Council the source of nominees for the aircraft rescue fire fighting chief, and SB 100 with amendments replacing the original substance with a prohibition on fingerprinting nonprofit liquor-license board members during background checks and limiting the bill to counties under 500,000 population. SB 170 and SB 1296, both related to special management area exemptions for affordable housing and disaster-related reconstruction, passed with amendments incorporating Office of Planning, Sustainable Development, and Attorney General changes to narrow and clarify the exemptions. Finally, SB 363, a cleanup bill related to firearm parts and ghost gun laws, was considered with amendments that deleted a proposed new penalty section, revised existing firearms statutes, removed an unnecessary definition, and expanded penalties to include indeterminate imprisonment terms. Despite the amendments, the measure was not adopted because the Vice Chair voted no. The committee then adjourned and announced a later joint hearing with Ways and Means.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the first is the GIWW shoreline protection.
• So the first is the GIWW shoreline protection.
• So we have, I mentioned, protecting the shoreline along the GIWW.
• And then I mentioned protecting White Lake's northern shorelines.
• We have structures all around there.

Summary: The board met at the State Capitol and approved the agenda and prior minutes after brief motions and no public comment. Executive Director Michael Hare then gave a CPRA implementation update, describing a large portfolio of active projects and highlighting several that are under construction, nearing bid, or recently awarded, including Port Fourchon shoreline protection, Caernarvon marsh creation, Schooner Bayou saltwater barrier rehabilitation, Cain Bayou marsh creation, West Shore river reintroduction work, Morganza to the Gulf, Raccoon Island restoration, Chenier-O-Tig ridge restoration, Bayou Pigeon and Dismal Swamp boat launches, Grand Bayou marsh creation, Highway 1 terracing, and several National Coastal Resilience Fund projects. He also noted the annual plan public meetings had concluded, with comments accepted through February 17, 2026, and answered board questions about the Rockefeller shoreline project, saying CPRA and the Corps were working through geotechnical and environmental issues and trying to move it forward. The board then received a joint presentation from CPRA and the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries on the White Lake Conservation Area and Management Plan. Speakers described White Lake as a 72,000-acre property in Vermilion Parish with major freshwater marsh, wildlife habitat, hunting and fishing opportunities, and aging infrastructure that currently operates on limited self-generated revenue. The plan, finalized in October 2025, focuses on habitat protection, maintaining wildlife, supporting revenue generation, expanding controlled public access, and strengthening partnerships. Proposed priorities include GIWW shoreline protection, Unit 2/Caddo levee stabilization, and north shoreline protection, with about $30 million secured for engineering and design and total costs estimated around $120 million to $130 million. Officials also discussed a possible lodge revitalization funded only with private dollars, broader landscape-level habitat management, conservation incentives for private landowners, and potential land acquisition for additional public access. Board members and agency leaders emphasized the importance of White Lake to waterfowl habitat and public recreation, and one member urged similar management attention for Sabine, Lacassine, and Cameron Prairie refuges. The final major presentation covered CPRA’s marsh creation design guidelines. Staff explained that marsh creation remains a major share of the coastal master plan and current project pipeline, and reviewed how projects are built using dredged sediment, containment dikes, and pipeline systems. They said the 2017 design guidelines were intended to standardize minimum design and construction practices, but are now being updated to reflect lessons learned, current survey standards, geotechnical practices, construction methods, and issues such as oil and gas infrastructure and land rights coordination. Board members asked about reducing unnecessary geotechnical costs, improving land-rights timing, considering unconfined marsh creation where appropriate, and accounting for why marsh areas are failing in the first place. Staff said they would consider those suggestions as part of the guideline update and then moved into a follow-up presentation on safety, access, and logistics for marine construction in the coastal zone.

Transcript Highlights:

• shoreline hardening structures interfere with existing recreational and waterline activities.
• <00:26:11.919><c> hardening</c><00:26:12.559><c> structures</c><00:26:13.520><c> including</c> shoreline
• hardening structures including shoreline hardening structures including seaw<00:26:14.320><c> walls<
• </c><00:26:20.880><c> hardening</c> and sites where shoreline hardening and sites where shoreline hardening
• </c> that these these requests for shoreline that these these requests for shoreline hardening<00:27:

Transcript Highlights:

• So the first is the GIWW shoreline protection.
• So the first is the GIWW shoreline protection.
• So anywhere we see these shorelines.
• We have structures all around there.
• We have structures all around there.

Summary: The board met on January 21, 2026, approved the agenda and minutes, and received a CPRA implementation update from Executive Director Michael Hare. Hare reported about 103 active projects, with work focused on completing existing projects and moving more into construction. He highlighted several projects, including Port Fourchon shoreline protection, Northwest Little Lake marsh creation, Sugar Ridge Pump Station, a large RESTORE-funded marsh creation project, Schooner Bayou saltwater barrier rehabilitation, Cain Bayou marsh creation redesign, West Shore river reintroduction work, Morganza to the Gulf reaches, NERDA Raccoon Island restoration, and Chenier-O-Tig ridge restoration. He also reviewed recreation and partnership projects such as Bayou Pigeon and Destrehan boat launches, Grand Bayou Marsh Creation, Highway 1 terracing, and four Louisiana projects funded through the National Coastal Resilience Fund. Hare noted the annual plan public meetings were complete and the comment period remained open through February 17, 2026. Board members asked about the Rockefeller shoreline project, and Hare said the Corps and state agencies were working through geotechnical and environmental issues and that leadership remained committed to moving it forward. The board then heard a joint presentation from CPRA and the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries on the White Lake Conservation Area and Management Plan. Officials described White Lake as a 72,000-acre property in Vermilion Parish with major habitat, recreation, and revenue functions, but said aging infrastructure, levee erosion, limited water control structures, and maintenance costs made a master plan necessary. The plan, finalized in October 2025, recommends coastal restoration projects, lodge and facility revitalization using private dollars, revenue-generation improvements, and long-term partnerships. Proposed work includes GIWW shoreline protection, Unit 2/Caddo levee stabilization, and north shoreline protection, with about $30 million already secured for engineering and construction and total needs estimated at roughly $120 million to $130 million. Officials also discussed broader habitat management, conservation incentives for private landowners, possible land acquisition in southwest Louisiana, and coordination with federal partners and other state agencies. Members praised the White Lake effort as a model of interagency collaboration and emphasized its importance for waterfowl habitat, public access, and tourism. Questions focused on funding sources, oil and gas revenue, and whether other agencies such as economic development and tourism should be involved. Several members also urged the state to apply similar management approaches to other refuges, including Sabine, Cameron Prairie, and Lacassine, where they said federal management has lagged. The discussion underscored a broader shift toward landscape-scale habitat management and public recreation investment. The final major presentation covered CPRA’s marsh creation design guidelines and related construction logistics. Staff explained that marsh creation makes up a large share of the coastal master plan and that the agency is updating its 2017 design guidelines after nearly a decade of use. The updates will address survey standards, geotechnical methods, dredge production estimates, construction monitoring, and oil and gas infrastructure conflicts. A second presentation reviewed safety, access, and logistics for marine construction, including equipment access routes, pipeline identification and coordination, cultural resources, private landowners, oyster resources, and permitting. Board members asked about reducing geotechnical costs, improving land-rights coordination, considering uncontained marsh creation where appropriate, and managing pipeline impacts; staff said they would consider those suggestions as part of the guideline updates.

Transcript Highlights:

• setbacks, erosion exposure, unpermitted shoreline structures, notices of violation, and related permits
• </c> exposure, exposure, unpermitted exposure, exposure, unpermitted shoreline<01:03:26.000><c> structures
• </c> estate listings of uh shoreline estate listings of uh shoreline properties<01:05:32.480><c> that
• </c> has an erosion control structure has an erosion control structure expired,<01:13:54.719><c> has<
• </c> disclosure form for shoreline disclosure form for shoreline properties.<01:18:51.120><c> Yes.

Bills: HB1739 , HB1741 , HB2606 , HB2362 , HB2608 , HB2294 , HB2431 , HB2375 , HB2582 , HB2585 , HB2231 , HB1601 , HB2424 , HB1956

Committee: House Water & Land

Summary: The committee on Water and Land met on February 19, 2026, and the chair opened by emphasizing strict time limits and that all bills would be deferred if the agenda was not completed before the noon session. The first major measure discussed was HB 1739 HD1, which would preempt county land-use authority in transit-oriented development areas. The Department of Planning supported the bill, saying it could promote state-funded TOD and infrastructure, while the city and county’s position was raised in questioning. Unite Here Local 5 opposed the bill, arguing it would strip counties of self-determination, disrupt state-county policy collaboration, and remove a check on unrestrained development. Committee members pressed the supporters on whether the bill was really about higher density and whether it would override local zoning and sustainability concerns. The committee then heard testimony on HB 1741 HD1, a housing bill described by supporters as reducing inclusionary housing mandates and increasing supply. Grassroots Institute of Hawaii argued affordability mandates reduce overall housing production and raise market-rate prices, while a Zoom testifier said the bill would improve housing stability, health, and community outcomes for working families, kupuna, and young residents. Members asked about the bill’s needs assessment and who would conduct it, with a witness saying the counties would likely contract it out but that the bill did not clearly specify the reviewer. HB 2668 HD1, dealing with water heating systems, drew testimony from the Hawaii State Energy Office and industry representatives. Supporters generally backed adding heat pumps to the law, but one solar-water-heater industry witness asked for amendments to remove or extend the current 15-year statutory life limit for solar water heaters and to update outdated standards and variance rules. A Kauaʻi Climate Action Coalition witness opposed the existing solar-only structure, arguing heat pump water heaters are cheaper, align with climate goals, and should be allowed without a variance. The Energy Office said the current law already allows variances in some cases, suggested adding high-efficiency heat pump water heaters to the exemption, and said the 15-year figure may be too short, with 18 years mentioned as a possible alternative. The committee also briefly moved through several other bills, including HB 2606 HD1 on off-site construction and HB 2362 HD1 on housing, with no notable testimony or action recorded in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• prevent a beach from migrating, so like a seawall parallel to the shoreline is shoreline hardening.
• </c><01:52:11.360><c> the</c> of potential stabilizing structures the of potential stabilizing structures
• </c><01:52:31.599><c> that</c> hardening um engineered structures that hardening um engineered structures
• </c><01:59:55.679><c> protection</c> any kind of Shoreline protection any kind of Shoreline protection
• Shoreline Shoreline Shoreline mitigation<01:59:58.119><c> since</c><01:59:58.599><c> statehood</c><01

Committee: House Water & Land

Summary: The Committee on Water and Land met on March 13, 2025, and first announced that SB 1456 would be deferred to the end of the agenda and ultimately worked on later, with the chair indicating the bill would be deferred and revisited in a future measure. The committee then heard SB 841 on marine life conservation districts. DLNR supported the bill, saying it would fund carrying capacity studies to inform rules and policies. Testimony noted a pilot study already underway at the Puka Marine Life Conservation District and another nearing completion at the old Kona Airport MLCD. Members discussed costs, with DLNR estimating about $300,000 per year for one user-experience study, potentially more for ecological analysis, and also discussed possible funding from the Mālama Kai special fund. DLNR said it had no objection to consulting current operators and other users, and explained the program would be a new, ongoing adaptive-management tool. The committee next heard SB 411 on capital improvement projects at small boat harbors. DLNR supported the intent, saying the bill would help expedite use of special funds for CIP work, while the Department of Budget and Finance opposed it, arguing the draft could conflict with constitutional limits on appropriations. Public testimony from an industry representative supported the bill and urged more collaboration with commercial operators, while committee discussion focused on whether DLNR could already use special funds for repairs, how much engineering and bidding work is required before projects go out to bid, and whether the current process creates bottlenecks when bids exceed initial estimates. DLNR said it can do some repairs and maintenance within existing authority and funding ceilings, but that the bill as drafted could be too broad. The committee also heard SB 5 on historic preservation, where DLNR supported the measure and NAOP Hawaii opposed it, saying the bill’s broader definition could expand the scope beyond the stated goal of narrowing reviews and reducing backlog. The committee then took up SB 1462 on the state historic preservation income tax credit. The Department of Taxation said the revenue estimate assumes the cap would be reached each year the credit is available, and DLNR supported the bill. SHPD said the prior credit had sunset, outreach had previously been done in targeted communities such as Chinatown, and owners of eligible historic properties are notified during review. Finally, the committee heard SB 268 on island burial councils. DLNR supported the bill, and OHA strongly supported it, saying the councils have struggled with quorum and expertise and that the measure would restore the original intent of having lineal descendants and cultural practitioners as decision makers, while still allowing landowners and developers to testify and participate. OHA also said it would help provide technical support and urged continued involvement from SHPD and the Attorney General’s office.

Transcript Highlights:

• and and that regulatory tax structure and and that regulatory structure<00:19:27.679><c> here</c><00
• So, um, structure here in Minnesota.
• These shoreline acres in St.
• </c> shoreline and which are not shoreline shoreline and which are not shoreline for<00:49:01.760><c>
• </c><01:09:24.640><c> and</c> these structures are impermanent and these structures are impermanent and

Committee: Senate Taxes

Transcript Highlights:

• This is the one that allows structures up to three stories and six units to be in the IRC.
• And that's been, I think, one of the benefits of the interlocal methods: it provides that structured
• And that's been, I think, one of the benefits of the interlocal methods is it provides that structured
• Was conducted of new shoreline armoring and new shoreline armor on 324 tax parcels measuring approximately
• That's the idea behind shoreline master programs requiring permit review for that.

Summary: The committee held a work session on local government issues, beginning with an update from the State Building Code Council on four legislatively mandated code amendments now in CR-102 rulemaking: temporary emergency shelters, reduced minimum dwelling unit size, multiplex housing up to three stories and six units, and single-exit apartment buildings up to six stories. Council staff also described a separate embodied-carbon appendix proposal that remains under public review, with testimony both supporting and opposing it. Members asked about the rationale for some of the code limits, including the restriction on connecting multiplex buildings. The committee then heard a panel on annexations from MRSC, Pierce County, and the Association of Washington Cities. Witnesses reviewed annexation methods, including petition, election, and interlocal agreement approaches, and said larger annexations are increasingly using interlocal agreements because they can address infrastructure, revenue sharing, and public process concerns. They described barriers such as inconsistent local standards, the cost of infrastructure, referendum risk, census requirements, and the difficulty of persuading residents and local officials to support annexation. Members asked about the five-year restriction on residential zoning changes in one annexation method and whether a hearing examiner could reduce political pressure on local decision-makers. A second panel discussed subdivision reform. The Master Builders Association urged raising the short-plat threshold within urban growth areas to 30 lots as a simpler first step, citing permitting delays and added housing costs. The City of Spokane described implementation problems with recent housing laws, including uncertainty about how to review plats under HB 1110, lot-splitting administration, and added notice requirements for unit lot subdivisions. AWC said there was broad agreement that subdivision decisions should be more administrative, but public hearings remained a point of disagreement. The committee also heard from FutureWise, the Washington State Association of Counties, and Lewis County on county development regulation and enforcement, with witnesses emphasizing underfunded code enforcement, inconsistent standards between counties and cities, and the need for better coordination, incentives, and possibly stronger enforcement tools. No votes were taken; the chair said the committee would continue working on possible solutions in future sessions.