Transcript Highlights:

• It emits climate and air pollution when combusted, just like any other fuel.
• It emits climate and air pollution when combusted, just like any other fuel.
• So make no mistake, California must continue to reduce climate pollution and local air pollution.
• You can reduce pollution from dairies and from landfills.
• They will also bear the brunt of climate change and pollution.

Summary: The hearing was a select committee discussion on the transportation costs and impacts of California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), with opening remarks from the co-chairs and members emphasizing affordability, climate goals, and the need to explain the program’s benefits to the public. The first panel from CARB and the California Energy Commission described how LCFS works as a market-based, declining carbon-intensity program that rewards lower-carbon fuels, supports zero-emission vehicle infrastructure, and is intended to reduce greenhouse gases and local air pollution. They argued the program has driven billions in private investment, increased alternative fuel use, and that LCFS credit prices are not the main driver of retail gasoline prices, which they said are dominated by crude oil, refining, and distribution costs. Members questioned the panel on the gap between the regulatory target and actual carbon-intensity performance, the role of credit banking, which fuels are generating the most credits, how the 2025 amendments affected the program, and whether LCFS credits are truly additional. CARB explained that banking helps cost-effectiveness and investment certainty, that ethanol, renewable diesel, and biodiesel currently provide the largest volumes while electricity is expected to grow, and that the updated targets were informed by the state’s 2045 carbon-neutrality goals and the 2030 scoping plan. The Energy Commission said its data show environmental programs add some cost to gasoline but do not drive price volatility, which is mainly tied to crude oil and refinery margins. The second panel, featuring academic and research experts, focused on program design, out-of-state credit generation, and broader economic effects. Speakers said LCFS is successful because it ties incentives to emissions benefit, uses life-cycle analysis, and allows flexible compliance that lowers costs compared with more direct regulation. They also said the program’s benefits generally outweigh costs, that it can reduce air pollution disparities and support equity, but that some issues—especially indirect land use change, additionality, and older program assumptions—need more research and may warrant future rulemaking. One researcher noted that while LCFS likely raises gasoline prices somewhat, the effect is uncertain by design and usually smaller than normal market fluctuations, and another warned that limiting credit generation too narrowly could create legal and efficiency problems.

Transcript Highlights:

• The air pollution control program was originally designed to apply a fee...
• At the same time, costs to operate the air pollution control... ...that they push out.
• At the same time, costs to operate the air pollution control program continue to increase.
• It would simply move over to funding the air pollution control program.
• It will simply keep the air pollution control program running so that we can, so that those emitters

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We have trailer bill language for the State Water Resources Control Board for water quality control planning
• Hazardous Waste Control Account in 25-26 and ongoing.
• Department of Toxic Substances Control as well, $2,000,000 from the Hazardous Waste Control Account in
• Brendan Tillingham on behalf of the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association.
• We welcome the discussion on community air pollution.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Purge the agency and bring trauma to its. employees.
• Environmental Protection Agency.
• pollutants and air quality?
• And as Utahans, that means we only control 20% of the ozone in the area.
• Of course, as you know, ozone pollution is a challenge.

Transcript Highlights:

• Brendan Tewig on behalf of the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association.
• Sylvia Solis Shaw here on behalf of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District.
• Sylvia Solis Shaw here on behalf of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District.
• Sylvia Solis Shaw here on behalf of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District.
• Sylvia Solis Shaw here on behalf of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District.

Summary: The hearing focused on the governor’s May Revision proposals for transportation, natural resources, climate, and related programs, with the Department of Finance and the LAO presenting competing views on the state’s fiscal condition. Finance said the budget remains balanced over two years, with major climate-bond, water, parks, transportation, DMV, and agriculture proposals, while the LAO argued the state still has a structural deficit and should reject or defer many new discretionary spending items, preserve reserves, and be cautious about ongoing commitments. The LAO specifically questioned the timing and scale of new spending for programs such as Clean California, Healthy Rivers and Landscapes, and the Golden Gate Fields acquisition, and urged more clarity on future obligations and revenue scenarios, including for the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. A major portion of the hearing was devoted to the Healthy Rivers and Landscapes proposal for Bay-Delta water quality implementation. Secretary Wade Crowfoot and Finance described it as an enforceable, science-based alternative to a more traditional regulatory approach, with the state’s $25 million request intended to support early implementation, monitoring, habitat restoration, and environmental flows. The LAO countered that the Water Board has not yet adopted the updated Bay-Delta plan, that the proposal may be premature, and that the Legislature should wait for more information on the state’s total funding commitment and the program’s long-term costs. Several members expressed support for the program as a way to reduce conflict and protect water reliability, while others echoed concerns about timing and fiscal exposure. The committee also examined the proposed $125 million Proposition 4 contribution toward acquiring the Golden Gate Fields property for a shoreline park and habitat project. State officials said the acquisition is a time-sensitive, once-in-a-generation opportunity, with an appraised value of $175 million and additional philanthropic and local funding expected to close the gap. Members questioned whether the project had gone through the usual competitive process, whether the site is the best use of scarce park bond dollars, and how public access, habitat, and disadvantaged-community priorities would be protected. The discussion ended without a vote, and the committee moved on to transportation items including Clean California litter abatement, the Games Route Network, homeless encampment coordinators, and DMV modernization and field office proposals, with LAO recommending rejection or delay on several of those requests as well.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, the change items I'll start with, we will start with the Pollution Control Agency.
• Control Agency.
• > Agency Control Agency Control Agency um<00:05:09.160> totaling<00:05:09.840> about
• This $700,000 per year equals four new FTEs at the Pollution Control Agency.
• Pollution Control Agency. Pollution Control Agency.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The working group on the Omnibus Environment Bill opened with remarks from House and Senate co-chairs describing the agreement as a compromise with wins and tradeoffs for both sides, and thanking nonpartisan staff and administration agencies for helping negotiate the package. Staff then walked through the finance spreadsheet, explaining that the agreement met the group’s general fund target by combining new spending with cancellations and fund shifts across the Pollution Control Agency, DNR, BWSR, Metro Parks, the Zoo, the Science Museum, and other entities. Major fiscal items included PCA operating and permitting-efficiency funding, PFAS-related and mercury-related provisions, county feedlot reductions, closed landfill and remediation fund changes, groundwater and aquatic invasive species fee increases, DNR groundwater and AIS spending, ATV trail grants, watercraft enforcement, and several one-time appropriations and extensions for specific water quality and conservation projects. The policy walk-through covered Article 3’s community grants changes, including a requirement that grants benefit all regions of the state, permission to use some funds for trail maintenance and AIS management, prohibitions on awards to certain entities, and a DNR reporting requirement. Article 4 contained a range of natural resources and environmental policy provisions, including abandoned watercraft seizure and forfeiture authority, higher watercraft AIS surcharges, disabled veterans license fee reductions, a county-based replacement for the shotgun zone, a one-year crossbow extension, a continuous bass season, increased water use permit fees, PFAS sales exemptions for certain products, creation of the Sustainable Foraging Task Force, and a moratorium on DNR foraging rules shortened to July 1, 2026. Article 5 addressed state lands, including an additional Cass County land sale authority. Article 6 focused on PCA permitting reform, requiring more emphasis on complex Tier 2 permits in annual reporting, giving applicants five business days to fix deficiencies, allowing the PCA to decline expedited permitting when it lacks capacity, and letting the agency retain certain fees if expedited permits are completed early. It also included changes to environmental review procedures, feedlot permitting, and EQB rules. During member questions, Senator McEwen asked about the $952,000 ATV trail appropriation and whether projects must have permits before receiving funds; DNR Assistant Commissioner Bob Myers said no project list had been finalized and that grants would go through the existing process, with environmental review and readiness considered, but he said he would need to verify the exact permitting policy and follow up with the committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• Right now, the lead agency is responding to over 600 comments. The agency can reject the project.
• Without a unified approach, agencies often struggle to deliver timely, accurate data during air pollution
• Brendan Tewig, on behalf of the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association, which are the
• air pollution control officers from all 35 local air districts, in support.
• impacted by unhealthy levels of ozone and/or particle pollution.

Summary: The committee heard several climate, environmental, and housing bills. AB 1425, dealing with pit dewatering near the San Joaquin River Parkway, drew extensive testimony. The author and supporters argued the bill was needed to protect the river, groundwater, floodplain conditions, tribal and cultural resources, and public access from a proposed mining project near the river. Opponents, including Cemex, labor representatives, and industry groups, said the bill would bypass the CEQA process before it was complete, threaten jobs, and create uncertainty for an existing operation. Members questioned both sides about hydrology, blasting, dewatering, and the adequacy of the ongoing environmental review. The bill was moved, but several members expressed concern about preempting CEQA and some did not vote or voted no. AB 881, which would allow California to move forward with carbon capture and sequestration pipelines, was presented as a way to advance state climate goals and capture federal funding. Supporters, including SMUD, labor, and industry groups, said the bill would help deploy carbon capture safely and preserve jobs. Environmental justice opponents supported stronger safety direction and warned that CO2 pipelines pose serious risks and that the state should not move ahead without clearer standards. The bill received a due-pass recommendation to Appropriations. AB 1207, on the cap-and-trade allowance price ceiling and the social cost of carbon, was presented as a science-based update to California’s climate policy. The author and EDF said the bill would keep the program aligned with current economic and climate data and protect it from federal political interference. It received broad support and a due-pass recommendation. AB 1106, creating a coordinated network of air quality incident response centers, was also approved after testimony about wildfire smoke, toxic emissions, and the need for better real-time monitoring during disasters. AB 28, the Landfill Fire Safety Act, focused on the Chiquita Canyon landfill fire and related health impacts in Castaic and Val Verde; residents described serious illnesses and contamination concerns, while landfill and county representatives warned about costs and asked for more study. The committee nonetheless advanced the bill with a due-pass recommendation. The committee also heard AB 357, which would speed Coastal Commission review of student and faculty housing projects, with supporters citing student homelessness and opponents urging caution but acknowledging the need for more housing; the bill was presented and discussed, with the committee emphasizing the need to balance housing production and coastal oversight.

Bills: HB1974, HB1853, HB1973, HB1574, HB2619, HB1966, HB1643, HB1671, HB2558, HB1854, HB2173, HB1575, HB2229, HB1535, HB1978, HB2508, HB1549, HB2187, HB1550, HB1977, HB2314, HB1871, HB2319, HB1591, HB1858, HB1898, HB2372, HB1765, HB2012, HB1706, HB1962, HB1963, HB1975, HB2009, HB2083, HB2224, HB1877, HB1959, HB1626, HB1665, HB2488, HB2456, HB2548, HB2207, HB1832, HB2079, HB1985, HB1618, HB2486, HB2242, HB2045, HB1703, HB2236, HB2480, HB1976, HB2287, HB2288, HB1777, HB276, HB1660, HB1676, HB1605, HB1751, HB1967, HB2383, HB2340, HB1946, HB2268, HB1950, HB2156, HB2118, HB1859, HB1863, HB1996, HB2114, HB2423, HB2429, HB2475, HB2534, HB2545, HB1813, HB1941, HB2474, HB2583, HB1576, HB1886, HB1939, HB2540, HB2590, HB2000, HB2163, HB2386, HB1691, HB1680, HB2516, HB1993, HB2442, HB1510, HB1958, HB1692

Keywords: HB1974, hearing loss, audiology, audiologist, hearing screening, hearing aids, cochlear implants, tele-audiology, communication access, assistive technology, speech-language pathology, deafness, hard of hearing, public health, kupuna, keiki, dementia, cognitive decline, fall prevention, State Health Planning and Development Agency

Transcript Highlights:

• the Office of Medical Cannabis Control the Office of Medical Cannabis Control and<00:11:24.320><
• <00:11:50.320> and office of medical cannabis control and office of medical cannabis control
• Medical Cannabis Control and Regulation. Medical Cannabis Control and Regulation.
• <00:39:53.040> in role of law enforcement agencies in role of law enforcement agencies in
• expert instructor and he's the agency expert instructor and he's the agency drug<00:52:08.400>

Bills: HB1974, HB1853, HB1973, HB1574, HB2619, HB1966, HB1643, HB1671, HB2558, HB1854, HB2173, HB1575, HB2229, HB1535, HB1978, HB2508, HB1549, HB2187, HB1550, HB1977, HB2314, HB1871, HB2319, HB1591, HB1858, HB1898, HB2372, HB1765, HB2012, HB1706, HB1962, HB1963, HB1975, HB2009, HB2083, HB2224, HB1877, HB1959, HB1626, HB1665, HB2488, HB2456, HB2548, HB2207, HB1832, HB2079, HB1985, HB1618, HB2486, HB2242, HB2045, HB1703, HB2236, HB2480, HB1976, HB2287, HB2288, HB1777, HB276, HB1660, HB1676, HB1605, HB1751, HB1967, HB2383, HB2340, HB1946, HB2268, HB1950, HB2156, HB2118, HB1859, HB1863, HB1996, HB2114, HB2423, HB2429, HB2475, HB2534, HB2545, HB1813, HB1941, HB2474, HB2583, HB1576, HB1886, HB1939, HB2540, HB2590, HB2000, HB2163, HB2386, HB1691, HB1680, HB2516, HB1993, HB2442, HB1510, HB1958, HB1692

Keywords: HB1974, hearing loss, audiology, audiologist, hearing screening, hearing aids, cochlear implants, tele-audiology, communication access, assistive technology, speech-language pathology, deafness, hard of hearing, public health, kupuna, keiki, dementia, cognitive decline, fall prevention, State Health Planning and Development Agency

Transcript Highlights:

• pollution and climate impacts.
• Brendan Tewig, on behalf of the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association.
• Good afternoon, Sylvia Solis Shaw here on behalf of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
• Good afternoon, Sylvia Solis Shaw here on behalf of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
• Good afternoon, Sylvia Solis Shaw here on behalf of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee heard the Department of Finance’s May Revision overview and the LAO’s budget assessment, then questioned administration officials on several natural resources and transportation proposals. Finance described the state’s improved near-term fiscal picture, but also highlighted continued budget balancing measures, including use of the temporary surplus holding account, climate bond spending, transportation and DMV/CHP augmentations, and changes affecting CEQA filing systems, water programs, CalRecycle, and food and agriculture. The LAO argued the budget still relies heavily on reserves and borrowing, recommended rejecting or delaying many new discretionary proposals, and urged caution about ongoing costs and future-year impacts, especially for the General Fund, Motor Vehicle Account, and Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. A major portion of the hearing focused on the Healthy Rivers and Landscapes proposal for Bay-Delta water quality implementation. Secretary Wade Crowfoot and Finance officials said the $25 million request would support early implementation of an enforceable program combining environmental flows, habitat restoration, and scientific monitoring, with the State Water Board retaining regulatory authority. The LAO said the proposal was premature because the updated Bay-Delta plan had not yet been adopted and asked for more clarity on the state’s existing commitments and future funding expectations. Several members expressed support for the program as a way to reduce long-running conflict over water policy, while others echoed concerns about timing and fiscal exposure. The committee also examined the proposed $125 million Proposition 4 contribution toward acquisition of the Golden Gate Fields property for a shoreline park and habitat restoration. State agencies said the project had a completed appraisal, was moving through a rolling grant process, and would leverage philanthropic and local funding, while members questioned why it was being elevated ahead of other park and conservation requests and whether it was the best use of limited bond dollars. The hearing then turned to transportation items, including $40 million for Clean California litter abatement, $6.2 million for Caltrans homeless coordinators, $73.4 million in DMV/Motor Vehicle Account requests, and funding for the 2028 Games route network. The LAO generally recommended rejecting or delaying the Clean California and homeless coordinator proposals pending more information, while members debated the need to preserve essential CHP and DMV operations despite the Motor Vehicle Account’s structural imbalance.

Transcript Highlights:

• to help control the price. to help control the price.
• I don't see that ever pollution.
• Um an at the agency right now.
• does not regulate federal agencies does not regulate federal agencies directly<04:22:47.600>
• have control over polluting this land. have control over polluting this land.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• appropriate money from the general fund to the commissioner to distribute to responsible social services agencies
• distribute to responsible social distribute to responsible social services<00:04:41.440> agencies
• <00:04:41.919> for<00:04:42.080> support<00:04:42.400> and services agencies
• for support and services agencies for support and implementing implementing implementing the<00:04:44.800
• I am an insurance consultant for Marsh McLennan Agency. It's a little different twist on this.

Bills: HF4407, HF4382

Keywords: child welfare, African American children, racial disproportionality, family preservation, reunification, foster care, kinship care, relative placement, noncustodial parent, guardian ad litem, ombudsperson, Department of Human Services, county social services, active efforts, reasonable efforts, child protection, placement, out-of-home placement, Northstar kinship assistance, data disaggregation

Summary: The Children and Families Committee adopted the April 8 minutes and then took up House File 4407, as amended by the A1 amendment. The amendment, explained by nonpartisan staff, incorporated much of the Senate version of related legislation and made a series of changes: it revised the definition of “disproportionately represented child,” shifted that determination to the Commissioner of Children, Youth, and Families, made technical cross-reference and terminology updates, adjusted training requirements, set the working group to expire December 31, 2027, and added an appropriation for statewide implementation. The committee adopted the A1 amendment and then referred the bill to Ways and Means. Representative Gilman said the bill is intended to preserve the goals of the Minnesota African American Family Preservation Act while addressing operational, legal, and fiscal problems before statewide implementation. He argued for delaying the effective date by one year, shifting case review responsibilities to the state, and providing funding so counties are not left with an unfunded mandate. He also said the bill adds safety measures related to synthetic opioids and other imminent-harm concerns, and that the delay would allow the working group to finish its recommendations and give counties time to prepare. County officials Steve Schmidt of Meeker County/Minnesota Rural Counties and Jenny Mojo of Clay County testified in support of the bill as amended, emphasizing that counties need clearer responsibilities, staffing, training, technology, and dependable funding to implement the law successfully. Rebecca St. George of DCYF said “active efforts” is not absolutely defined and is determined case by case, often with court involvement. Members raised questions about the meaning of active efforts, the bill’s synthetic opioid language, and whether the proposal should apply more broadly rather than within this specific act. A citizen also cautioned that the opioid language should not unintentionally affect families in treatment programs. Representative Hicks warned that the fentanyl provisions could lead to broad removals and create placement problems for teens with substance use disorder, while Representative Gilman responded that the bill includes a rebuttable presumption and is meant to protect children from imminent harm.

Transcript Highlights:

• I also have issue with the agreements with federal agencies, which could put citizens even at risk of
• uh which could put citizens agencies uh which could put citizens even<00:36:22.720> at<00:36:
• that come together and help, agencies that come together and help, but<01:12:54.239> they<01:
• I just simply don't know who in that agency would have the expertise to manage the funds involved in
• would have the expertise to agency would have the expertise to manage<01:59:13.520> the<01:59

Bills: SB141, SB124, SB56, SJR116, SB94, SB37, SB127, SB197, SB66, SB70, SB133, SB160, SB214, SB312, SB52, SJR62, SJR75

Keywords: legal advertisements, tax rates, public hearings, transparency, local government, sick leave, education, teacher retirement, benefits, employee compensation, Medicaid, nonopioid analgesics, pain management, health care regulation, utilization controls, physician shortage, health care access, medically underserved areas, medical education, workforce development

Transcript Highlights:

• modifies the changes made in an AG opinion to provide additional predictability and stability for the agency
• Senate Bill 1, the Appropriations Bill, includes continued funding to address this backlog. agency funding

Bills: SB214, SB935, SB1030, SB1901, SB2018, SB2020, SB2066, SB2206

Keywords: HVAC, tax exemption, energy efficiency, residential heating, installation services, Energy Star, sales tax, residential, installation, sales tax exemption, Environmental Protection Agency, temporary exemption, motor fuel tax, county exemption, diesel fuel, gasoline tax, transportation funding, SB 1030, Texas Tax Code, use tax exemption

Transcript Highlights:

• The fiscal note and then the duplicative services that working with agency we were looking to remove.
• but I'm also aware of. situations where the discretion of the judge prevents a poor decision by the agency
• But the fact is, and we're looking at changing this, that a single individual within a agency or who
• concern is, it is sometimes that the oversight of a judge prevents a poor decision being made by the agency
• the ICR program statutes requiring increased coordination with local authorities. officials and agencies

Bills: SB437, SB528, SB626, SB636, SB884, SB968, SB1044, SB1608, SB2336

Keywords: healthcare, training, abuse, neglect, penalties, chemical dependency, safety, regulation, inpatient competency restoration, competency restoration, forensic mental health, mental health law, criminal competency, incompetent to stand trial, Chapter 46B, HHSC, Health and Human Services Commission, state hospital, behavioral health, local mental health authority

Transcript Highlights:

• cabinet-level position to give the commissioner the advantage of utilizing assets from every state agency
• last week when SB67 and HB154 were introduced to completely overhaul what is perhaps the only state agency
• We cannot control what happens outside of this room or in the other chamber, but I hope you feel that

Bills: HB154, HB153, HB180, SB70

Keywords: veterans affairs, Alabama Department of Veterans Affairs, State Board of Veterans Affairs, commissioner, governor appointment, board advisory, veteran service organizations, veterans homes, veterans cemeteries, veteran service officers, district managers, state veterans home trust fund, veterans benefits, military veterans, disabled veterans, elderly veterans, active-duty service members, state agency reorganization, executive authority, governance reform

Transcript Highlights:

• What agency is providing oversight to that?
• And there's no state agency overseeing these programs.
• That doctor is already regulated, so these are not unregulated agencies or entities.
• I'm just asking you to Tell me the state agency. Thank you for the question.
• Could you... give me a rough idea how many wildfires are caused by control burns?

Bills: HR1036, HB2975, HB3026, HB3297, HB2981, HB2978, HB4144, HB1322, HB1818, HB3194, HB3767, HB3342, HB3344, HB4170, HB3287, HB3288, HB4454, HB3264, HB3266, HB3268, HB4095, HB4115, HB4316, HB3530, HB3428, HB4272, HB4273, HB4274, HB3405, HB3406, HB3467, HB3469, HB3931

Keywords: poultry waste, nutrient management, environmental regulations, agriculture, water quality, pollution prevention, best management practices, kindergarten, military families, education policy, school districts, international military dependents, age eligibility, towing services, Oklahoma Wrecker and Towing Services Fund, Department of Labor, vehicle storage fees, consumer protection, nonconsensual towing, open meetings

Transcript Highlights:

• primarily the flood federal agencies primarily the flood control<00:25:33.720> sites<00:25:34.360
• This is a summertime pollutant.
• Ozone is a summertime pollutant.
• , a quasi-public-private agency.
• , and so when I talk about agencies I'm talking about several federal agencies.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• That included water quality certification with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency.
• They continued on to get a construction stormwater permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
• <00:36:29.079> Control Pollution Control Pollution Control agency<00:36:31.720> they<00
• Control agency and Minnesota Pollution Control agency and have<00:36:40.880> continued<00:36:
• Control Agency.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• We have fought on air quality standards with the DEP and with other regulatory agencies.
• I represent a community that lives with these consequences of this pollution.
• a little more control over it.
• In terms of air pollution, these pellet boilers emit 99 percent... ...pollution, these pellet boilers
• No community deserves to bear the burden of this pollution.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing focused mainly on two subjects: expansion of the Massachusetts bottle bill and bills to remove woody biomass from state clean-energy and greenhouse-gas programs. On the bottle bill, supporters from municipal, environmental, public health, and local government groups argued that the 5-cent deposit is outdated, redemption rates have fallen, and expanding coverage to more beverage containers—especially water, sports drinks, and small alcohol bottles—would reduce litter, cut plastic waste and microplastics, and save cities and towns money. Several speakers also backed raising handling fees for retailers and redemption centers, and some supported restoring a Clean Environment Fund so unclaimed deposits would support recycling-related purposes. Opponents, including the Massachusetts Beverage Association and the National Waste and Recycling Association, argued that curbside recycling and transfer-station systems are more convenient, that the targeted containers are valuable to local recycling programs, and that the proposal would shift costs onto consumers and municipalities. Committee members questioned witnesses about redemption rates, handling fees, the 2014 ballot question, and whether the bill had changed from prior sessions. The biomass portion drew strong support from Springfield officials, state legislators, environmental advocates, and public health groups. They said woody biomass should not count as clean energy because burning wood produces particulate pollution and carbon emissions, and they warned that current law contains a loophole that could help finance the proposed Palmer Renewable Energy biomass plant in Springfield. Witnesses emphasized Springfield’s air-quality and asthma burdens, the public health impacts of PM2.5, and the need to close the loophole before a January 1, 2026 deadline. One forest-industry witness supported a separate bill promoting modern wood heat with pollution controls, arguing it is cleaner than older wood systems and has minimal ratepayer cost, while noting that those credits would be affected if the governor’s broader energy affordability bill repeals the alternative energy portfolio standard. No votes were taken during the hearing. The chairs managed testimony by alternating between the bottle bill and biomass topics, asking speakers to keep remarks brief and to note when they agreed with prior testimony. Several legislators also testified in support of the bills, and committee members asked follow-up questions on deposit levels, retailer handling fees, recycling economics, and the public-health rationale for the biomass restrictions.