Transcript Highlights:

• </c> presentation on the gas tax reduction presentation on the gas tax reduction impacts<00:06:46.160
• </c><00:08:50.640><c> on</c> The impact of the 10-cent reduction on The impact of the 10-cent reduction
• If the the reduction in the rate.
• </c> see in the chart the estimated reduction see in the chart the estimated reduction to<00:10:12.880
• toll rates?

Committee: Joint Transportation

Transcript Highlights:

• An insufficient supply of new podiatrists in the state will result in a concomitant reduction in Californians
• inevitable outcome will be that these patients will be treated only after complications have taken their toll
• and will overburden our primary care providers... ...only after complications have taken their toll,

Committee: House Health

Transcript Highlights:

• Senate Bill 627FN, relative to toll rate adjustments and periodic inflation-based toll reviews for the
• <01:08:57.520><c> 627FN</c><01:08:58.640><c> relative</c><01:08:58.960><c> to</c><01:08:59.120><c> toll
• </c><01:08:59.440><c> rate</c> Senate Bill 627FN relative to toll rate Senate Bill 627FN relative to
• </c> adjustments and periodic inflationbased adjustments and periodic inflationbased toll<01:09:02.480
• reviews for the New Hampshire toll reviews for the New Hampshire Turnpike<01:09:04.239><c> system</c

Transcript Highlights:

• The governor recommended a reduction to their...
• This represents a core reduction of $2,000 from the previous year.
• So there's an offsetting GR core reduction.
• There is an offsetting GR reduction. This is simply a fund switch.
• And I sell the FTE reduction. I saw, yeah, it looks great.

Committee: House Budget

Transcript Highlights:

• However, we are deeply concerned that the current seemingly arbitrary federal staffing reductions The
• work, including the potential implications of grant pauses, shifting grant operating requirements, reductions
• in VA staff, including in those who serve homeless veterans, and other federal reduction in force initiatives
• CHB, because we have a toll-free referral line, we got calls from veterans who were upset that they had

Committee: Senate Senate Veterans' Affairs

Keywords: veteran services, Secretary Collins, healthcare provisions, contract cancellations, transparency, accountability, committee meeting, legislation

Summary: During this committee meeting, various bills were discussed with a specific focus on veteran services and healthcare provisions. Notably, the cancellation of critical contracts under Secretary Collins sparked significant debate, with representatives emphasizing the adverse impact on veteran care. The meeting featured testimonies from veterans and stakeholders who expressed their concerns regarding the potential fallout of these cancellations, demonstrating the urgency of transparency and accountability in management decisions. Discussions also delved into various legislative proposals aimed at improving services for veterans amidst these challenges.

Transcript Highlights:

• The personal toll is devastating, but so is the institutional toll.
• The personal toll is devastating, but so is the institutional toll.

Committee: Senate Labor, Public Employment and Retirement

Transcript Highlights:

• effects of opioids on individuals and their families, and I've seen the cycle of suffering and the toll
• I've seen the cycle of suffering<00:04:46.039><c> and</c><00:04:46.160><c> the</c><00:04:46.240><c> toll
• </c><00:04:46.560><c> takes</c><00:04:46.720><c> on</c><00:04:46.880><c> our</c> suffering and the toll
• it takes on our suffering and the toll it takes on our communities<00:04:48.240><c> this</c><00:04:48.400

Transcript Highlights:

• This created a tolling period during the licensing period for illness that was similar to what service
• This created a tolling period during the licensing period for illness that was similar to what service

Summary: The Senate Trade and Economic Development Committee met in executive session on cutoff day and received staff briefings on several gubernatorial appointments and bills, including SB 6248 on travel insurance, SB 5976 on false subject lines in commercial emails, SB 6079 on a wildfire mitigation grant program, SB 6250 on small loan principal limits, SB 6257 on real estate appraiser trainee licensing tolling, SB 6289 on the Department of Commerce’s economic development strategic plan, SB 6230 on rounding cash transactions to eliminate pennies, and SB 6149 on the definition of rural counties. Staff also noted a new substitute for SB 6149 that narrowed the rural county definition and reduced the fiscal impact. The committee briefly paused for caucus before taking action. In executive session, the committee voted to recommend confirmation of gubernatorial appointments 9060 (Alicia Levy), 9169 (Michael Charles), 9265 (Brian Bennett), and 9266 (Noah Skartford), all subject to signatures. It then advanced SB 6248, SB 6079, SB 6250, SB 6257, SB 6289, SB 6230, and SB 6149, generally by adopting proposed substitutes and sending the bills to Rules, except SB 6079, which was sent to Ways and Means. SB 5976 was not considered. At the close of the meeting, the chair thanked members, stakeholders, and staff for their work during the short session and noted the committee had completed its agenda. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• time, I know that all these seawall-building projects and infrastructure is going to take a heavy toll
• On us, but also a heavy toll on the environment.
• time, I know that all these seawall building projects and infrastructure is going to take a heavy toll
• . all these seawall building projects and infrastructure is going to take a heavy toll on us, but also
• a heavy toll on the environment.

Summary: The hearing of the Select Committee on Sea Level Rise and the California Economy focused on infrastructure, pollution, climate resilience, public health, access, and economic impacts of sea level rise in California, with an emphasis on San Diego and the Bay Area. Chair Tasha Boerner Horvath opened by describing the committee’s purpose, the state’s sea level rise action planning, and the need for better monitoring and early warning systems. She also referenced her prior bills AB 66 and AB 72, which supported Scripps research on coastal bluff collapse warning capabilities. Assembly Members David Alvarez and Jessica Caloza later joined and emphasized that sea level rise affects not only coastal communities but inland areas as well, and that the issue should inform future legislative and budget decisions. In the first panel, Dr. Mark Merrifield of Scripps Institution of Oceanography described observed sea level rise of roughly 0.8 to 0.9 feet since the early 1900s, with acceleration expected by mid-century and potentially much greater rise by 2100 depending on emissions. He highlighted flooding, groundwater rise, beach and cliff erosion, salinization, and risks to transportation, sewage, ports, and national security. Dave Gibson of the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board discussed how sea level rise affects wastewater systems, stormwater, contaminated sites, wetlands, and coastal groundwater basins, and said the board is requiring climate adaptation planning, updating stormwater permits, and seeking more flexible state permitting and mitigation tools. Members and witnesses also discussed the need for better mapping, more monitoring, and more state funding, especially if federal support from NOAA and other agencies declines. The second panel addressed public health, equitable access, and local economies. Ramon Chiras of Un Mar de Colores described how sea level rise, pollution, and access barriers threaten the Tijuana River Valley and Imperial Beach, especially for underserved communities and youth programs that rely on safe, welcoming access to the ocean. He stressed the cultural and spiritual importance of coastal access and the need for water safety and environmental education. Jessica Fane of the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission explained that the Bay Area faces major economic exposure from sea level rise, citing a regional estimate of $96 billion in adaptation costs versus $230 billion in potential losses from inaction, and said BCDC is working with local governments under SB 272 on shoreline adaptation planning, funding, and regulatory innovation. Members discussed the tension between environmental permitting and the need to move projects faster, including the possibility of planned retreat in some areas and the use of simultaneous permitting and longer-term state authority to streamline adaptation work. In the final panel, Philip Gibbons of the Port of San Diego described the port’s climate adaptation efforts and its vulnerability assessments under AB 691. He said the port manages state tidelands, supports maritime commerce and recreation, and is already seeing flooding at king tides and during El Niño events, including storm-drain backflow and damage to bikeways and parks. He explained that future sea level rise could inundate major port areas and disrupt operations, underscoring the need for continued planning, mitigation, and infrastructure investment. The hearing did not take formal votes, but it concluded with a clear call for more science, funding, coordination, and regulatory streamlining to prepare California’s coast and nearby communities for worsening sea level rise impacts.

Transcript Highlights:

• time, I know that all these seawall-building projects and infrastructure is going to take a heavy toll
• . ...on us, but also a heavy toll on the environment.
• time, I know that all these seawall building projects and infrastructure is going to take a heavy toll
• . all these seawall building projects and infrastructure is going to take a heavy toll on us, but also
• a heavy toll on the environment.

Summary: The hearing of the Select Committee on Sea Level Rise and the California Economy focused on the impacts of rising seas on coastal infrastructure, pollution, public health, access, and local economies, with an emphasis on San Diego and broader statewide examples. Chair Tasha Boerner opened by describing sea level rise, flooding, bluff collapse, and the state’s sea level rise action planning, and noted her prior bills that helped launch a Scripps bluff-collapse early warning pilot. Panel one featured Dr. Mark Merrifield of Scripps and Dave Gibson of the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board, who described accelerating sea level rise, groundwater rise, flooding, erosion, and risks to sewage, transportation, ports, and contaminated sites. Gibson stressed that agencies are already adapting through permits, climate resolutions, stormwater updates, and infrastructure planning, but said the work will require major funding, better mapping, and streamlined permitting. Members then discussed early warning systems, groundwater inundation, federal funding uncertainty, and how state authority might fill gaps left by changing federal clean water rules. Boerner and Assembly Members David Alvarez and Jessica Caloza highlighted that sea level rise affects inland communities too, and asked about local mapping, long-term planning, and the cost of protecting or relocating vulnerable infrastructure. Former Imperial Beach Mayor Serge Dedina said the city had the maps and plans but needed money, and urged faster permitting and more investment in protective projects. The panel also discussed the tension between environmental mitigation and urgent adaptation, with Gibson suggesting expanded mitigation banks and state revolving fund support, while Boerner and others noted the need to prioritize projects that protect communities and public health over bureaucratic delay. Panel two shifted to public health, equitable access, and local economies. Ramon Chiras of Un Mar de Colores described outdoor equity work that introduces children and families, especially from historically excluded communities, to the ocean and teaches water safety and stewardship. He said sea level rise, pollution, and access restrictions threaten cultural continuity and free community programs, especially in places like Imperial Beach and the Tijuana River Valley. Jessica Fane of the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission described how sea level rise threatens Bay Area tourism, airports, roads, ports, and neighborhoods built on fill, estimating roughly $96 billion in adaptation costs versus $230 billion in potential losses if no action is taken. She said BCDC is working under SB 272 on regional shoreline adaptation plans, local government coordination, and regulatory innovation, while emphasizing the need for sustained funding and science. In the final panel, the Port of San Diego’s Philip Gibbons began describing the port’s climate adaptation work, including vulnerabilities to king tides, storm drain backflow, and long-term inundation that could affect roads, buildings, terminals, and parks. He said the port is using climate planning to assess risks and prepare for sea level rise while maintaining maritime commerce, recreation, and environmental stewardship. The hearing ended with a shared call for more funding, better data, streamlined permitting, and coordinated state, local, and federal action to protect coastal communities and infrastructure.

Transcript Highlights:

• predator mitigation within 60 days if any population within the federal delisting area experiences a reduction
• Predator mitigation actions would include seasonal or geographic predator reduction around sensitive
• I do support federal workforce reductions where appropriate, especially when they improve efficiency
• But those reductions shouldn't come at the expense of wildfire preparedness and response capacity or
• There's an... ...emotional toll that doesn't show up in any compensation program.

Summary: The committee heard public testimony on House Bill 2619, which would create a joint legislative task force to review and recommend ways to reduce regulatory burdens in agriculture, and on House Joint Memorial 4009, which asks Congress to ensure federal wildfire response agencies remain capable of protecting communities, natural resources, and firefighter safety. On HB 2619, the prime sponsor and supporters from the Washington State Department of Agriculture, cattle, wheat, potato, onion, and dairy interests said the bill responds to farm stress and suicide concerns by examining regulatory overload; WSDA supported the concept but noted a fiscal note, and members discussed whether the task force scope and cost could be reduced before policy cutoff. On HJM 4009, staff and the sponsor described the memorial as a request for stronger federal wildfire capacity and coordination, with testimony from tribes, counties, forest landowners, conservation groups, and public employees emphasizing wildfire risk, smoke impacts, and the importance of federal-state cooperation; the committee also repeatedly tied the memorial to support for state wildfire funding under 1168 and heard broad support for restoring that funding. The committee then took up House Bill 2221, which would require the Department of Fish and Wildlife to designate at-risk ungulate populations and begin predator mitigation when certain population declines occur, while also requiring annual reporting and white-tailed deer surveys. The sponsor argued the bill addresses rapidly declining deer and elk herds, predator pressure, food security, and rural economies in northeast Washington. Supporters included some local residents, ranchers, sheriffs, county officials, and the Colville Tribes, who said predators, livestock conflicts, and reduced hunting opportunity are harming communities and that the state should act more aggressively. Opponents included WDFW staff, Washington Wildlife First, the Sierra Club, the Animal Legal Defense Fund, and other conservation voices, who said the bill is not scientifically supported, would be costly, and wrongly blames predators rather than habitat, forage, weather, disease, and vehicle collisions; several said predator control would have limited value and could undermine wolf recovery. Some agricultural and sportsmen groups supported the bill in principle but asked for amendments, especially to remove or revise the in-state wolf translocation provision. No final votes or executive action were taken in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• The two-year General Fund impact is a reduction of $100,000, and the four-year General Fund impact is
• a reduction of $300,000.
• The General Fund impact is a reduction of $313,000 in the two-year and the same amount in the four-year
• And I would just say that we have had to do reductions all across the board.
• specific targeted reductions.

Summary: The House Appropriations Committee met in executive session on a proposed substitute operating budget bill and worked through a long series of amendments before voting on the bill. Members discussed a wide range of budget items, including court funding for Thurston County civil filings, Attorney General funding for a domestic extremism task force, grants for Yakima aquatics access, North Mason mobile integrated health, mentoring programs, poverty reduction work, a proposed Department of Housing task force, federal grant inventory staffing, HEAL Act funding, assisted living rebasing, DCYF family resource centers and pediatric interim care, law enforcement training and equipment, shellfish and birthing center licensing fees, school bus depreciation, charter school accountability, transition to kindergarten priorities, and several Fish and Wildlife and OSPI grants. The committee also considered amendments related to the Columbia River Gorge Commission, shrub-steppe habitat mitigation, and a study on Lower Snake River reservoir drawdown impacts. Debate on many amendments centered on whether items were statewide priorities or local projects, and on the fiscal constraints of the budget. Supporters often argued that proposals would protect vulnerable populations, improve public safety, or leverage future savings and outside funding; opponents frequently cited budget pressure, the availability of existing funding, or the need to avoid singling out local projects. Some amendments were adopted, including Clark 343 on intent to fund up to 10,000 additional eCAP slots, Jones 419 on paint stewardship funding, and Stevens 070 limiting birthing center license fees. Many others failed, including amendments on Thurston County court funding, the domestic extremism task force, Yakima aquatics, North Mason mobile integrated health, mentoring, poverty reduction workgroup funding, the Department of Housing task force, federal grant staffing, HEAL Act funding, assisted living rebasing, the PIC Center contract, the Lacey regional training academy, and several Fish and Wildlife and OSPI-related proposals. The committee then moved to the underlying bill, Proposed Substitute House Bill 2289, and adopted a do pass motion after disposing of the amendments. The transcript indicates the committee ultimately reported the bill out of committee with a do pass recommendation.

Transcript Highlights:

• Denzel Hankinson: So let's take a look on the next slide, a closer look at the mechanics of cost reduction
• been used successfully and applied successfully for major U.S. infrastructure projects, including toll
• These cost reductions come from financing and tax savings, not from reductions in quality.
• These cost reductions come from financing and tax savings, not from reductions in quality.
• So it has a larger impact in terms of rate reduction because you're removing ...the equity portion of

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:

• Does that include the ability to adjust things like toll rates or other kind of washout processes?
• He staffs governance issues, freights and ports, tolling, towing, and this tolling, towing.

Committee: House Transportation

Transcript Highlights:

• Does that include the ability to adjust things like toll rates or other kind of washout processes?
• He staffs governance issues, freights and ports, tolling, towing, and this. Tolling, towing.

Summary: The Transportation Committee met for an organizational session and received a presentation from Washington State Department of Transportation and Washington State Ferries staff on recovery from the December atmospheric river storms. Committee members were introduced, and staff outlined a new process for submitting proviso and project requests through an online app, with members directed to work through their caucus policy staff. The chair also announced caucus meetings and noted staff changes for the session. WSDOT and WSF described emergency response operations, including statewide activations, damage assessment, and the use of emergency declarations to speed repairs. Staff explained how they pursue federal reimbursement through FHWA Emergency Relief and, separately, FEMA for debris removal, while noting that permanent repairs still require environmental clearances. They reported more than 50 emergency work orders, 16 emergency contracts, about 107 road sites closed at one point, and an initial damage estimate of roughly $30 million. Examples of storm damage and recovery included US 2 near Skykomish and Tumwater Canyon, US 12 near Naches, Highway 410, Highway 42 near Mount Baker, I-90 shoulder damage, and a major US 101 slope failure near Forks that will require longer-term geotechnical work. Members asked about environmental permitting, bridge impacts, flood coordination with the Army Corps of Engineers, and whether emergency declarations allow broader actions; staff said the declaration mainly speeds stabilization and contracting, does not change tolling authority, and does not waive environmental requirements. No votes were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Fabricio, how about House Bill 313, toll exemptions for Purple Heart medal recipients?
• So, how about House Bill 313, toll exemptions for Purple Heart medal recipients? You're recognized.
• individuals driving vehicles or motorcycles displaying the Purple Heart specialty license plate from paying tolls

Summary: The Budget Committee took up six bills. HB 313 passed unanimously and was reported favorably; it exempts vehicles or motorcycles displaying the Purple Heart specialty license plate from paying tolls on Florida facilities. HB 749 also passed and was reported favorably; it extends benefits to firefighters injured during training exercises. CS/HB 1103 passed and was reported favorably; it addresses APD’s developmental disability waitlist by increasing transparency, creating statewide family care councils, expanding the existing pilot program statewide on a phased timeline, and improving coordination for young adults transitioning out of foster care. Testimony on HB 1103 focused on the long waitlist, the need for more provider capacity and support coordinators, and concerns from Disability Rights Florida about moving too quickly without enough data, while supporters argued the current system is not working and families need access to services now. HB 1097 passed after a unanimous amendment removing an appropriation; it creates a premier academic insurance research center at Florida State University to conduct applied insurance and catastrophic risk research, with members discussing the transition from FIU and noting continued collaboration. HB 1309 passed and was reported favorably; it requires evidence-based reading interventions for K-2 students with reading deficiencies and creates a reading coaches program for grades 4-12. Supporters from education and business groups appeared in favor. CS/HB 433 also passed and was reported favorably, though it drew the most debate. The bill requires agencies to review existing rules and guidance documents for consistency with legislative intent, repromulgate rules over time, and report licensing metrics. Members raised concerns about possible duplication of work, staffing needs, and cost, while the sponsor and supporters argued agencies should already be doing this and that the bill would reduce unnecessary regulation and improve accountability. The committee then adjourned after completing its agenda.

Transcript Highlights:

• HB 1557 by Moody relating to the waiver programs for certain veterans provide by toll project entities
• Affairs HP 1589 by Curtis relating to the required voter approval for the construction of the new toll
• project for the toll project entity or for the subcommittee on transportation funding.

Transcript Highlights:

• There were some that had relatively very minimal reductions, and then some that would be 100%.
• We've had a 90% reduction in the past 30 years in the number of dairies.
• We've had a 90% reduction in the past 30 years in the number of dearies.
• When this project started, it looked like it was going to be that 30% reduction in water use.
• He said, quote, can you understand the toll...

Bills: S0036 , S0620 , S0796 , S0934 , S1080 , S1096 , S1366 , S1536 , S1548 , S1580 , S1588 , S1620 , S1756 , S7034 , S7044

Committee: Senate Rules

Keywords: nursing title, advanced practice registered nurse, advertising, professional standards, disciplinary action, candidate qualifying, federal office, election integrity, regulatory compliance, political candidacy, veterinary medicine, telehealth, veterinary professional associate, animal health, public safety, access to veterinary services, payment bond exemption, Habitat for Humanity, Florida Forever Act, land acquisition

Transcript Highlights:

• AB 32, cap and trade, low-carbon fuel standards, petroleum reduction mandates, production restrictions
• So you have to look at a tolling agreement.
• So to clarify with the vice chair, so you mentioned earlier, we've seen a 2% reduction of demand over
• So our scoping plan put a 48% reduction by 2030 as a checkpoint on our way to carbon neutrality.
• We need a long-term phase-out plan with continued demand reduction toward zero-emission transportation

Summary: The Senate Environmental Quality Committee held an informational hearing on the environmental impacts and policy considerations surrounding refinery closures. Chair Blakespear framed the hearing as part of California’s broader transition away from fossil fuels, emphasizing the need for proactive planning so communities, workers, and local governments are not caught off guard. Vice Chair Gunda argued that the state has long signaled a future away from oil, while also warning that closures can create supply instability, higher prices, and infrastructure stress if not managed carefully. Senators also raised concerns about consumer costs, supply reliability, the role of imports, and whether California’s climate policies are contributing to refinery disinvestment. The first panel included the California Energy Commission, CARB, and the State Water Resources Control Board. Gunda described California as being in a “mid-transition,” with gasoline demand gradually declining, zero-emission vehicle adoption rising, and refinery capacity shrinking through both conversions to renewable fuels and outright closures. He said the state needs a coordinated strategy that balances near-term supply stability with long-term decarbonization, and noted that refinery closures can shift liabilities onto pipelines, terminals, and potentially the state. CARB’s Matthew Boutill said the agency’s focus is reducing air pollution and greenhouse gases, and that state policies are already driving billions in annual investment in alternative fuels, EV infrastructure, and refinery conversions. Water Board representative Annalisa Kihara explained the cleanup authorities used at refinery sites, including investigation, remediation, and enforcement tools, and said decommissioning often reveals previously inaccessible contamination and may require new monitoring wells and additional site assessment. Committee members pressed the panel on whether the state has enough information to plan for land reuse and cleanup costs, whether current tools are adequate, and whether more legislative direction is needed. Gunda said there are still gaps in information and transparency, especially around liability and long-term community planning. Kihara said the Water Boards can require more data, cleanup, and timelines, but that refinery remediation is highly site-specific and can take tens to hundreds of millions of dollars. Senators Menjivar, Stern, and Hurtado questioned demand trends, the pace of refinery closures versus demand decline, the role of imports and the Jones Act, and whether California should consider options such as state ownership or broader ecosystem planning. The panel generally agreed that closures are likely to continue and that the state should plan proactively rather than reactively. A second panel presented recent research on refinery closures. Emily Grubert said closure costs and remediation obligations are often underestimated and that California should better define end-of-life obligations and financial assurance requirements. Tham Herschbach outlined five drivers of refinery closures: declining California crude production, falling in-state gasoline demand, the shift toward renewable diesel and other alternative fuels, global refinery consolidation, and the growing availability of imported gasoline. Anne Alexander focused on community impacts, using the Phillips 66 Los Angeles refinery closure as a case study, and said refinery sites are often heavily contaminated, cleanup can take a decade or more, and communities are often left without clear information because refineries have little end-of-life planning or financial assurance requirements. No votes or formal actions were taken at the informational hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• AB 32, cap and trade, low carbon fuel standards, petroleum reduction mandates, production restrictions
• So you have to look at a tolling agreement.
• So to clarify with the Vice Chair, so you mentioned earlier, we've seen a 2% reduction of demand over
• “Our scoping plan put a 48% reduction by 2030 as a checkpoint on our way to carbon neutrality.
• We need a long-term phase-out plan with continued demand reduction toward zero-emission transportation

Committee: Senate Environmental Quality