Transcript Highlights:

• They're not regulated by HHSC. We just regulate... [David Kostron:] They are not regulated by HHSC.
• Do we have any of that data? I'm not a... Do we have any of that data?
• And your data source? My data source for. For these situations?
• I don't have any data source. I'm sorry. I don't have any data source, I'm sorry.
• I'm not aware of any data.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:08:51.519><c> privatelyowned</c> not impact or regulate privatelyowned not impact or regulate
• I'm sure it's a real issue. >> Yeah, I mean data on it. >> I got all kinds of data.
• By pausing new data construction, a data By pausing new data construction, a data center<01:44:15.199
• </c> study the environmental impact of data study the environmental impact of data centers.
• </c> data, what is large is not even defined. data, what is large is not even defined.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• 12, 2024, and January 1, 2025, depending on the regulation.
• Research on the sector can be very difficult to get good current data.
• We welcome thoughtful regulation.
• But regulation must reflect operational reality.
• But regulation must reflect operational reality.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We have the transparency around emissions data.”
• The first is updating our regulations to reflect the changes that are in 279.
• Us to consolidate reporting systems, and that would help our data intake.
• So that's a bit of knowledge and data that we are taking in.
• Do we have data to keep track of these SETs?

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Resources, Environmental Protection and Energy heard budget overviews and several budget change proposals from CalRecycle, CalEPA, and DTSC. CalRecycle outlined its proposed 2026-27 budget of 987 positions and $1.9 billion, and members focused on edible food recovery funding under SB 1383, beverage container recycling fees and infrastructure under SB 1013, plastic packaging reduction under SB 54, and composting implementation under SB 279. CalRecycle said edible food recovery has recovered more than 300 million meals but lacks ongoing funding, explained that beverage container processing fees are set by statute and reflect higher recycling costs for difficult-to-recycle materials, and noted that SB 54 implementation will include a pollution prevention mitigation fund for legacy plastic cleanup. The committee also discussed the need for more composting capacity and the role of volunteer cleanup groups, while public commenters urged continued funding for food recovery, composting, and landfill response. CalEPA presented its department overview and a proposal to strengthen landfill response and enforcement, emphasizing climate, air quality, water, and cleanup priorities. Secretary Garcia described the agency’s work on methane monitoring, toxics reduction, drinking water compliance, Exide cleanup, pesticide alternatives, and implementation of AB 617, while also noting the agency’s response to federal rollbacks. Members pressed CalEPA on landfill fires and subsurface elevated temperature events, especially at Chiquita Canyon, asking about authority, scientific resources, and when intervention should occur. CalEPA said it has authority to respond but needs more coordinated technical and enforcement capacity, and later presented a $5.1 million, 12-position multi-agency proposal involving CalEPA, CalRecycle, DTSC, and the Water Board to address current landfill events and improve future prevention and response. DTSC and the Board of Environmental Safety presented several proposals tied to reform implementation, hazardous waste oversight, and emerging waste streams. DTSC reported progress in clearing its permit backlog, advancing safer consumer products regulations, and continuing Exide cleanup, while seeking additional resources for cost recovery and enforcement, PFAS work, recycling infrastructure for solar panels and lithium batteries, and a new statewide planning division to implement the hazardous waste management plan and consolidate reporting systems. The Board of Environmental Safety described its oversight role, public meetings, permit appeals process, and fee-setting authority, and said its priorities include permit appeals, hazardous waste plan oversight, and performance metrics. Members questioned whether DTSC was creating too many new subdivisions, but the department said the new structure is needed to handle growing workload and modernize regulation. Public testimony generally supported the landfill proposal, DTSC consumer product enforcement, water board staffing, and continued funding for food recovery and composting programs.

Transcript Highlights:

• So inaction or loosening of these regulations, including our regulations around light-duty and heavy-duty
• What are the data points?
• We don't have detailed data that we gather.
• We address that through the at-berth regulation, and the goal of that regulation is to reduce emissions
• How do you regulate China when they come in?

Summary: The joint informational hearing of the Assembly Committees on Utilities and Energy, Transportation, and Natural Resources focused on California’s transportation fuels sector, especially the state’s response to refinery closures and the broader transition away from fossil fuels. Opening remarks emphasized the tension between climate and air-quality goals, fuel affordability, refinery jobs and local tax bases, and the need to avoid crisis-driven responses as Phillips 66 and Valero consider shutting refineries in Wilmington and Benicia. Professor Emily Grubert framed the issue as a long-term managed transition in which the public already bears much of the risk and should also capture benefits from a well-planned shift. CARB Chair Leanne Randolph reviewed the state’s emissions and fuel policies, including AB 32, the low-carbon fuel standard, clean vehicle programs, and the at-berth regulation for ocean-going vessels. She said California’s transportation sector remains the largest source of greenhouse gases and a major source of smog-forming pollution, but that the state has made substantial progress and still needs to reduce demand for fossil fuels while maintaining compliance with federal air-quality standards. Randolph also said CARB’s recent LCFS amendments had not caused the predicted spike in gas prices and explained that compliance pathways for the at-berth rule include emissions-reduction technologies or payments into a remediation fund. CEC Vice Chair Gunda described declining gasoline demand, shrinking in-state refining capacity, and growing dependence on imports, arguing that the state is in a “mid-transition” period that requires both support for legacy infrastructure and continued investment in cleaner alternatives. He outlined the administration’s petroleum market stabilization proposal, which aims to return California crude production to 125 million barrels a year through four components: codifying the ban on fracking, validating the Kern County oil-and-gas permitting ordinance, creating a temporary CEQA exemption paired with a two-for-one plug-and-drill framework, and strengthening pipeline and spill-safety requirements. Department of Conservation Director Jennifer Lucasey said the proposal is intended to stabilize crude supply and pipeline throughput while preserving health and environmental protections, and noted that CalGEM would still review permits and enforce other requirements. Mayor Steve Young of Benicia testified that a Valero closure would significantly reduce city revenue and leave the community facing years of cleanup and redevelopment challenges. He said the city supports environmental protection but is worried about the economic hit, the possibility that Benicia becomes a fuel-import terminal, and the lack of local influence over refinery decisions. Members pressed the panel on the CEQA exemption, tribal and habitat review, disclosure of closure liabilities, fuel-demand projections, and whether the proposal should include more demand-side measures. No formal votes were taken; the hearing was informational, and officials said some proposals, including a margin-cap pause and further transition planning, would be taken up later in the process.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh so uh this bill is we want data.
• </c> &gt;&gt; House Bill 593, an act relating to data &gt;&gt; House Bill 593, an act relating to data
• They are absolutely data centers.
• </c> high electric bills because of data high electric bills because of data center<00:24:02.240><c>
• </c><02:57:48.080><c> House</c> Administrative Regulations. House Administrative Regulations.

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> algorithm works uh, because certain data algorithm works uh, because certain data inputs<00:42:25.080
• </c><00:42:45.960><c> without</c> problems, but we're regulating without problems, but we're regulating
• Sounds knowing what we're regulating.
• ,</c> identify what is it we're regulating, identify what is it we're regulating, how<00:43:04.320><c
• </c> makes us the agency who is regulating. makes us the agency who is regulating.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 2455, HD2, relating to employment practices. Testimony was limited, with support from the Hawaii State Commission on the Status of Women and UPW; the committee noted nine support, zero opposition, and zero comments. No vote was taken on this bill during the portion provided. The committee then took up House Bill 2165, HD2, relating to the Hawaii Employment Security Law. DLIR supported the measure but requested an amendment moving language in Section 2 from subsection A to subsection C to preserve the legal structure. Members questioned DLIR about a January 8 U.S. Department of Labor letter and whether the bill would keep Hawaii in conformity with federal unemployment insurance requirements. DLIR said the federal guidance requires the state to remove the carve-out for labor-dispute claimants, though unions with hiring halls and members in good standing could still be exempt from work-search requirements under an authorized list. UNITE HERE Local 5 opposed the bill and said the current law already gives the department discretion to exempt striking workers. The committee recessed the bill before any final action was taken in the portion shown. In the joint hearing with Commerce and Consumer Protection, the committees heard House Bill 1509, HD2, relating to workers’ compensation. DLIR supported the bill, DHER offered comments and requested an amendment, UPW supported it, and one Zoom testifier described personal experience with delayed care and urged faster decisions. After testimony, the committees voted to pass the bill with amendments. The adopted amendments restored the 7-day treatment-plan deadline from 10 days, changed the effective date to January 1, 2077, and struck the proposed $500 fine for employers who fail to respond within 10 days. Back in the Labor and Technology agenda, the committee heard House Bill 1515, HD2, also relating to workers’ compensation, with testimony noting seven in support, one in opposition, and one comment, but no action was taken in the excerpt. The committee also heard House Bill 1514, HD2, relating to workers’ compensation vocational rehabilitation plans. A Zoom testifier opposed the bill, arguing the 120-day timeline was unrealistic for complex cases. DLIR said the bill would give the director discretion to extend the vocational rehabilitation plan timeline beyond 120 days with no cap on extensions, and the committee noted five support, four opposition, and zero comments. Finally, the committee began House Bill 2458, HD3, relating to surveillance pricing. OCP said it stood on written testimony, while supporters argued the bill would prevent corporations from using personal data to set prices, especially for groceries. Retail and grocery interests opposed the measure, saying it was too broad and could restrict loyalty programs, promotions, and discounts; one witness asked that a loyalty-program exemption be restored.

Transcript Highlights:

• Inaccurate and incomplete data limits the Liquor and Cannabis Board's capacity for data-driven regulation
• RAND used other data from LCB, data from other sources, and made assumptions where no data was available
• RAND used other data from LCB, data from other sources, and made assumptions where no data was available
• We also found that LCB's data system does not support a data-driven approach to regulation.
• Until this time, LCB will likely continue to have incomplete and unreliable data with which to regulate

Summary: At the May 14, 2025 JLARC meeting, members approved the January 9 minutes and adopted the 2025–27 biennial work plan with a minor typo correction. Staff reviewed the new work plan studies, including a drug take-back program fee/expenditure review due in December 2025 and a state energy performance standard compliance review due in June 2027, and noted JLARC’s recent session activity, including several bills passed related to JLARC work and recommendations. The committee then heard a preliminary cannabis market study showing Washington businesses likely produced two to three times more cannabis than retailers sold in 2023. Staff and RAND said LCB’s data systems are incomplete and unreliable, limiting regulation, tax verification, and diversion tracking; they recommended that LCB submit a plan by year-end for collecting accurate data by the end of 2026. Members and LCB discussed the long timeline for a new traceability system, the causes of missing sales and weight data, overproduction, diversion, and the social equity program’s effect on producer licenses. JLARC also presented a preliminary hospital oversight report concluding that the Department of Health is late on many hospital inspections, does not verify third-party inspection standards, does not review adverse health event correction plans, and could make hospital data more accessible. The committee discussed fee funding, language access, and inspection timing, and DOH said it would work on a strategic plan and continue coordinating with JLARC. Members also heard a preliminary report on the public records survivor exemption, which found agencies are using it but need more guidance; JLARC recommended keeping the exemption and having the Attorney General provide additional training. Finally, the committee approved the DDA processes and staffing final report for distribution, which recommended performance metrics, stronger data quality controls, and workforce planning; DDA concurred. JLARC also introduced proposed study questions for a future DCYF juvenile rehabilitation review focused on safety, security, programs, staffing, education, and contraband, and the meeting adjourned after members asked about scope and facility conditions.

Transcript Highlights:

• I mean, everybody knows that data is prevalent.
• I have lived in a data environment for 30 years where we are regulated based on personally identifiable
• data.
• In general, if you are already regulated, we do not want to come in and re-regulate something that you're
• In data, we call it CRUD: Create, Update, Delete.

Keywords: 923, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's time to regulate and but verify.
• The time to regulate and enforce is now.
• The time to regulate and enforce is now.
• The time to regulate and enforce over. The time to regulate and enforce is<00:06:43.840><c> now.
• How does data collection work?

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• , and to comply with all those regulations of the state.
• All those regulations of the state, it will cost them money.
• And the regulations are important. Clean air is important.
• new data, looking at the net margin data that we are now able to analyze, and also weighing in on some
• California already has hundreds of data centers on our system.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:17:15.400><c> to</c> thing that needs to be uh regulated to thing that needs to be uh regulated
• </c><00:19:16.320><c> profession</c> that of the regulated profession that of the regulated profession
• </c> and their clients to poorly defined data and their clients to poorly defined data collection<00:
• I went ahead and queried CDC data.
• The CDC is collecting data.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The joint House Committee on Health and Committee on Consumer Protection and Commerce heard two midwifery bills, with testimony focused primarily on HB 1194. Committee chairs opened the hearing with rules for Zoom testimony and noted the bills relate to midwives. The Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs said it supported the intent of HB 1194 and offered comments. Supporters of the bill, including the Midwives Alliance of Hawaii, argued that midwifery should remain subject to mandatory licensure to protect consumer safety, citing the state’s regulatory licensing standards and a 2025 state auditor sunset analysis. They said the bill would strengthen educational standards and public protection, and some offered clarifying amendments. Opponents argued HB 1194 would restrict access to care and fail to protect traditional, cultural, and community-based birth practices. Testifiers from the Hawaii Home Birth Task Force, the Hawaii Home Birth Collective, the Libertarian Party of Hawaii, the Center for Reproductive Rights, Pacific Birth Collective, and Papa Ola Lōkahi said the bill would limit licensure pathways, reduce access in rural and underserved areas, and burden Native Hawaiian and traditional practitioners. Several speakers said the measure could worsen Hawaii’s maternal health shortages, especially on Maui, and urged lawmakers to defer HB 1194 or instead advance HB 1328, which they said better protects practitioner access and cultural practices. The Hawaii affiliate of the American College of Nurse-Midwives said it opposed HB 1194 because it did not align with national or state standards for certified midwives and could create conflicts with Medicaid reimbursement and prescriptive authority. The ACLU also opposed the measure, emphasizing reproductive rights, privacy, and the need to preserve apprenticeship pathways to licensure. No vote or final committee action was taken during the portion of the hearing reflected in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, data centers' number two concern is data center and grid buildout timeline mismatches.
• </c> one hypers scale size data center. one hypers scale size data center.
• data centers to come online.
• data centers to come online.
• </c> ease in regulation to allow these data ease in regulation to allow these data centers<00:25:33.760

Keywords: Meeting Start - 00:00 Roll Call – 00:15 Approval of Minutes of the July 15, 2025, Meeting 00:55 Helping Power Kentucky’s Growth – 01:25 Powering and Deploying AI – 41:00 Fueling America’s Intelligence – 56:12 Adjournment – 01:10:37, 958, all

Summary: The Artificial Intelligence Task Force met with a quorum, adopted prior meeting minutes, and then focused on energy policy and economic development as they relate to AI and data centers. John Bevington of LG&E and KU, introduced by Caroline Clark of LG&E/KU and PPL, described the utility’s Kentucky-only service territory, vertically integrated system, 1.3 million customers, and about 7.5 gigawatts of generating capacity. He said the company has supported 76 Kentucky projects in 2024 totaling about $3 billion in announced investment and roughly 3,000 jobs, with a large share of statewide announcements occurring in its service area. Bevington said LG&E and KU’s current project pipeline is unusually strong, totaling about 170 projects and 8.5 gigawatts of requested power, with data centers accounting for about two-thirds of that demand. He broke the pipeline into existing customer expansions, new-to-Kentucky projects, and 20 data center projects representing about 5.6 gigawatts of potential load. He highlighted a Louisville data center project by PO Development Company and Powerhouse Data Centers that has announced a 400-megawatt facility and may expand to 525 megawatts, estimating that such a project could represent about $4 billion in investment. He also explained that large data centers generally must locate near transmission lines and that utilities must conduct studies, order long-lead equipment, and secure reimbursement commitments before proceeding so other customers are not harmed. Members asked about how Kentucky compares with other states, the size of data center projects, and whether regulatory reform is needed. Bevington said the 20 projects reflect current Kentucky interest, which he attributed in part to the state’s sales tax exemption for data centers, and noted that states like Ohio have had similar incentives for years. In response to questions from Senator Thomas, he confirmed that data centers can vary in size and said the state should have a regulatory environment that supports economic development, while emphasizing that the benefits would flow to the state, local communities, and schools rather than just the utility. He also cited national and regional data suggesting data centers generate indirect jobs and tax revenue, and said LG&E and KU are investing in transmission, reliability, solar, and gas generation projects, including proposed additional 645-megawatt natural gas units and other system upgrades, to meet expected demand.

Transcript Highlights:

• ><c> I'll</c><00:10:43.519><c> again</c> somewhat self-regulated, but I'll again somewhat self-regulated
• I'm sure it's a real issue. >> Yeah, I mean data on it. >> I got all kinds of data.
• </c> study the environmental impact of data study the environmental impact of data centers.
• </c> data, what is large is not even defined. data, what is large is not even defined.
• </c> &gt;&gt; Any data will be helpful. Thank you. &gt;&gt; Any data will be helpful. Thank you.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The hearing focused on House Bill 1281, which would establish standards and voluntary certification for agency-owned “facility comfort dogs” used by police and other public safety agencies. Representative Morton, the prime sponsor, said the bill is intended to create a consistent statewide framework because different departments currently use different policies. He emphasized that the bill is meant to distinguish comfort dogs from service animals, emotional support animals, and therapy dogs, and noted that a small amendment may be needed to make that distinction clearer. He also said the bill is timely under the ADA because comfort dogs fall outside service-animal protections, but still need training standards for public safety and consistency. Committee members questioned whether the bill was too detailed and whether the legislature should be setting rules on matters like training methods, diet, and breeding. Laura Barker of Hero Pups, who helped train New Hampshire’s first police comfort dog, supported the idea of a minimum standard but said the bill should be less prescriptive and should not interfere with therapy dogs or private handlers. She explained that comfort dogs vary in temperament and deployment needs, that raw diets raise zoonotic disease concerns, and that the program should remain voluntary and not cost the state money. Detective Michelle Jones of Portsmouth Police opposed the bill as written, saying the term “facility comfort dog” is confusing, the bill is overly restrictive, and some provisions go beyond what should be mandated by statute; she suggested a more flexible, guideline-based approach and noted that departments already have their own SOPs and can enforce them internally. Justin Brassen of the Manchester Police Department also testified, describing the history of comfort dog programs in New Hampshire and the work of a prior subcommittee formed through the governor’s commission on PTSD among first responders. He said there are currently no statewide standards and that the earlier study involved police, fire, EMS, dispatch, corrections, and NAMI New Hampshire, with the goal of creating a thoughtful work product. He agreed the bill needs work and answered questions about how departments handle training and public access. By the end of the hearing, members and witnesses discussed possible amendments, and one committee member suggested the bill may be better handled through interim study because of the amount of work still needed.

Transcript Highlights:

• No matter what, we hope that the regulators, of course, will ensure that proper regulations take place
• We have gear and crew regulations.
• All the data I'm going to show is the data we collected at the university here unless I'll mention otherwise
• All the data I'm going to show is the data we collected at the university here unless I'll mention otherwise
• That's not just an economic data point.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The joint hearing focused on the Massachusetts sea scallop fishery, especially the economic importance of the industry, federal scallop management, and two policy questions: reopening the Northern Edge area on Georges Bank and allowing permit stacking/permit consolidation. Chairing senators emphasized their interest in hearing both sides, their frustration with federal bureaucracy, and their view that the issue should be guided by science while protecting the long-term resource and local communities. Dr. Kate O’Keefe of the New England Fishery Management Council and Kevin Stokesbury of UMass Dartmouth described the Magnuson-Stevens framework, annual catch limits, rotational area management, and the role of industry-funded surveys and the research set-aside program. They said scallops remain the most lucrative council-managed commercial fishery on the East Coast, but recent changes include more small scallops, lower biomass in some areas, higher natural mortality, and shifting abundance toward Georges Bank. On the Northern Edge, they explained that the council previously considered opening the area through a framework/joint action with habitat management, but discontinued the action in 2024 because of conflicting objectives involving scallop yield, habitat protection, and other species. They said the issue could be revisited through future council priority-setting. Representatives of the Sustainable Scalloping Fund argued that the fishery needs modernization to remain economically viable. They supported reopening the Northern Edge and strongly backed permit stacking, saying it would allow two permits on one vessel while keeping ownership caps in place, reducing costs, improving safety, and helping family-owned fleets avoid financial distress and outside investment. Port of New Bedford representative John Regan stressed the port’s central role in the state economy, the need to protect working waterfront infrastructure, and the importance of any permit changes preserving local ownership and participation. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational, and members asked that the witnesses keep the committee informed as the council and federal agencies consider next steps.

Transcript Highlights:

• And as scientists, what we want is just the data.
• So we can see that the regulations are changing.
• It's data-driven and research-based.
• We have to get a handle not just on one regulation, but on the overall way in which we write regulations
• Can we use that data better? And can we develop more...

Summary: The Senate Select Committee on California’s Wine Industry held its first meeting at Napa Valley College, with Chair Christopher Cabaldon and Assembly Majority Leader Cecilia Aguiar-Curry opening the hearing by stressing the wine industry’s importance to California’s economy, communities, and tourism. They said the purpose of the hearing was informational rather than legislative, with no votes or bill actions taken, and framed the day as a fact-finding session to inform future legislation, budget work, and oversight. The first panel focused on research and trends, with Dr. Damien Wilson of Sonoma State, UC Davis professor Ben Mumpeteet, and wine economist Chris Bitter describing the industry as facing structural change rather than a temporary downturn. The research panel highlighted falling wine production and sales, rising costs, and changing consumer behavior. Wilson argued the industry has relied too heavily on premiumization and technical elitism, pricing out younger consumers and needing to focus more on new customer acquisition, accessible brands, and evidence-based business decisions. Mumpeteet emphasized external threats such as grapevine diseases, extreme weather, water shortages, and wildfire smoke, and called for more public investment in viticulture and enology research, especially through California’s university system. Bitter said growers are dealing with depressed grape demand, a grape glut, vineyard removals, and sharply higher production costs driven largely by regulation and labor, and he urged review of regulatory costs, trade conditions, vineyard removal support, and barriers to replanting. Committee members then asked about how the industry can adapt, whether change will come through existing producers or market turnover, and how California might use its research capacity to improve regulation and compliance. Witnesses said the industry needs cultural change, better marketing to younger consumers, more data on health and consumption trends, and more efficient, science-based regulation. The second panel, with representatives from growers and the Wine Institute, described severe market stress: unharvested grapes, vineyard removals, and closures in some regions. Michael Miller said growers are seeing fruit left on the vine and called for relief on regulatory and trade pressures, while Honor Comfort described Wine Institute’s Share Wine Co-Lab, an open-access marketing platform aimed at helping wineries reach younger consumers through digital and data-driven strategies. A final panel addressed tourism, farmworkers, and water regulation. Visit Napa Valley’s Lindsay Gallagher said Napa remains relatively strong but is broadening its message beyond wine to cuisine, wellness, and outdoor experiences, while noting international visitation, especially from Canada, has fallen sharply. Sonia DeLuca of the Napa Valley Farmworker Foundation said declining sales and rising costs reduce hours and income for farmworkers and called for targeted relief, wage-loss support, and continued workforce training. Annalisa Kiara of the State Water Board provided an update on the Winery General Order, explaining that it was created to streamline and standardize wastewater permitting while protecting water quality; she said 56 wineries have enrolled and 122 more are under review, and noted ongoing coordination with industry sustainability programs. Throughout the hearing, members and witnesses repeatedly returned to the need for updated regulations, better data, and collaborative solutions, but no formal action was taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• Work with the regulators in a more collaborative way.
• Let's also get real by changing the law and regulation.
• We share the data from the AI smoke-detecting cameras, We share the data from the AI smoke-detecting
• data and recent history of fire behavior patterns.
• So year over year, we're generating these data products.

Summary: The committee first heard updates on the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) and related funding. Department of Ecology staff explained how MTCA and the hazardous substance tax support cleanup, prevention, stormwater, and local assistance programs, but said forecasted revenues have declined while appropriations and transfers have outpaced incoming funds. Ecology said the operating account will require underspending to stay balanced this biennium and that the problem is ongoing, with further reductions possible if forecasts worsen. Ecology also reviewed the state cleanup program, noting there are more than 14,500 cleanup sites in Washington and that new sites continue to be discovered faster than they are cleaned up. A question from Representative Lee raised the long-term issue of declining fossil-fuel-based revenue, and Ecology agreed that this is a future structural concern even though the current shortfall is driven more by forecasts and transfers than by fuel-use decline. The Pollution Liability Insurance Agency described its underground storage tank and heating oil programs, saying it has modernized from a reinsurance model to a financial assurance model with stronger state oversight and cleanup milestones. Russ Olson said the agency’s dedicated petroleum tax account is in strong financial condition, but emphasized the importance of preserving that funding source. He also discussed the loan and grant program for historic commercial releases and a new heating oil loan/grant program, while noting the agency is working on equity concerns where liens can be disproportionate to property values in smaller communities. Practitioners and advocates then offered differing views on MTCA’s performance: one attorney urged a collaborative review process to make cleanups faster, less expensive, and more certain, while another consultant argued the program is too conservative and process-heavy and should focus more narrowly on actual exposure and realistic cleanup standards. Environmental and community groups countered that MTCA is essential for cleanup, pollution prevention, stormwater control, and public participation, and that it is especially important for environmental justice communities such as the Duwamish Valley. Port and city representatives stressed that MTCA grants and cleanup funding are critical for large redevelopment projects, but said long timelines, permitting delays, and funding uncertainty can slow projects and jeopardize commitments. The committee then shifted to utility wildfire risk. Staff summarized recent legislation, including requirements for utility wildfire mitigation plans, creation of a wildfire mitigation standards work group, authorization for captive insurance by local governments and PUDs, securitization authority for disaster costs, and the existing wildfire response and resilience account. Chelan County PUD and Puget Sound Energy described extensive mitigation efforts such as vegetation management, grid hardening, undergrounding, AI smoke cameras, weather stations, enhanced operating settings, public safety power shutoffs, and community outreach. Both said wildfire risk is rising and insurance costs are increasing, and Chelan PUD asked the Legislature to restore funding to the wildfire response and resilience account. The Office of the Insurance Commissioner said a 2022 utility liability market study found insurance availability is tightening as perceived risk rises, and reported that a 2025 work group recommended restoring community resilience funding, requiring insurers to share wildfire risk scores and mitigation steps with property owners, and creating a grant program based on insurance industry wildfire standards. A PNNL scientist added that wildfire probability is increasing in parts of Washington and that mitigation requires long-term, landscape-scale coordination. The final speaker began describing California’s approach to wildfire risk, but the transcript cuts off before that presentation concluded.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill is not asking credit unions to submit current data.
• I don't know where regulations create incentives. To me, really, regulations create disincentives.
• Work, so I'm trying to understand what a regulation is going to do.
• A lot more regulations.
• If they've already had the data and they could produce the data that shows that they are investing at

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But within the United States, the regulated market is pretty limited and pretty well regulated.
• market is pretty limited and pretty well regulated.
• There is this reporting of data from a lot of different sources.
• And that data, those data are really compiled in a lot of different places.
• But that data collection could be expanded.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The special commission on xylazine met virtually to review and discuss the first draft of its final report. Chair Mindy Domb opened the meeting, confirmed quorum, and the commission approved the minutes from its December 11 public meeting. Staff then walked commissioners through the proposed report structure, including background on xylazine as both an FDA-approved veterinary drug and an illicit drug supply contaminant, as well as appendices for public meeting materials and public resources. The commission discussed findings and recommendations for several working groups. For oversight and enforcement, members focused on licit versus illicit sources of xylazine, noting that the illicit supply is typically obtained through online vendors rather than diverted from veterinary use. Recommendations included better storage and reporting practices in authorized settings, review of manufacturing and distribution information, and focusing enforcement on fentanyl trafficking and large-scale xylazine importation rather than personal possession. Commissioners also discussed whether xylazine should remain in Schedule 6 or be subject to additional penalties, and several members emphasized the need for coordination, information-sharing, and possibly a DPH task force or advisory body to monitor emerging drug threats. For outreach and treatment, staff summarized strong existing programs such as drug checking, wound care education, naloxone distribution, mobile and low-threshold care, and self-directed wound kits, while noting gaps including the lack of an FDA-approved reversal agent for xylazine, difficulty distinguishing xylazine from other exposures, and uneven access by geography, insurance, and audience. Commissioners stressed the need for provider education, including physicians, nurses, pharmacists, family support networks, and first responders, and for clear guidance on wound care and when more intensive treatment is needed. The education and training section identified first responders, clinicians, non-clinicians, and people who use drugs and their families as key audiences for tailored, stigma-free materials, with emphasis on real-time, centralized data, naloxone and breathing support, recognition of overdose versus xylazine exposure, and adapting materials as the drug supply changes. The meeting ended with discussion of next steps: staff will circulate a revised draft by March 2, the commission will meet again on March 9 to consider the report and recommendations, and an additional late-March meeting was reserved if needed before the statutory deadline.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> &gt;&gt; So if you need data &gt;&gt; So if you need data the<01:01:26.319><c> data</c><01:01:26.640
• </c><01:24:40.960><c> Um,</c> data, so that's pretty recent. Um, data, so that's pretty recent.
• There’s a lot of data out there.
• </c> charge of regulating gaming. charge of regulating gaming.
• </c> regulator in the country. Yes, sir. regulator in the country. Yes, sir.

Bills: HB2118, HB2473

Keywords: business development, arts, cultural affairs, Hawaii, commissions, administrative transfer, funding appropriation, Hawaiian culture, sense of place, land management, environmental stewardship, cultural preservation, 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard several bills related to permitting and economic development. On HB 2603, relating to permits, the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development said it supported the measure with comments. Committee discussion focused on the fact that the state’s facilitated permit process appears to have been rarely or never used, the need to identify specific projects that would use it, and whether DBEDT would need dedicated staffing to administer it. DBEDT said it had found no projects under the current process, had no capacity to run the program as structured, and estimated it would need about 7 to 9 FTEs, including permitting, coordination, data, systems, and possibly legal support. The chair suggested exploring a staff assignment and comparing the concept to federal FAST-41-style expedited permitting. On HB 2140, relating to essential permitting positions, the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development again supported the bill with comments. Testimony and questioning centered on a pilot program to help counties pay competitively for permitting staff. A DBEDT representative said the issue of competitive pay affected both county and state permitting offices and that the bill was intended as a temporary pilot, though a more permanent solution would be preferable. When asked how counties would fund the salary support, the witness said that was not yet discussed with the counties and agreed to follow up. The committee also noted the bill applies to participating counties. On HB 2598, relating to the Hawaii Technology Development Corporation, the State Procurement Office and HTDC offered comments, and the Department of the Attorney General raised constitutional concerns. The AG said the bill’s residency-based certification requirements, when tied to procurement, could implicate the dormant Commerce Clause, and that the required 1% contribution tied to state contracts raised unconstitutional-conditions concerns. In questioning, the AG characterized these as legal risks rather than automatic lawsuits. The committee did not take a vote. The committee then heard HB 2141, relating to state enterprise zones. Taxation, DBEDT, HCDA, the University of Hawaii Cancer Center, and HTDC testified in support, while the Tax Foundation noted the program was intended to help economically depressed areas create jobs. HTDC said the bill would help preserve the Maui Research and Technology Center’s enterprise-zone status after rezoning. Committee discussion focused on whether the enterprise zone program is being used effectively, how the bill might attract businesses to areas where the state is investing, and whether the program’s labor requirements are too burdensome for new businesses. DBEDT explained that the program requires a 10% workforce increase in the first year, which must be sustained, and said it promotes the program through county coordinators and in-person outreach. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion provided.