Transcript Highlights:

• By keeping these organics out of the landfills and using them for energy, we are producing a reduction
• We have a 100% waste reduction by 2030.
• Um, the facility does have a greenhouse gas reduction as well of about 30,000 metric tons of CO2E per
• So that’s the other kind of benefit is the GHG reductions to the facility that might be part of that
• <00:38:01.680> in with respect to the the reduction in with respect to the the reduction in

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• <04:41:58.360> when charging us for our free pollution when charging us for our free pollution
• New Hampshire should be anticipating a federal carbon price, a price on pollution.
• um there's good ways to do pollution um there's good ways to do this<04:45:26.120> that<04:45
• The environmental benefits: reduction of greenhouse gases by setting energy efficiency standards for
• the environment it's going to pollute the environment it's going to rot<05:10:00.480> the<05:

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 216, which Representative Carol Maguire described as a fix to a workers’ compensation/retirement “glitch.” The bill would remove the current limit that only one year of workers’ compensation time can be credited as retirement service time. Maguire argued the limit is arbitrary and affects only a very small number of grievously injured workers, while committee members asked about the fiscal impact, available data, and whether the change could affect workers’ compensation rates or incentives. Mark Kavar of the New Hampshire Retirement System said Labor could not provide data on how many people exceed a year on weekly indemnity benefits, so the fiscal note used a conservative estimate that could be scaled down; he also explained that workers’ comp is not earnable compensation, which is why service credit stops after a year, and noted that many long-term cases move into disability retirement or lump-sum settlements. The committee closed the hearing, entered executive session, and voted ought to pass on HB 216 by a 13-0 roll call, sending it to consent and noting it would also go to Finance. The committee then acted on House Bill 85, adopting Amendment 0037 and then voting ought to pass as amended by another 13-0 roll call. The bill was described as allowing second-year respiratory therapy students to work under supervision using the skills they have already learned, with support from the Hospital Association and no opposition noted. Finally, the committee took up House Bill 267, the animal chiropractors bill. Members said the bill had been approved previously but was vetoed because of a defect; the problem has now been corrected, and the bill is intended to reduce delays caused by requiring veterinary referrals before chiropractors can treat animals. The committee voted ought to pass 13-0 and placed the bill on consent.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:25:08.559> and<00:25:08.760> habitat potential pollution and habitat potential
• pollution and habitat disruption<00:25:11.039> the<00:25:11.200> local<00:25:11.480>
• Some of that is for community risk reduction programs, and it would be part of that, but some of that
• that is for Community risk reduction that is for Community risk reduction programs<02:50:30.840>
• different land uses and risk reduction different land uses and risk reduction on<02:50:40.560>

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard three House bills related to the Department of Hawaiian Homelands. HB 606 would extend the Act 279 special fund to June 30, 2028, continue deposits and appropriations to help eliminate the DHHL waitlist, and require a strategic plan and annual reporting. DHHL strongly supported the measure, saying most of the initial $600 million had been used and that the need remains large, with more than 29,000 people on the waitlist. Public testimony also supported the bill, emphasizing its importance to Native Hawaiian families and concerns about Hawaiians leaving the islands because of housing costs. A member noted the bill is a priority and that the committee will keep working on how to fund another $600 million. HB 1086 would exempt DHHL homestead lot and housing development from general excise and use taxes. DHHL supported the bill, saying any tax savings would reduce the eventual cost of housing for low-income beneficiaries. The Department of Taxation said it could administer the measure and noted it is already being implemented under the governor’s emergency proclamation, with a proposed effective date of January 1, 2026. The Tax Foundation of Hawaii offered technical comments and urged the committee to weigh existing benefits already received by DHHL beneficiaries. HB 1307 would appropriate funds for DHHL water well development and geothermal exploration on Hawaiian homelands. DHHL said the bill is a follow-up to prior study funding and would support slim-hole drilling, site evaluation, and consultant work to identify viable geothermal resources, especially on Hawaiʻi Island. Several testifiers opposed the bill, arguing there had been inadequate beneficiary consultation, raising environmental, cultural, and safety concerns, and objecting to using $20 million for geothermal rather than housing. In response to committee questions, DHHL staff explained that the goal is to gather information for a future public-private partnership to develop geothermal electricity, and that a Chapter 343 environmental review would be required later in the process. No votes were taken during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• It followed the state's investment in treatment, recovery, prevention, and harm reduction.
• <01:28:06.400> in<01:28:06.639> the decisions and reductions in the decisions and reductions
• recovery, housing, and harm reductions recovery, housing, and harm reductions approaches<01:39:29.600
• ,<01:54:57.760> all<01:54:57.920> these<01:54:58.239> all regulation, pollution
• , all these all regulation, pollution, all these all these<01:54:59.199> all<01:54:59.440>

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Residents live with a constant risk of toxic emissions, heavy metal pollution, and fires that release
• I believe it's important to pass now rather than waiting until pollution gets worse to take action.
• It allows for aggregation of township data so that you don't even know where the pollution is coming
• Those are used for our most polluted water water water.
• Those are used for our most polluted waterways—the waterways that are too polluted to swim, fish, or

Summary: The committee heard SB 404 on metal shredding facilities, SB 601 on water quality protections after the U.S. Supreme Court’s Sackett decision, SB 682 on phasing out PFOS in certain consumer products, and later SB 646 on prenatal vitamins and toxic metal contamination. SB 561 had been pulled from the hearing. In each of the measures, the authors and supporters emphasized environmental and public health protections, while opponents raised concerns about overregulation, implementation, and unintended economic impacts. The committee also spent time on the policy details of each bill, including how smaller operators would be treated under SB 404, how “nexus waters” would be defined under SB 601, and whether alternatives and testing standards were adequate under SB 682 and SB 646. For SB 404, Senator Caballero said the bill would create a permitting and enforcement framework for metal shredding facilities, with operational standards for fire prevention, stormwater, and releases of shredder residue, while supporters argued it would bring needed certainty to a critical recycling industry. Opponents, including small recyclers and community/environmental advocates, said the bill was either too broad or not strong enough, with some warning it would burden smaller facilities and others arguing it would fail to protect overburdened communities. The committee approved SB 404 on a due-pass-as-amended motion to Appropriations, with recorded support from the chair and some members and opposition from others. SB 601 sought to restore state-level protections for waters that lost federal Clean Water Act coverage after Sackett, using a “nexus waters” framework and revised enforcement provisions after amendments removed the private right of action. Supporters said California needed to preserve protections for seasonal streams and wetlands and avoid backsliding, while opponents from business, agriculture, water districts, and local governments argued the definition remained too broad and could create uncertainty, costs, and unintended consequences. The committee also approved SB 601 on a due-pass motion to Appropriations, again with split votes. SB 682, which the committee also advanced, would phase out intentionally added PFOS in six product categories, including cleaning products, cookware, dental floss, ski wax, food packaging, and juvenile products, with an amendment delaying cookware implementation until 2030. Supporters framed it as a source-control measure to reduce PFAS contamination and lower long-term water treatment costs, while manufacturers and cookware interests argued the bill was overbroad, lacked workable testing standards, and could push consumers and businesses toward uncertain alternatives. The committee chair recommended an aye vote, and the measure passed to Appropriations. SB 646 was then introduced on prenatal vitamins, with supporters saying it would require testing and disclosure of heavy metals like lead, arsenic, cadmium, and mercury, while the opposition said disclosure must be handled carefully so as not to confuse consumers or undermine confidence in prenatal supplements.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, it removes a requirement for the 2038 residential energy code to achieve the 70% reduction in annual
• It protects lives by reducing air pollution and by adding hours of safety in emergencies. from writing
• whole task force around insurance, and one of the biggest drivers of that is climate change and polluters
• Um, it was around permits and, uh, public health, you know, are you seeing, with less pollution, increased

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: Representative Mecklin moved House File 3545 to the general register and offered a DE amendment that removed the commissioner’s authority to choose a more efficient standard and removed the requirement that the 2038 residential energy code achieve a 70% reduction in annual net energy consumption compared with the 2006 energy use index. The amendment was adopted, and the bill was then discussed as amended. Mecklin said the bill was intended to address home affordability, arguing that energy code requirements add to housing costs and make it harder for younger Minnesotans to buy homes. Several testifiers opposed the bill, including representatives from the Center for Energy and the Environment, AIA Minnesota, Sierra Club, Fresh Energy, Housing First Minnesota, and ARXUS. They argued that energy codes are not a primary driver of housing costs, that stronger codes do not slow housing production, and that more efficient homes lower utility bills and improve comfort, safety, resilience, and climate outcomes. Testifiers cited studies and examples showing payback over time, including estimates that efficiency upgrades could pay for themselves in five to nine years and save homeowners tens of thousands of dollars over 30 years. The Department of Labor and Industry said it had concerns about the bill because it would move away from a more energy-efficient standard and could create unintended consequences in the code adoption process, though it said the current technical advisory group process already considers cost concerns. Members questioned the cost and savings estimates, especially the comparison between higher upfront mortgage costs and lower utility bills. Fresh Energy explained that its figures were based on Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and Slipstream analyses using a typical Minnesota home and that the savings were modeled over time. Representative Johnson expressed skepticism about the assumptions behind the savings numbers and argued that utility costs are not the main barrier to homeownership. The chair said the committee intended to take a vote on the bill that day, but the transcript ends before any final vote or disposition is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• There have been concerns about water use, pollution, and tax incentives.
• So it's not actually the hours that matter, but it's the limits on pollution.
• <01:31:36.320> control process that the pollution control process that the pollution control
• limits we think that come with pollution limits we think that actually<01:33:09.040> pollution
• be below the limit set by the pollution be below the limit set by the pollution control<01:49:24.119

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill uses taxpayer money to support a foreign industry that makes it easier for them to pollute
• In Gloucester, the air pollution and noise pollution is devastating.
• In Louisiana alone, this company was fined $3.2 million for pollution violations in 2022.
• Canadians paying the health costs associated with increased exposure to industrial pollution.
• There were still penalties for permitting and pollution issues at that plant. Okay.

Summary: The Senate Commerce Committee met on May 13 with a quorum present and approved the prior meeting minutes. The committee then heard and advanced a series of House bills, many of them described as modernization or consumer-protection measures. HB 555, as amended, expands the definition of financial exploitation under the Protection of Eligible Adults from Financial Exploitation Act, adds training and transaction-delay provisions for financial institutions, and was reported favorably after technical and substantive amendments. HB 1166 creates a disclosure form for vacant residential property transactions and was also reported favorably. HB 267, which changes how candidates for the Louisiana Board of Home Inspectors are submitted to the governor, and HB 1195, which updates rules and penalties for athletic contests, exhibitions, and sports-agent/NIL regulation, were each moved favorably without objection. The committee also advanced several licensing and regulatory bills. HB 917 modernizes life safety and property protection licensing by reducing burdens on some employees and moving to a three-year license cycle; it was reported favorably. HB 1230 overhauls Louisiana’s money transmission laws, replacing older statutes with a new framework for digital payments and stronger consumer protections; a technical amendment was adopted and the bill was reported as amended. HB 1103, described as opening Louisiana for business in certain commerce areas, was reported favorably. HB 478 requires utility bills to clearly label and reimburse overcharges within 90 days and was reported favorably. HB 1096 gives electric cooperatives an opt-out from a prior law allowing boards to amend bylaws without member approval, and HB 921 modernizes private security licensing while restoring penalties for unlicensed activity; both were reported favorably, with HB 921 amended. HB 548 adds CPA licensure pathways to help address shortages, especially in rural areas, and was also reported favorably. Several bills drew more extensive discussion. HB 670 would promote wood pellet manufacturing and related workforce development; supporters argued it could create jobs and help manage timber waste, while an opponent warned about pollution, environmental violations, and the risks of biomass facilities. Committee members raised concerns about permitting and environmental oversight, but the bill was ultimately reported favorably, with discussion of possible follow-up with DEQ. HB 259, dealing with BEAD broadband projects, extends notice requirements before excavation, requires coordination with utility operators, and addresses damage reimbursement; an amendment was adopted and the bill was reported as amended. HB 848 clarifies repair obligations for ATV and golf cart sellers, aiming to ensure consumers have meaningful repair access and to level the playing field between small dealers and big-box retailers; it was reported favorably after questions about enforcement and service requirements. The committee also heard HB 672 and HB 670 as economic-development measures tied to brick manufacturing and wood pellets, respectively, and both were moved favorably. At the end of the meeting, the chair announced that remaining bills would be carried over to the following week, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're concerned about the reduction of the time to file from 120 days to 30, and think that's a pretty
• Um, we're concerned<00:04:10.799> about<00:04:11.040> the<00:04:11.280> reduction
• ><00:04:11.599> of<00:04:11.760> the concerned about the reduction of the concerned about
• the reduction of the time<00:04:12.239> to<00:04:12.480> file<00:04:12.879> from
• As one of the co-founders of an organization working to end the fossil fuel pollution damaging our climate

Bills: HB1979

Keywords: environmental review, affordable housing, clean energy, judicial proceedings, public participation, Hawaii Revised Statutes, 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 1979 HD3, which would shorten the time to file certain judicial challenges to environmental assessments and environmental impact statements for affordable housing and clean energy projects, and would also affect transfer of some environmental court appeals to the Supreme Court. The Office of Planning and Sustainable Development supported the amended bill, saying the changes were improved from earlier versions and that the shorter filing period was reasonable for these priority projects. Hawaii Gas asked that the bill’s clean energy definition be broadened to align with existing renewable energy law so emerging technologies like renewable hydrogen and renewable gas would be included. Kauai Island Utility Co-op and Greenpeace Hawaii testified in support and opposition, respectively, with supporters arguing the bill would reduce litigation uncertainty and opponents saying the shorter deadline would limit public participation and not solve the real causes of project delays. Opposition testimony came from the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Earthjustice, Sierra Club, 350 Hawaii, and others, who argued the bill could chill legitimate public-interest claims, especially where there is limited public notice, and that environmental review was being unfairly blamed for delays caused by permitting, financing, or infrastructure problems. Several speakers said the measure would reduce transparency and make it harder for communities to respond in time. One testifier from Earthjustice said the environmental review process itself is not the problem and should not be weakened for projects that still need public disclosure and community engagement. The committee then moved to decision-making and, citing the volume of opposition and concerns about public participation, transparency, and whether the bill would actually improve timelines, the chair deferred HB 1979 HD3 indefinitely. The hearing was adjourned after the vote decision was announced. The transcript then shifted to HB 2585, relating to tourism and statewide standards for agritourism. Testimony was mixed: farmers and agricultural groups described agritourism as essential to keeping small farms and ranches viable, while also urging safeguards so it would not be abused or displace real agricultural production. Some speakers warned the bill’s revenue-based limits could unintentionally shut down existing farm stays and related operations, especially in Maui County. The Hawaii Farm Bureau said it supported the intent but wanted clearer protections for bona fide agriculture and more flexibility around revenue requirements and force majeure situations. The discussion was still underway when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um preventable elements<00:51:46.480> of<00:51:46.640> pollution<00:51:47.040> such<
• /c><00:51:47.200> as<00:51:47.359> noise, elements of pollution such as noise, elements
• of pollution such as noise, smoke,<00:51:48.079> soot,<00:51:48.400> particulates<00:51
• That's a disproportionate reduction.
• , but I don't want to signal reductions in force.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Ways and Means Committee held a public hearing on Senate Bill 291, which would update religious land-use and property tax exemption rules for church-owned parsonages, parish houses, and similar properties. Senator Tim Lang, speaking for the sponsor, said the bill was intended to address situations where former parsonages are no longer occupied by clergy and are instead used for church-related purposes such as housing staff, religious education, or congregate living tied to ministry, including addiction recovery. He emphasized that the bill was not meant to create commercial rental housing and that it also preserves reasonable zoning and environmental regulations. Committee members pressed the sponsor on how the bill would be applied, especially the meaning of “religious purposes,” the six-unit limit, the “same lot” language, and whether churches could use the exemption to rent units for revenue. The sponsor said the six-unit cap was added to prevent large-scale commercial rental use, that congregate housing would be limited and defined, and that the bill was meant to cover uses like substance abuse recovery, homes for unwed mothers, and religious education, but not apartments converted for ordinary rental. He also said churches would still file annual exemption paperwork and towns could challenge claims they believed were commercial. Questions also raised concerns about whether the bill treated religious and nonreligious housing trusts differently; the sponsor responded that the bill was aimed at church-owned property used in pursuit of a religious mission. Several witnesses testified in support. Representative Mark Pearson, an active clergyman, said the bill would not remove additional property from the tax rolls because clergy housing allowances typically lead clergy to buy taxable homes elsewhere, while the church-owned parsonage remains exempt. Nick Taylor of Housing Action New Hampshire supported the bill as a modest expansion that could help create more attainable housing by allowing better use of existing religious land and structures, though he noted his organization would support even broader use. The hearing ended without a vote or final action, and the chair closed questions after the testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• for the Select Committee on Sea Level Rise and the California Economy hearing on infrastructure, pollution
• Of the Select Committee on Sea Level Rise and the California Economy, hearing on infrastructure, pollution
• Some of the issues we see with pollution and sea level rise are not ones that would immediately come
• We're not going to expose our kids to pollutants in the water, to bacteria.
• Pollution levels as well as when we think about sea level rise.

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

Transcript Highlights:

• including forest therapies with an emphasis on immersion in nature, had a significant effect on the reduction
• including forest therapies with an emphasis on immersion in nature, had a significant effect on the reduction
• Let alone what benefits you might get for air pollution.
• there<00:46:40.560> are<00:46:40.800> some<00:46:40.960> of air air pollution
• Uh there are some of air air pollution.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It impacts the Oil Discharge and Disposal Cleaning Fund as well as the Oil Pollution Control Fund, and
• It impacts the Oil Discharge and Disposal Cleaning Fund as well as the Oil Pollution Control Fund, and
• The Oil Pollution Control Fund, the other fund affected by this bill, is for the agencies' emergency
• Control fund the other fund Pollution Control fund the other fund that's<00:46:43.400> affected
• <01:33:12.679> Control uh oil uh disposal and Pollution Control uh oil uh disposal and Pollution

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first held a public hearing on HB 660, which would require historic horse racing facilities to provide 10% of HHR winnings to host municipalities as mitigation. Representative Om said the bill was intended to offset local costs associated with large gaming facilities, noting that prior gaming measures included opt-in provisions and that this proposal would leave charities and the state whole while taking the 10% from the operator’s share. Members questioned why 10% was chosen and whether municipalities were currently experiencing added costs; Om said the amount was meant to address projected future impacts, not broader municipal budget issues, and cited a study on casino-related community costs. Opponents from the New Hampshire Charitable Gaming Operators Association argued the bill unfairly singled out one industry and said gaming facilities do not impose more municipal burden than other entertainment venues. The hearing closed without a vote, and a member clarified the bill would apply to existing and future casinos/facilities. The committee then opened a hearing on HB 658-FN, which raises the cap on reimbursements from the Oil Discharge and Disposal Cleanup Fund and makes related changes to the Oil Pollution Control Fund. Representative Malloy introduced the bill, and Representative Aly described the funds as an insurance backstop for oil spill cleanup and low-income tank replacement, saying the program helps prevent environmental hazards and satisfies financial responsibility requirements. Bob Scully of the Energy Marketers Association supported the bill but noted that fee changes are ultimately passed on to consumers. Department of Environmental Services officials Robert Bishop and Jennifer Marts explained that the bill would change reporting deadlines, raise the reimbursement cap for low-income homeowners, extend the fee collection period for 10 years, and adjust petroleum import fees based on an actuarial review. They said the funds cover spill response, prevention, and tank replacement, and that the fee structure was designed to keep the funds solvent while balancing costs across fuel categories. Committee members asked about the actuarial basis for the fee changes, why some fees would rise while others would fall, and how the funds are used. DES said the review used 10 years of claims and exposure data and that the fuel oil fee would otherwise need to rise sharply, so the board proposed a smaller increase and rebalanced other fees. Members also asked about the scope of covered oil imports, and DES explained that the fee applies to oil destined for use in New Hampshire, not merely passing through the state. The discussion also covered home heating oil spills, which DES said are often discovered by homeowners or fire departments and are usually caused by tank corrosion, piping, or overfills. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the chair noted that the policy committee had already approved the bill before the finance-focused review.

Transcript Highlights:

• I have seen the polluting industries in Albuquerque South Valley, where my mother was raised.
• Protect streams from harmful chemicals and the severe danger of pollution projects.
• Animal populations are declining due to mining, lost habitat, and pollution.
• We should hold polluting industries 100% accountable for cleaning up their messes.
• Unfortunately, these three items have been Very polluted in our state.

Transcript Highlights:

• Denzel Hankinson: So let's take a look on the next slide, a closer look at the mechanics of cost reduction
• The chart at the top of the slide shows a 10% reduction in individual input variables and how those affect
• These cost reductions come from financing and tax savings, not from reductions in quality.
• These cost reductions come from financing and tax savings, not from reductions in quality.
• So it has a larger impact in terms of rate reduction because you're removing ...the equity portion of

Summary: The committee first heard AB 13, which would restructure the CPUC to increase legislative oversight, add legislative liaisons, require more detailed and timely reporting on rate-setting decisions, and add a public advocate member. The author and supporters argued the bill would improve transparency, accountability, and geographic diversity in CPUC decision-making amid rising utility rates. Witnesses from TURN, San Joaquin County, SDG&E, and former CPUC Commissioner Loretta Lynch offered support or support-in-principle, while no opposition testimony was presented. Members generally praised the bill’s transparency goals, and AB 13 passed 10-0 to Appropriations, with the roll left open for absent members. The committee then adopted the 2025-2026 committee rules and approved three consent items: AB 61, AB 365, and AB 406. The next bill, AB 99, would cap investor-owned utility rate increases above inflation except for specified costs such as safety, modernization, and fuel/commodity costs. The author and supporters, including a representative of the California Senior Legislature, said the bill was needed to protect ratepayers, especially seniors and low-income customers, from repeated rate hikes. Opposition came from utility labor, utilities, the Chamber of Commerce, and others, who argued the bill was too simplistic, could suppress labor costs, and did not account for major cost drivers such as wildfire mitigation, mandates, and net metering. Several members supported moving the bill forward as a starting point on affordability, while others criticized it as overly blunt. AB 99 passed 11-0 to Appropriations, with the roll left open. The hearing then shifted to an informational panel on strategies to reduce California transmission costs. A Public Advocates Office staffer described a growing backlog of approved-but-unbuilt transmission projects, rising transmission access charges, and long project timelines driven largely by utility pre-application and construction periods. Panelists from Net Zero California and consulting firms presented research suggesting that public financing or public-private partnership lease models could reduce transmission costs by lowering financing, tax, and capital costs, with estimated savings of up to 57% and as much as $123 billion over 40 years. PG&E’s representative said the utility is already pursuing federal loan guarantees, grants, and a public-private partnership with Citizens Energy, but warned that state ownership could create tax, wildfire-liability, and governance risks. Members asked about the CPUC’s role, the causes of delays, and whether public financing could complement existing competitive solicitation processes.

Transcript Highlights:

• There's 12 actual criteria pollutants, and some of them are carcinogens.
• > of<00:21:51.760> them<00:21:52.000> are pollutants and some of them are pollutants
• <00:23:29.039> This<00:23:29.200> has three decades uh air pollution.
• This has three decades uh air pollution.
• There was an issue dealing with the fish pollutant of the water for years.

Bills: SB23, SB71, SB105, SB109, SB115, SB131, SB148, SB165

Keywords: law enforcement, taser, restrained individuals, police procedures, civil rights, income tax, tax exemption, Alabama tax code, Section 40-18-3, civilian employees, Department of Defense, DoD, Armed Forces, military pay, combat zone, deployment, National Guard, Reserve components, emergency response, federal employees

Transcript Highlights:

• to protect our residents from pollutants to protect our residents from pollutants we<00:46:22.800
• <00:47:32.800> Control at the Minnesota Pollution Control at the Minnesota Pollution Control
• Untreated stormwater can contain pollutants and toxins.
• It can contain pollutants and toxins.
• Minnesota Department of Health pollution Minnesota Department of Health pollution control<01:07:

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• That's about a $1,500 reduction. The HMO fell from $3,100 to $1,800.
• One data center alone is the equivalent of 2.6 million cars of pollution going into one community.

Bills: SB151, HB8, SB177

Keywords: corporate income tax, franchise tax, gross receipts tax, tax credit, tax deduction, controlled foreign corporation, CFC, bonus depreciation, interest expense, apportionment, unitary group, high-wage jobs tax credit, local journalism, news media, newspaper printer, physician incentive, health care workforce, affordable housing, multifamily housing, construction materials

Transcript Highlights:

• We administer 12 incentive grant programs under the Texas Emission Reduction Plan, or TERP.
• to our metro areas and along the border, and, you know, we've got the migrants. of other folks, pollution

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• operate, and offer advanced nuclear resources; and HB 764, prohibiting the intentional release of polluting
• prohibiting the intentional release 764 prohibiting the intentional release of<00:02:45.040> polluting
• <00:02:45.519> emissions<00:02:46.159> including<00:02:46.680> cloud of polluting
• emissions including cloud of polluting emissions including cloud seating<00:02:47.560> weather
• But there is certainly a reduction on the UPT side, and an increase, or I should say increase in the

Keywords: 1189, house, all