Transcript Highlights:

• The analysis is adopted. Okay.” “The analysis is adopted. Are there amendments?
• All of that costs money, and it costs state money. Thank you, so again, that provision...
• Paragraph 7 of the proposed analysis quotes, Paragraph seven of the proposed analysis quotes nearly verbatim
• He's talking about the analysis, line 15.
• Yes, I move the amendment of the draft analysis for HCR 2048 as—” “...the draft analysis for HCR 2048

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• All that's being offered is basically the ability for the state to adjust costs by shifting cost from
• We're not changing or controlling any cost. We're not changing or controlling any cost whatsoever.
• Those costs are in the market.
• We've kept costs very well managed.
• It's a cost shift.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee met to consider four policy bills and discussed a possible later return to handle DOCR amendments and budget work. They first took up HB 1327, funding for the Agricultural Diversification and Development Fund, and adopted an amendment striking language that would have capped up to $10 million for agricultural infrastructure grants to political subdivisions. The bill was then passed as amended on a 22-0 vote, with Rep. Belts assigned as carrier. Next, the committee considered SB 2256, the Research Technology Park grant. Rep. Stemen offered an amendment reducing the appropriation amounts from the original figures to $10 million and $5 million levels, citing available funding; the amendment passed 19-3. The bill then passed as amended 22-0, and Rep. Stemen agreed to carry it. The committee then debated SB 2093, which combined a retired peace officers/surviving spouses benefit with an added income tax reduction. Rep. Munson moved to remove the income tax portion, and the committee agreed 17-4. The remaining peace officer benefit portion was then passed as amended 21-0, with Rep. Kempenich carrying it. Finally, the committee considered HB 2160, changing the state health plan from grandfathered to non-grandfathered status. Members discussed cost shifting, employee retention, out-of-pocket exposure, and the updated fiscal note; the committee adopted an amendment updating the appropriation figures to match the current PERS/Deloitte analysis, then passed the bill as amended 15-7-1, with Rep. Worry originally the carrier.

Transcript Highlights:

• I will be accepting the committee amendments in numbers six and seven of the analysis.
• I will be accepting the committee amendments in numbers six and seven of the analysis.
• After consulting with staff and the committee, analysis.
• The analysis referenced it as well.
• I believe that adds more cost, and we’re not trying to add more cost at the end of the day.

Summary: The committee met on June 17, 2026, beginning without a quorum and initially proceeding as a subcommittee. Members heard several Senate bills, with testimony focused mainly on redistricting, Bay Area transit funding, and military/overseas voting access. The chair also announced committee membership changes and that SB 1369 had been pulled by the author. Written testimony was accepted through the committee portal, and public testimony was limited by the chair’s rules. SB 1414 by Senator Reyes would create an independent redistricting commission for San Bernardino County. Supporters, including Inland Empire United, Common Cause, and the League of Women Voters, argued the bill would improve transparency and reduce political influence in map drawing. Opponents, including San Bernardino County and several local government/election groups, said the county’s existing advisory commission already provided substantial public input and raised concerns about cost. The bill was moved do pass as amended and re-referred to Local Government, with one no vote from Assembly Member Lackey; it was later taken off call and passed 6-1. SB 830 by Senator Wiener made technical changes to the administration of the Bay Area regional transit sales tax measure authorized by SB 63, including uniform ballot naming and county-specific ballot arguments. Support came from labor, transit, business, and advocacy groups, who said the bill would help voters understand the measure and protect transit funding. Members emphasized the Bay Area’s transit funding crisis and the need for local action. The bill passed do pass as amended, 5-1, and was later recorded as out 6-0 on call. The committee also approved a consent calendar containing six bills. SB 970 by Senator Cervantes addressed military and overseas voting after the federal discontinuation of the Department of Defense fax service used for ballot return. Supporters, including county election officials and local government organizations, said California needed a secure replacement to avoid disenfranchising service members and overseas voters. The Secretary of State’s office and Verified Voting raised security concerns and suggested a task force or more detailed standards, but the author and supporters argued the bill was urgent and should direct the Secretary of State to develop secure regulations. The bill passed do pass and was re-referred to Military and Veteran Affairs, and the meeting adjourned after all agenda items were completed.

Transcript Highlights:

• The value proposition is difficult without objective analysis tools.
• Other areas, we have a robust cost-share program. 95.5% of our budget is directly related to that cost-share
• You're just creating an upfront cost of business.
• It creates an expense that doesn't make them cost competitive.
• estimate, which wouldn't be the kind of post-FEED cost analysis that you would need to move forward

Summary: The committee met in Grand Forks, approved the February 26 minutes by voice vote, and recessed for a tour of Minnkota Power Cooperative before hearing presentations on large energy consumers and related infrastructure issues. The first presentation, from the North Dakota Transmission Authority, focused on the need for better local decision-making tools for counties, townships, and planning and zoning boards facing major projects such as transmission lines, pipelines, data centers, wind, solar, and large-scale agriculture. The speaker urged more objective, data-driven analysis, noted that local officials often have limited time and resources, and said the state should support training and tools through groups like the League of Cities and the Association of Counties. Members asked about proactive outreach, data center ordinances, and how to avoid subsidizing large loads or causing reliability problems. The Division of Air Quality then discussed environmental oversight of data centers, emphasizing that North Dakota’s air remains among the cleanest in the country and that the agency’s role is limited to air, water discharge, stormwater, and waste—not zoning or water use. The presentation explained that data centers generally have low direct emissions but may rely on diesel backup generators when the grid is unavailable, which creates air-quality concerns; the department said it is requiring air monitors at some projects to collect real-world data and guide future decisions. Members asked about generator emissions, misinformation, monitoring costs, and staffing succession, and the agency said permit applicants pay for the monitors while the state handles some QA work. The Department of Water Resources followed with an overview of North Dakota water law and data center water use. The director explained the state’s prior-appropriation system, the public-interest review for permits, and the large overall water supply available from groundwater and the Missouri River. He said most proposed data centers use closed-loop cooling systems and generally request relatively small amounts of water compared with other uses such as power plants, irrigation, and oilfield operations, and that even a worst-case data center scenario would use only a tiny fraction of Missouri River flow. Questions focused on downstream impacts and comparisons to fracking water use, and the director said the state’s use is too small to materially affect downstream users. Later, McLean County State’s Attorney Ladd-Erickson testified online about data center zoning and permitting. He asked the committee to have Legislative Council gather information on how other states handle data center permitting and to keep the topic on the interim agenda. He argued that local zoning should remain local, but said counties lack the technical and legal resources to manage complex reclamation or bonding requirements and that state-level enabling legislation may be more appropriate. He also recommended eliminating tax incentives for data centers. The committee chair said staff would prepare a document on other states’ zoning and permitting approaches. After a lunch recess, the committee reconvened at the EERC, where CEO Charles Gorecki gave an overview of the center’s 75 years of work and its role in oil and gas, carbon management, and other energy technologies, highlighting enhanced oil recovery and carbon dioxide utilization as major opportunities for future production and tax revenue.

Transcript Highlights:

• I know that one of the issues that was expressed was the cost, not the cost, the salaries that they're
• But resources cost money. Could you do more with more enforcement resources? Absolutely.
• I think price is what we should be seeking, and a reduction in tax and costs would help that.
• So the second piece on the analysis of prices is to look at market integration.
• Lower costs for the licensed industry, more enforcement, and higher costs for the illicit industry.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee 5 on State Administration held an informational hearing on budget issues for the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Department of Cannabis Control, the Department of Consumer Affairs, the Commission on the Status of Women and Girls, and the California Arts Council. The chair noted there would be no votes. CalVet gave an overview of its programs serving veterans and families, including transition assistance, county veterans service officers, education approvals, housing and homelessness programs, home loans, long-term care homes, and state veterans cemeteries. Members asked about future long-term care needs for aging veterans, staffing and recruitment challenges at veterans homes, and the Yountville steam infrastructure replacement project, for which CalVet sought a $38.8 million reappropriation and said federal reimbursement was expected. CalVet also discussed the role of county veterans service officers in helping veterans file claims and avoid predatory unaccredited representatives. The Department of Cannabis Control described its regulatory role from seed to sale and requested one position to implement SB 1064’s combined activities license. Members and public witnesses focused heavily on the illicit cannabis market, enforcement staffing, and the impact of taxes and fees on the legal market. DCC said it had roughly 87 enforcement positions with about a 15% vacancy rate and more than 200 compliance staff. Its economist presented the 2024 cannabis market report, which found licensed production and retail quantity were up, but retail value and prices were down, with an estimated 11.4 million pounds of illicit production and about 60% of California consumption still coming from the illicit market. Industry witnesses argued the legal market is in crisis, urged repeal of the scheduled excise tax increase, stronger enforcement against illicit cannabis and hemp-derived intoxicants, and expanded retail access. The Department of Consumer Affairs briefly presented nine budget proposals, including a $2.6 million ongoing request to maintain a business modernization system for several boards and bureaus. The Commission on the Status of Women and Girls described its work on economic and educational equity, health care, violence prevention, student rights, and archival and outreach projects, and said its budget request would convert limited-term positions to permanent. A member urged the commission to narrow its priorities toward current issues such as affordability, child care, and women’s health. The California Arts Council outlined its role as the state’s only statewide arts funder and requested restoration of $5 million in local assistance; supporters testified that the funding would leverage additional local investment and help sustain arts access, especially in rural communities. The hearing ended after the non-presentation items were noted and no further public comment was offered.

Transcript Highlights:

• One of the underlying drivers in rising health care costs is the cost of prescription drugs, which has
• One of the underlying drivers in rising health care cost is the cost of prescription drugs, which has
• The senator went over the data on rising drug costs, but the independent analysis of this bill is clear
• The vast majority of the bills that we do actually add cost to our ever-growing cost of our health care
• So we do understand costs.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I think the benefit for the cost I think the analysis<01:24:29.280> does<01:24:29.560> support
• Transit know a cost benefit analysis on Transit know a cost benefit analysis on Transit um<01
• So that's just kind of my push to try and think about as we look at that, not just the cost-benefit analysis
• Like I said, the cost-benefit is a mandatory part of the analysis, and if the cost relative to the benefit
• And it's very, very competitive on an ongoing cost-benefit analysis in terms of upkeep, whereas you're

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• costs.
• For utilities, fixed costs, and other opening-the-door costs.
• I think that your analysis is actually, analysis is actually... that we adapt this?
• I think that your analysis is actually, analysis is actually I think that your analysis is actually a
• It said it's going to cost about 15.

Summary: The committee first heard a detailed staff presentation on the LESC FY27 public school support recommendation. Staff reviewed the budget structure and explained that, despite a downward revision in state revenue estimates, the recommendation still relied on recurring and non-recurring revenue to support educator compensation, insurance, transportation, literacy, math, special education, and other school programs. Major recurring items included a 3% compensation increase, funding for an 80-20 health insurance cost share, insurance premium growth, and transportation adequacy funding. Staff also flagged a possible supplemental need of up to $35 million for virtual education tied to rapid enrollment growth in Chama and Santa Rosa, and members raised concerns about the quality, accountability, and funding model for virtual programs. Members asked questions about transportation for rural districts, the Martinez-Yazzie lawsuit fees, the treatment of enrollment declines in the school funding formula, and whether the word “average” in salary language should remain in the budget. Staff explained that the SEG should remain whole, that the insurance and transportation recommendations applied to all public school employees but not contractors, and that the budget included multiple math-related investments spread across several lines rather than one single appropriation. There was also discussion of out-of-school learning grants, school meals, literacy center operations, special education training, and the Public Education Reform Fund, including the use of multi-year, evaluation-based appropriations for high-impact tutoring and community schools. After discussion, the committee adopted the LESC budget recommendation. The committee then moved to endorsed legislation proposals. It endorsed a bill allowing the secretary to suspend an individual school board member, with notice and appeal procedures clarified, and a bill creating an 80-20 health insurance cost-share requirement for public school employees, along with a study of the sustainability of public school insurance programs. It also endorsed a bill on attendance provisions for students with severe medical conditions, which would keep those students from being classified as excessively absent. Finally, the committee discussed a teacher residency bill that would raise stipend levels, allow residents to complete service anywhere in New Mexico, and remove the requirement that sponsoring schools must hire them, though the bill did not include an appropriation. Members also raised questions about bilingual, Hispanic, and Black education funding, cultural and linguistic supports in teacher preparation, and where various programs should be placed in the budget or PERF framework.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our bridge work costs have increased significantly over the years.
• The average cost to build a bridge in 2020 was approximately $400.
• 75% of our costs.
• The BRM database can also perform some analysis, trying to predict future projects.
• a benefit-cost analysis to determine if that's a sound investment.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so we did a bit of analysis wage. And so we did a bit of analysis on three different counties.
• Cost-benefit analysis is the one that I really like to look at.
• For BRC, we were asked some questions about the changes in BRC and the ROI, the cost-benefit analysis
• We have a standard cost-benefit analysis.
• It's a cost-benefit analysis that we do for every project.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• with the least ability to afford the cost.
• This basically costs, this loophole, the Montana tax loophole, cost California taxpayers about $20 million
• And the cost-benefit of this bill is far greater than the cost of loss due to a wildfire event.
• So what is the analysis?
• So what is the analysis?

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Revenue and Taxation Committee heard a long agenda of tax and housing measures, beginning with SB 1329 on solar property tax assessment. The author and solar industry witnesses argued the bill would create a uniform, predictable statewide method as the current solar property tax exclusion sunsets, while county assessors and local county representatives opposed it as a departure from market-based valuation that would reduce assessed values and local revenue. The committee also heard SB 1406, which would target the so-called Montana loophole used to avoid California vehicle taxes and fees; it drew support from CTA and no formal opposition. Both bills were moved to Appropriations and placed on call after committee votes. The consent calendar was also adopted and placed on call. The committee then took up several tax relief and wildfire-related measures. SB 984 would conform California law to the federal tipped-income deduction; restaurant, taxpayer, and enrolled agent representatives supported it, and the committee approved it 3-0 to Appropriations, on call. SB 1084 would create a fire-safe home tax credit for home hardening and defensible space improvements; supporters included the Town of Truckee and the California Association of Realtors, while members raised questions about cost and interaction with Prop. 98, and the bill passed 3-0 to Appropriations, on call. SB 1118 would provide a tax credit for backup generators or solar battery systems in high fire-threat areas; the author and supporters framed it as a resilience measure, but committee members questioned the use of taxpayer funds, diesel generators, and the benefit relative to cost. The bill was not advanced in the portion of the transcript provided. Later, the committee heard SB 1249, a narrowly targeted senior deduction for taxpayers ages 86 to 90, supported by LeadingAge California and the California Senior Legislature; it passed 4-0 to Appropriations, on call. SB 1424 would extend a partial sales and use tax exemption to zero-emission vehicle refueling equipment, including charging and hydrogen stations; it received support from hydrogen and electric transportation groups and passed 4-0 to Appropriations, on call. SB 1113 would conform California tax law to the federal tonnage tax regime for U.S.-flag international shipping companies; maritime industry witnesses supported it as a competitiveness and national security measure, while ILWU opposed it over the estimated general fund impact, and the bill passed 4-0 to Appropriations, on call. SB 1137 would expand the medical expense deduction for lower-income taxpayers, and SB 1415 would extend a partial welfare property tax exemption to mixed-income housing; both were presented with support from advocacy and local government witnesses, with assessors and housing stakeholders seeking amendments on SB 1415. The transcript ends before final action on SB 1415 is completed.

Transcript Highlights:

• One of the underlying drivers in rising health care costs is the cost of prescription drugs, which has
• The senator went over the data on rising drug costs, but the independent analysis of this bill is clear
• The vast majority of the bills that we do actually add cost to our ever-growing cost of our health care
• Well, we don't, for the most part, we don't get into cost because we don't know how much things cost
• So we do understand costs.

Summary: The committee heard several bills, beginning with SB 1312 by Senator Richardson on abandoned endowed-care cemeteries. Richardson described vandalism, theft, and neglect at abandoned cemeteries and said the bill would define abandonment, create a process for local governments to declare a cemetery abandoned, and allow the Bureau to act as conservator of endowment funds. Support came from Marin County, while county and special district groups opposed or had concerns, arguing the bill could shift burdens to local governments or public cemetery districts without enough safeguards. Members expressed general support but noted the need for further work; the bill was discussed but no final vote was taken in the excerpt. The committee then took up SB 758 by Senator Umberg, which would restrict retail sales of nitrous oxide to curb misuse. Supporters, including the League of California Cities, narcotic officers, counties, pediatricians, and other local governments and health groups, said easy access at smoke shops and convenience stores has fueled recreational abuse and health harms. There was no opposition testimony, and members voiced strong support for a statewide approach over city-by-city bans. The bill was well received, with the author closing in support. Dr. Weber-Pierson presented SB 1094, a health care affordability bill on biosimilars and biologic substitution. The bill would allow pharmacists to substitute biosimilars under certain conditions, require advance notice to providers and patients, and add reporting on savings; the author said amendments would strengthen provider notice and preserve the ability to mark prescriptions “do not substitute.” Supporters from health plans, insurers, pharmacies, labor, business, and some provider groups argued the bill would lower costs and expand access. Opponents, including dermatology and rheumatology groups and biotech interests, warned about non-medical switching, prior authorization delays, and patient harm. After extensive discussion, the committee voted 13-0 to pass SB 1094 to the Committee on Health. The committee also passed SB 849 by Dr. Weber-Pierson, which would bar reinstatement of physicians who surrendered their licenses while a sexual misconduct accusation was pending. The Medical Board and California Medical Association were generally supportive or neutral, and members praised the bill’s patient-protection focus. SB 993 by Senator Ochoa Bogh, which limits routine disclosure of identifying information for mental health professionals in correctional and psychiatric settings while preserving complaint processes, also passed unanimously to Appropriations. SB 1002 by Senator Niello, extending the David Hall Act to allow certain patients in remission to continue telehealth care with out-of-state specialists, drew strong patient support but opposition from the Medical Board and CMA over licensure and oversight concerns; the committee voted it out on a split roll with some members not voting. Finally, SB 1263 by Senator McGuire, aimed at protecting wildfire survivors and workers by requiring licensed, trained contractors for post-disaster residential debris removal, received support from labor and the Contractors State License Board, with contractors raising a narrower amendment concern about scope.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think now you've asked me to go deep into legal analysis that's beyond my scope.
• I have not done any analysis of compactness.
• Prater provided his best analysis, or his only answer to that question, in committee.
• Issues like the cost of living, healthcare access, or educational quality.
• How much is that going to cost us? Same voters. How much is that going to cost us?

Summary: The Senate convened in special session with an opening prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, then moved to the special order calendar to consider congressional redistricting legislation, beginning with Senate Bill 8D and then substituting the identical House Bill 1D. The bill would establish Florida’s congressional districts. Senator Gaetz, presenting the measure, said the Governor had proposed the map to address population growth and to draw race-neutral districts, and argued that mid-decade redistricting is legally permissible and has occurred before in Florida and other states. He repeatedly said the Legislature could accept, reject, or amend the proposal, but that the Governor had the prerogative to propose it. The floor debate focused heavily on the legality and timing of the map, especially after the U.S. Supreme Court’s Louisiana redistricting decision was announced during the session. Several senators, including Rouson, Sharief, Smith, Polsky, Arrington, Bracy Davis, Bernard, Nathan, and Berman, questioned whether the map complied with the Florida Constitution’s Fair Districts Amendment, the Voting Rights Act, and equal protection principles. They raised concerns about the short notice, lack of statewide public hearings, the use of partisan data, the absence of sworn testimony from the Governor’s representatives, the claimed severability of the Fair Districts Amendment, and the impact on minority communities and communities of interest. Gaetz generally declined to offer legal opinions, saying those issues would ultimately be for the courts, but he relayed the Governor’s position that race-based provisions in the Fair Districts Amendment are unconstitutional and that the proposed map is race-neutral and compact. Members also debated whether the map’s population data and compactness scores justified the district lines, with critics arguing that the plan cracked and split communities in places such as Central Florida, Tampa Bay, and South Florida. Gaetz said the Governor’s office relied on 2020 census data plus updated population estimates from the Office of Economic and Demographic Research and the American Community Survey, and that the mapmaker said he drew the map himself without outside consultants. After questions concluded, the Senate adopted a motion to substitute HB 1D for SB 8D, read the bill a third time, and proceeded to debate the House bill. The transcript ends during debate, with no final vote on passage shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think now you've asked me to go deep into legal analysis that's beyond my scope.
• I have not done any analysis of compactness.
• Prater provided his best analysis, or his only answer to that question, in committee.
• Issues like the cost of living, or healthcare access, or educational quality.
• How much is that going to cost us? We have a job to do. We have a job to do.

Summary: The Senate convened in special session and took up Senate Bill 8D, later substituting identical House Bill 1D, to establish Florida’s congressional districts. The opening prayer and Pledge of Allegiance were followed by procedural remarks, then extensive floor discussion focused almost entirely on the redistricting proposal, its timing, and its legal basis. Senator Gaetz, explaining the bill, said the Governor had transmitted the map two days earlier, argued that mid-decade congressional redistricting is not prohibited by law, and said the Governor’s stated reasons were to address population growth and to draw race-neutral districts. He also said the legislature could accept, reject, or amend the proposal. Much of the debate centered on the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent Louisiana decision and whether it affected Florida’s Fair Districts Amendment and the Voting Rights Act. Senators Smith, Rouson, Sharief, Polsky, Arrington, Bracey Davis, Bernard, Nathan, and others questioned the short notice, lack of public hearings, the use of partisan data, the absence of sworn testimony, and whether the map diluted minority voting strength or fragmented communities of interest. Gaetz repeatedly said he was not offering legal opinions, that the Governor’s counsel believed the Fair Districts race-based provisions were inconsistent with federal law, and that any legal challenge would be for the courts. He also said the Governor’s mapmaker reported using census and demographic data, along with political data as one of many inputs, and claimed the map’s compactness was comparable to the current map. A motion by Senator Smith to temporarily postpone consideration of the bill failed on a 12-23 vote. After the Senate returned from a 30-minute break to review the new Supreme Court decision, debate continued. The chamber then substituted HB 1D for SB 8D, read the House bill, and advanced it to third reading. The transcript ends during debate on final passage, with Senators Rouson and Bernard speaking in opposition and arguing the map was procedurally rushed, legally vulnerable, and politically motivated.

Transcript Highlights:

• They can't cover their cost.
• They can do it fast and efficiently at a lower cost.
• But what they don't do is true up the cost based on a total cost report and surgical interventions in
• That was not part of the analysis.
• That was not part of the analysis.

Bills: HB198, HB325, HB488, HB719, HB749, HB755, HB797, HB823, HB1028, HB1194, HB1222

Keywords: Medicaid, reimbursement, ambulatory surgical centers, gastroenterology, ophthalmology, otolaryngology, healthcare funding, Louisiana Department of Health, surgical procedures, TOPS-Tech, scholarship, education, eligibility, college credit, dual enrollment, state funding, HB 488, Belle Chasse Bridge, Belle Chasse Bridge Merit-Based Special Fund, Plaquemines Parish

Transcript Highlights:

• But those also impose costs, and those costs go up for the licensed market, that makes it less competitive
• And that enforcement activity is helpful for making it cost. costs right and that enforcement activity
• What I couldn't make out was the impact driving down the costs and increasing additional production costs
• Fiscal analysis, it's analysis of bringing a market where consumers are using this substance, regardless
• But then they do get cost reimbursement.

Summary: The joint informational hearing focused on the Department of Cannabis Control’s report on the condition and health of California’s cannabis industry. Department staff reviewed the evolution of state cannabis law, the creation of the current regulatory framework, licensing and compliance efforts, and enforcement against illicit cannabis and hemp-derived intoxicating cannabinoids. The department said the licensed market has grown in production and retail units sold, while active licenses and retail sales value have declined, and that the illicit market remains a major competitive factor. The department also highlighted consumer education efforts, product testing and recalls, and coordination through the state enforcement task force and other agencies. The department’s economist said the data show continued growth in licensed production and a rising share of consumption through the licensed market, but falling wholesale and retail prices have reduced overall industry value. He identified major headwinds as taxes and fees, illicit-market competition, local prohibitions that limit retail access, regulatory costs, and broader business pressures, while noting opportunities in product innovation and possible hemp-market changes. Committee members pressed the department on enforcement, public health concerns, equity ownership and employment, delays in grant administration, pesticide testing, and whether the legal market is truly viable for small businesses and farmers. Several members argued that stronger enforcement and lower costs are needed, while one member raised concerns about cannabis-related health harms and said the hearing focused too narrowly on supply-side issues. Public commenters from industry groups and advocacy organizations largely echoed concerns about high taxes, regulatory burdens, limited retail access, and the size of the illicit market. Many urged the Legislature not to let the excise tax rise from 15% to 19% and called for tax relief, compliance reform, more enforcement, and broader retail access. Some speakers said the report was too optimistic and did not reflect business failures, debt, and closures, while others emphasized the need to protect small farmers, address wildfire insurance, and support equity businesses. No votes or formal actions were taken; the hearing was informational only.

Transcript Highlights:

• Do you not consider the 2006 analysis comprehensive?
• So we just don't have a good estimate on these costs.
• Our taxpayers need to know what the actual cost is.
• There's costs in repairing fencing, there's actual real costs and cattle losses and things like that.
• , which most of this conversation has been, but is a full cost-benefit analysis.

Bills: SB825

Keywords: illegal immigration, economic impact, environmental impact, financial impact, annual study, Texas, government report

Summary: The Senate Committee on Border Security heard testimony on Senate Bill 825 by Senator Middleton, as substituted, which would require an annual or biennial study of the economic, environmental, and financial impacts of illegal immigration in Texas. Middleton said the bill is intended to provide lawmakers with comprehensive data on costs to law enforcement, health care, education, infrastructure, and taxpayers, and to support possible federal reimbursement claims. Several senators, including Hinojosa and Eckhardt, agreed that a study is needed but raised concerns about bias, the scope of the study, and whether the Comptroller’s Office rather than the governor’s office should conduct it. Middleton argued the governor’s office was the best coordinating entity because it could direct multiple agencies to provide data, while Hinojosa and others emphasized the Comptroller’s expertise and prior 2006 study. Public testimony was generally supportive of the idea of a study but critical of the bill’s framing. Sarah Cruz of the ACLU of Texas said the study should be a full cost-benefit analysis and warned that focusing only on costs could create an anti-immigrant narrative. Danny Woodward of the Texas Civil Rights Project also supported the concept but recommended moving the study to the Comptroller or, alternatively, creating a neutral commission. Jaime Pointe of Every Texan likewise supported updating the 2006 analysis and said state agencies should be able to cooperate with a governor-led study. Resource witnesses from the governor’s office, HHSC, TEA, OCA, TDCJ, and DPS explained that data collection would be uneven across agencies. HHSC and TEA said they often do not collect immigration status and, in TEA’s case, federal law limits schools from requesting such information; OCA and TDCJ said they could provide only partial or indirect data unless new reporting requirements were added. DPS said it already has Operation Lone Star data but would need to collect additional information if tasked with the broader study. The chair asked the governor’s office to provide a follow-up answer on separation-of-powers and related authority questions by the following Tuesday, and the committee recessed subject to the call of the chair without taking a vote on the bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• One of Habitat's biggest costs are development fees.
• When those fees arise unexpectedly late in the project planning timeline, they add fixed costs and cost
• In addition to that, there are financing costs, commitment fees, etc.
• There's an environmental analysis on soil, et cetera, heavy metals.
• There's an economic impact analysis.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard AB 736, the Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2026, which would place a $10 billion housing bond on the ballot to fund multifamily housing, permanent supportive housing, homeownership, preservation of existing deed-restricted units, acquisition/rehabilitation of naturally affordable housing, farmworker housing, and tribal housing. The author and supporters argued the state needs major new subsidy to address homelessness and the affordable housing shortage, while many organizations and local governments testified in support. Habitat for Humanity opposed unless the bond explicitly reserved 10% for CalHome; members discussed that issue and broader negotiations over possible amendments. After quorum was established, the committee approved the bill on a do-pass motion to Senate Appropriations, with several members voting aye and the measure held on call for absent members. The committee also heard SB 1361, which would limit local governments from using SB 79 transit-oriented housing requirements as a reason to stall or condition planned transit projects. The author and supporters from LA Metro and the building trades said the bill would prevent opposition to future transit stops from undermining transit expansion, jobs, and climate goals. Several groups that had initially opposed or been neutral, including cities and housing advocates, withdrew opposition after amendments; the League of California Cities moved to no position pending review. The bill passed the committee as amended to Senate Local Government on a do-pass motion, with the roll held open for absent members. Senator Grayson presented SB 1003, creating an Infrastructure Partnership Financing Program to help local governments and developers fund infrastructure needed for infill housing, and SB 1014, requiring local agencies to provide early good-faith estimates and itemized lists of on-site and off-site improvements tied to housing projects. Supporters said both bills would improve project feasibility and reduce late-stage cost surprises; there was little opposition, though some local government representatives sought continued discussion on implementation details. Both measures were approved on do-pass motions to Senate Appropriations and held on call. The committee also took up SB 908, which streamlines permitting for energy-code-compliant window replacements and limits added aesthetic requirements, with the new-construction portion narrowed to San Francisco; it received support from housing and decarbonization groups and was moved to Appropriations on a do-pass motion, also held on call.

Transcript Highlights:

• Someone also did an analysis.
• And thank you for all the work on your analysis.
• really calling out in the analysis... ...the analysis, but really calling out in the analysis programs
• AG Bonta is very concerned about cost of living, and we know that housing cost is a major contributor
• The public cost of that is twice what it would cost to get people indoors into interim housing.

Summary: The committee heard several housing bills, with the longest discussion focused on SB 79, which would allow more housing near high-capacity transit stops and on transit agency-owned land. The author and supporters argued it would address California’s housing shortage, reduce vehicle miles traveled, and strengthen transit systems by putting more residents near rail and rapid transit. Supporters included housing advocates, local officials, environmental groups, and transit-oriented development organizations. Opponents, including many cities, the League of California Cities, and some tenant and legal advocacy groups, raised concerns about affordability requirements, displacement, demolition protections, local control, and the bill’s interaction with existing local planning efforts. The committee discussed amendments to strengthen anti-displacement protections, minimum density, affordability standards, and a local flexibility alternative, and SB 79 was moved out on a due-pass-as-amended vote of 8-1, with one member not voting. The committee then took up SB 21, which would amend the Housing Crisis Act to allow limited unit reductions when converting deed-restricted SRO buildings into larger, more livable affordable units with private bathrooms, kitchens, and supportive services. The author and nonprofit housing providers said many SRO buildings are financially unsustainable and that the bill would preserve deeply affordable housing while improving conditions for residents. There was no organized opposition testimony at the hearing, though one business property group registered opposition. Members expressed support for the preservation-focused approach, and SB 21 was approved on an 8-0 vote and sent to the Assembly Committee on Local Government. Next, SB 92 was heard, a measure to close a density bonus loophole by limiting how much additional commercial floor area a project can receive and preventing the law from being used to justify very large nonresidential projects with only minimal affordable housing. The author cited a San Diego project as an example of the problem, and the City of San Diego supported the bill as a reasonable fix. Several labor and housing groups also supported it, while no formal opposition witnesses testified. The committee accepted amendments, members praised the effort to curb abuse while preserving feasibility, and SB 92 passed on a 7-0 vote. Finally, the committee began hearing SB 522, which would extend just-cause eviction protections to units rebuilt after disaster if they had previously been covered by the Tenant Protection Act. The author and the Los Angeles City Attorney said the bill would help preserve rental housing in disaster-affected communities, especially after the Pacific Palisades fires, and would not create new rent control. Opponents, including apartment, realtor, and property owner groups, argued it would add burdens to rebuilding and could discourage reconstruction. Members raised questions about whether existing law already protects returning tenants and whether the bill was necessary, and the hearing continued into committee discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Research cited by this committee analysis itself raises concerns Research cited by this committee analysis
• It's just the cost of doing business.
• And that was Justice Brown's analysis.
• The cost is not only measured in life.
• And I would argue, and I would bet money, and I'm respectfully saying the cost-benefit analysis of all

Keywords: 988, house, all