Transcript Highlights:

• So the first slide is: you're going to hear us talk a lot about mitigation. What is mitigation?
• The hurricane loss mitigation program is a state program.
• The hurricane loss mitigation program is a state program.
• Legislature also gave us funding last year... ...mitigation program.
• It doesn’t have it for the two and three mitigation. Is there any provision for mitigating effects?

Summary: The Banking and Insurance Committee heard a series of presentations focused on mitigation, flood and wind resilience, and insurance discounts. Kevin Guthrie of the Florida Division of Emergency Management outlined several funding streams for mitigation, including federal Hazard Mitigation Grant Program dollars, BRIC grants, flood mitigation assistance, and the state hurricane loss mitigation program. He emphasized the new Elevate Florida initiative, which will use about $400 million initially to elevate or reconstruct flood-prone homes, starting with National Flood Insurance Program properties and severe repetitive-loss homes, with no current per-home cap. Guthrie said the state will contract directly with licensed vendors and aims to reduce future flood losses, lower insurance costs, and keep properties on the tax rolls rather than relying on buyouts. Insurance Commissioner Mike Yaworski described Florida’s windstorm mitigation discount program, explaining that the 1802 inspection form is used to assess a home’s overall “envelope” and determine statutory discounts. He said the office is updating the program based on a new wind loss study, with likely changes including greater recognition of roof types such as metal roofs and possible territorial risk adjustments. He also said the Legislature now requires the office to revisit the study every five years. Stephen Fielder of the Department of Financial Services reported on My Safe Florida Home, noting that the program offers inspections and grants for roof and opening protections, has completed more than 100,000 inspections, and has reimbursed hundreds of millions of dollars. He said the department has validated its discount calculations with insurers and that the program is intended to help homeowners reduce premiums through verified mitigation work. Michael Newman of the Insurance Institute for Business and Home Safety said Florida’s building code is nationally leading and that post-Ian surveys found no wind-driven structural damage in buildings built after adoption of the code. He argued that mitigation should be treated as a system, not isolated upgrades, and suggested adding Fortified designation to the state’s mitigation form to better document verified resilience improvements. Bill Truex, a county commissioner and builder, stressed the need to educate homeowners about floodproofing and roof choices, citing examples where flood panels prevented damage and noting that asphalt shingles often do not last as long in Florida as their marketing suggests. In panel discussion, senators asked about program eligibility, outreach to elderly and digitally challenged residents, contractor vetting, roof-life disclosures, and whether flood insurance should be more broadly required. Officials said outreach will include call centers and in-person assistance, and several participants urged better consumer disclosure and more data-driven guidance on roof and mitigation choices.

Transcript Highlights:

• and what we factually and statistically know to be about the space, we should take every effort to mitigate
• and what we factually and statistically know to be about the space, we should take every effort to mitigate
• These drones that we were looking at the other day, they pick 24/7.

Keywords: 981, all

Summary: The House convened with 58 members present and seven excused, establishing a quorum, and approved the April 15, 2026 journal as corrected. The chamber then moved through announcements recognizing visiting railroad workers, LIUNA Local 720, Colorado West Christian Schools, Religious Freedom Day, and several school and community groups, along with birthday acknowledgments and committee schedule notices. The House also adopted a motion to remove House Bill 1245 from special orders and returned it to the general orders second reading calendar, and set House Bills 1290, 1312, and 1321 as special orders. The House adopted Senate Joint Resolution 18, recognizing Nowruz and expressing support for the human rights and fundamental freedoms of the Iranian people, including the Women, Life, Freedom movement. Supporters described Nowruz as a holiday of renewal and resilience and tied the resolution to solidarity with Iranian communities. Representative Zokaie also spoke at length about the personal impact of war on Iranian families and urged a vote. The resolution passed 59-2 with four excused. The chamber then considered several bills in committee report. House Bill 1290, concerning assault and clarifying sentencing, was amended in Judiciary to remove the medical professional provision and passed after testimony emphasizing strangulation as a serious warning sign in domestic violence cases; it then passed the House. House Bill 1312, dealing with peace officer participation, POST Board composition, academy training, and related grants, was amended for clarity and passed the Judiciary report and then the bill. House Bill 1321, modifying the School Security Disbursement Program, had the Education Committee report defeated, but amendments were adopted to broaden eligible service providers and adjust funding language; the bill then passed as amended.

Transcript Highlights:

• Starting this July, project developers will be able to easily mitigate VMT by contributing to the mitigation
• Starting this July, project developers will be able to easily mitigate VMT by contributing to the mitigation
• if it's the least costly mitigation measure.
• Starting this July, project developers will be able to easily mitigate VMT by contributing to the mitigation
• Mitigation valuation should be an objective, science-based assessment of the mitigation being undertaken

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee heard several housing-related bills. AB 2270, by Assembly Member Arambula, would create scoring parity for farmworker housing projects in the state low-income housing tax credit program, with supporters arguing that rural farmworker developments are unfairly disadvantaged because they must be located near agricultural jobs rather than urban amenities. The committee accepted amendments and moved the bill forward on a unanimous vote to the Assembly Committee on Appropriations. The committee also considered AB 2552, by Assembly Member Lee, which would clarify how a CEQA vehicle miles traveled (VMT) mitigation program tied to affordable housing near transit may be used. Supporters said the bill would preserve cost-effectiveness and guard against litigation, while opponents from Housing California, the Planning and Conservation League, and others warned that the amended bill could undermine the new statewide VMT mitigation bank before it is fully implemented by making cost the key trigger for use. After discussion about balancing environmental and housing goals, the bill passed to Appropriations on an 11-1 vote. AB 2689, also by Assembly Member Lee, would establish good-cause renewal protections for tenants in state-subsidized housing whose incomes rise above 140% of area median income for two consecutive years, while requiring notice and limiting displacement if tenants cannot afford market rent. Some members supported the bill as a way to free up scarce subsidized units for lower-income households, while others objected that it could punish people for improving their financial situation. The committee approved the bill as amended on an 11-1 vote. The committee also approved three consent items—AB 2308, AB 2397, and AB 2512—without discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• THE FIRST IS A HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT PROGRAM.
• THE HURRICANE LOSS MITIGATION PROGRAM IS A STATE PROGRAM.
• FOR THE MITIGATION DISCOUNT PROGRAM PARTICULARLY.
• FIRST TOPIC IS HAZARD MITIGATION.
• IS THERE ANY PROVISION FOR MITIGATING EFFECTS?

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:42:15.000> greenhouse doing the work to mitigate greenhouse doing the work to mitigate
• planning for greenhouse gas mitigation planning for greenhouse gas mitigation going<00:43:02.800
• mitigation mitigation efforts<01:26:39.760> uh<01:26:40.000> many<01:26:40.400> of<
• available for mitigation.
• will be responsible for the mitigation will be responsible for the mitigation projects<01:30:01.760><

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• If we want to keep insurance then that goes back to mitigation because mitigation is there and yeah mitigation
• And so disaster mitigation has to be.
• I think each of you mentioned mitigation. When I hear mitigation, I also hear money.
• I heard you all talking about mitigation.
• And there's extremely effective mitigation, cost-effective mitigation that can be done.

Keywords: homeowners insurance, natural disasters, insurance costs, climate change, disaster preparedness, federal policies, bipartisan solutions

Summary: The meeting reviewed critical issues surrounding the rising costs and accessibility of homeowners insurance across the United States, particularly in light of increasing natural disasters linked to climate change. Members engaged in extensive discussions regarding the implications for families and the economy, citing significant increases in premiums and decreasing availability of policies in high-risk areas. Supervisor Peysko highlighted the direct impact of federal policies on local communities, emphasizing the growing burden on homeowners as they face skyrocketing insurance costs amidst a backdrop of environmental challenges and regulatory constraints. The committee expressed a unified call to action for bipartisan solutions, focusing on improving building codes and enhancing disaster preparedness measures.

Transcript Highlights:

• And if they can't be... ...mitigated, then the project has to be stopped.
• So this bill narrows the number of projects that would trigger assessments and mitigation.
• Vehicle miles traveled need to be mitigated.
• It's not clear how mitigation will be managed, who will be responsible for the mitigation projects, how
• available for mitigation.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up House File 748, a bill revising Minnesota’s transportation greenhouse gas and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) impact assessment requirements for trunk highway projects. The chair first moved and adopted the A2 author’s amendment and then the A3 amendment, which was described as adding implementation time and project exemptions when federal dollars are available. The bill author explained that the measure responds to concerns from stakeholders that the current law can force costly mitigation, delay or stop safety and capacity projects, and create uncertainty because key implementation details are still being developed by a technical advisory committee. Testimony was split. County and city engineers, county commissioners, the Minnesota Transportation Alliance, and the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities generally supported the bill, arguing that the current requirements can add 20% to 40% or more to project costs, are difficult to administer, and could jeopardize critical safety improvements, congestion relief, and federal funding. They cited examples such as Scott County and Trunk Highway 65, and said VMT mitigation is especially hard to quantify and fund. Opponents, including Move Minnesota and Sierra Club, argued that safety and climate goals are not in conflict, that reducing driving can save lives and reduce pollution, and that the bill would weaken an important tool for cutting transportation emissions. Members also asked about how GHG and VMT are measured, whether the required assessment was ready, and who would be responsible for mitigation assets and costs. After discussion, the committee held a roll call vote. The bill, as amended, passed 8-7 and was moved to the General Register.

Transcript Highlights:

• Starting this July, project developers will be able to easily mitigate VMT by contributing to the mitigation
• if it's the least costly mitigation measure.
• Starting this July, project developers will be able to easily mitigate VMT by contributing to the mitigation
• if it's the least costly mitigation measure.
• Mitigation valuation should be an objective, science-based assessment of the mitigation being undertaken

Summary: The Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee heard several housing bills. AB 2270, by Assemblymember Arambula, would give farmworker housing projects scoring parity in the state low-income housing tax credit program so they are not disadvantaged by amenity-proximity criteria that do not fit rural agricultural areas. Supporters, including La Cooperativa Campesina, said the bill would help farmworker projects compete fairly for credits; there was no opposition, and the bill was later approved 11-0 and sent to Appropriations. The committee also considered AB 2552, which would clarify use of the state’s new CEQA vehicle miles traveled (VMT) mitigation bank for affordable housing near transit. The author and supporters from the California Building Industry Association and business groups said the bill would add guardrails so the program is cost-effective and usable, while Housing California, the Planning and Conservation League, and others opposed the least-cost requirement, arguing it could undercut the new mitigation bank before implementation. After discussion about balancing housing and environmental goals, the bill passed 11-1 to Appropriations. AB 2689 would require good cause for nonrenewal of certain state-subsidized housing tenancies when a household’s income exceeds 140% of area median income for two consecutive years, with notice requirements and protections if the tenant cannot afford market rent. Some members supported the bill as a way to free up scarce subsidized units and create a housing “ladder,” while others objected that it could punish people for increasing their income. The bill was amended and passed 11-1. The consent calendar items AB 2308, AB 2397, and AB 2512 were also approved unanimously.

Transcript Highlights:

• mitigation plan. So, it's a 7525 split. mitigation plan. So, it's a 7525 split.
• flood mitigation assistance. flood mitigation assistance.
• :04.000> efforts So mitigation mitigation efforts efforts So mitigation mitigation efforts efforts
• >> It's under the hazard mitigation. >> It's the hazard mitigation 404.
• It's under the hazard mitigation. It's the hazard mitigation 404.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Public Safety held an informational briefing on hazard mitigation planning and recent tsunami and wildfire threats. Chair Dela Buladi opened by framing the meeting around the need for iterative disaster planning and lessons learned from events such as the Lahaina wildfires, the Puna Coast earthquake/tsunami, and recent wildfire activity. The committee heard first from Hawaii County Civil Defense Administrator Tomage Magno, who explained the federal and local hazard mitigation planning process, including the requirement for an active five-year mitigation plan to qualify for federal disaster funds. He described the plan as a living document built from prior plans, public and agency outreach, risk and capability assessments, and ongoing updates, with county departments, state agencies, and subject matter experts participating in the process. Magno outlined several FEMA-related mitigation funding programs, including flood mitigation assistance, post-fire assistance, pre-disaster mitigation, revolving loan funds, and dam safety grants. He emphasized that the Hawaii County plan was recently approved by FEMA, that the county council approves the plan, and that the county reviews it annually with a formal revision process beginning in the fourth year. Members asked about how the plan tracks project status, how priorities and funding changes are handled, and whether federal funding programs might be affected by HR1; Magno said the county is proceeding on the assumption that funding will remain available and noted some sources have been reestablished. He also said the county encourages council participation in meetings and planning. Department of Transportation Director Ed Sniffen then addressed the committee on DOT’s response to a recent tsunami threat, saying the agency had about four hours to prepare before the first wave arrival and was focused on its own operational response rather than the broader statewide planning process. In response to questions, he stated that FHWA funds cannot be used for evacuation routes, which is why prior legislative funding was important. Members also discussed specific mitigation projects such as fire breaks, bridge retrofits, and the Singing Bridge, with DOT noting that work is underway and that a replacement bridge upstream is being planned to carry traffic during repairs. No votes or formal committee actions were taken during the informational briefing.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, we believe that between the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program and
• The Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, we believe that between the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program and
• Mitigation, I don't believe that we'll see federal mitigation assistance through FEMA.
• Mitigation, I don't believe that we'll see federal mitigation assistance through FEMA this fiscal year
• It's an all-hazards mitigation plan, and it's supposed to be our attempt to coordinate mitigation resources

Keywords: 914, all

Summary: The committee held a budget hearing for the Oklahoma Office of Emergency Management, with Director Annie Verst presenting the agency’s FY26/FY27 request and explaining the agency’s role in disaster response, recovery, preparedness, and mitigation. She said OEM remains a lean agency focused on coordinating resources for local governments, supporting recovery after disasters, and helping communities build resilience. She highlighted recent activity including wildfire response, multiple fire management assistance declarations, $83 million in public assistance payouts, use of the new state disaster revolving fund, and implementation of an Oklahoma resilient recovery strategy and ARPA-funded rural public safety grants. Verst emphasized uncertainty in federal funding and FEMA operations, saying hazard mitigation assistance has been canceled for the first time since 1988, some obligations were delayed under DHS’s “Defend the Spend” review, and the emergency management performance grant period was shortened before later being resolved. She said OEM has restructured by eliminating obsolete administrative work, repurposing positions to regional coordinators, ending warehouse leases, and assigning fleet vehicles more efficiently. Her budget request included $3.7 million to cover a possible loss of federal operating support, $1 million for a required state hazard mitigation plan update, $3.8 million for the state emergency fund to cover anticipated 12.5% state shares and replenish prior expenditures, and $800,000 for anticipated other-needs/temporary sheltering cost share. Members questioned her about Oklahoma Task Force One, the revolving fund, and whether OEM is shifting toward a response-focused agency. Verst said response remains local and OEM’s role is coordination, recovery, and mitigation, not replacing local emergency management. She explained Task Force One is used when local capacity is exceeded, is not currently funded by OEM for routine operations, and the revolving fund helps bridge reimbursement delays. She also said the hazard mitigation plan update would likely be done by an outside contractor or university partner. No votes were taken; the hearing ended after questions and thanks from the chair.

Transcript Highlights:

• They need, you know, mitigation grants.
• Efficacy and mitigation.
• And so. efficacy and mitigation.
• We need not just mitigations, but evidence-based mitigations.
• At the Department of Insurance, our focus is and must remain on mitigation, mitigation, and mitigation

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Committee on Insurance held an informational hearing on how climate change, wildfire risk, and related catastrophes are affecting California’s insurance market, affordability, and availability. Chair and members framed the issue as a statewide challenge tied to resiliency, land use, utilities, legal liability, and the FAIR Plan. Senator Becker noted the hearing was connected to SB 254 and its recent report, while the Vice Chair emphasized that the state’s current regulatory framework limits flexibility and that industry testimony would also have been useful. Amy Bach of United Policyholders described worsening availability and affordability, driven by climate impacts, insurtech/risk scoring, inflation, and the growth of surplus lines coverage. She said the Sustainable Insurance Strategy is beginning to show progress, but the FAIR Plan remains too large and non-admitted carriers create concerns because they are less regulated and do not share FAIR Plan or guaranty fund obligations. She stressed that mitigation incentives, grants, and voluntary insurer rewards for wildfire-hardening are important, but that many households cannot afford the needed improvements. In response to questions, she said underinsurance remains a major problem, especially after recent fires, and suggested stronger insurer responsibility for replacement-cost estimates or broader replacement-cost endorsements. Actuary Nancy Watkins and Stanford’s Michael Wara argued that California must both reduce wildfire risk and allow actuarially sound pricing if it wants a healthier market. Watkins compared the market to a household with rising expenses and said the state needs a mitigation framework focused on the highest-risk communities, especially older neighborhoods and homes near the wildland-urban interface. Wara said premiums must roughly equal expected claims plus expenses, and that California is “burning down too many houses,” which drives both availability problems and higher rates. He highlighted the role of structure-to-structure spread, older housing stock, utility ignitions, and the need to focus on community hardening, not just vegetation management. Both speakers said mitigation should be targeted, science-based, and sustained rather than one-time or scattered. Frank Freebalt of Cal Poly and Michael Gullner of UC Berkeley continued the discussion on fire modeling and risk reduction. Freebalt said the problem is best understood as a structure ignition and urban conflagration problem, requiring integrated land-use, utility, and community mitigation, with evidence-based priorities and better analytics. He emphasized that the state should focus on the highest-risk intersections first and that targeted mitigation can multiply the effectiveness of suppression and evacuation resources. No votes or formal actions were taken; the hearing was informational and focused on testimony, questions, and policy discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• While this hearing focuses on flood mitigation, I-2 are highly vulnerable to flooding.
• So we are putting forward projects with our local money to try to help mitigate these issues.
• That includes over 3,000 flood mitigation evaluations, over 600 flood mitigation projects, and nearly
• 900 flood mitigation solutions or strategies, excuse me, in those regional plans.
• The FMA, the Flood Mitigation Assistance Program, is part of FEMA's Hazard Mitigation Assistance grant

Summary: The House Committee on Natural Resources met to focus on flooding issues across Texas, with particular attention to South Texas and the recent catastrophic flooding in Central Texas. Chair Harris and Vice Chair Martinez emphasized that flooding is a statewide problem requiring continued legislative attention. The committee heard invited testimony from Hidalgo County Commissioner David Fuentes and Hidalgo County Drainage District No. 1 General Manager Raul Sassine, who described the March flood event in Hidalgo County, including more than 20 inches of rain, six deaths, over $100 million in local damage, widespread road flooding, and repeated shutdowns of Interstate 2 and its frontage roads. They argued that existing drainage systems are under capacity, that TxDOT projects must account for downstream drainage impacts, and that local governments have already invested heavily in mitigation through bonds and partnerships. Fuentes and Sassine also described the county’s long-term flood mitigation and water-reuse efforts, including the Delta region water management project, which would capture stormwater, runoff, and treated effluent, reduce flooding, and create potable water supply. They said the drainage district manages about 780 miles of channels and 1,100 acres of detention facilities, has used prior Flood Infrastructure Fund and GLO grants, and has ongoing applications for additional state and federal assistance. Members discussed the need for TxDOT coordination, emergency access on frontage roads, local “skin in the game,” and the possibility of combining flood control with aquifer recharge and water supply projects. Texas Water Development Board Executive Administrator Brian McMath then presented an overview of the state’s flood planning and funding framework, including the post-Harvey legislative changes that created the Flood Infrastructure Fund, the Texas Infrastructure Resiliency Fund, and the regional/state flood planning process. He summarized the first state flood plan adopted in 2024, noting that about one in six Texans live or work in known flood hazard areas and that regional plans identified 4,609 flood risk reduction solutions with an estimated cost of $54.5 billion. He also reviewed TWDB programs for flood grants, community assistance, flood insurance compliance, stream gauges, TexMesonet, flood mapping, and the TexasFlood.org viewer. Members asked about drainage fees, technical assistance, gauge placement, the relationship between flood maps and FEMA FIRMs, and whether flood mitigation funds could support aquifer storage and recovery or recharge projects; TWDB staff said such projects can be eligible if they include flood mitigation components, but direct technical assistance cannot be paid from Flood Infrastructure Fund dollars. The committee concluded by expressing interest in further study of combining flood mitigation with aquifer recharge, and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have to have coordinated mitigation.
• And I'm also our state hazard mitigation officer tasked with overseeing FEMA's hazard mitigation assistance
• mitigating that one.
• “Random acts of mitigation. Exactly.
• So we had a robust wildfire mitigation program.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The joint Senate hearing of the Natural Resources and Water Committee and the Emergency Management Committee focused on wildfire resilience, with members discussing the SB 254 report on enhancing California’s response to natural catastrophes. Opening remarks emphasized the scale of wildfire damage, the need for prevention and preparedness, and concerns about the affordability and insurability crisis. Senators repeatedly contrasted the relatively small share of funding going to community hardening with the much larger amounts spent on utility wildfire mitigation and landscape-scale projects, and several members raised concerns about CEQA delays, one-time funding, and the need for more sustainable, ongoing financing. The Legislative Analyst’s Office presented an overview showing about $4.7 billion in state wildfire resilience appropriations from 2018-19 through 2025-26, with funding shifting from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund to the General Fund and then to Proposition 4. LAO noted that only about $65 million had been specifically targeted to community hardening, while most funding went to forest health, fuels, research, and related programs. LAO also said one-time funding will decline in coming years and that future GGRF support is uncertain, though General Fund use is not legally precluded. Members asked about maintenance costs, polluter-pays ideas, and whether performance metrics should focus more on property and community risk reduction than acres treated. Cal Fire’s State Fire Marshal described the state’s community wildfire preparedness strategy, centered on home hardening, defensible space, and neighborhood-scale mitigation. He said roughly 4 million homes are in the wildland-urban interface, most built before modern fire-resistant standards, and argued that the state must move from response to prevention. He said Cal Fire is incorporating the SB 254 recommendations into its updated action plan, has streamlined some fuel-reduction projects under a recent executive proclamation, and is shifting some grant funding toward maintenance of existing treatments. Cal OES described the AB 38 pilot and FEMA hazard mitigation work, saying the pilot helped build tools and standards for home hardening but that federal approval delays remain a major barrier; the agency reported 155 hardened properties, 19 under construction, and 370 assessed and waiting. The Wildfire and Forest Resilience Task Force said it has coordinated more than $6 billion in state and federal investments, is moving toward regional block grants and better data-driven prioritization, and is developing separate community and landscape strategies. The hearing ended with discussion of modeling, data gaps, utility coordination, contractor capacity, and possible legislative or budget changes to better align funding and metrics with community safety outcomes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chairman, members, another thing, the FAA has rules about drones and height restrictions around airports
• The parole board will consider the mitigating qualities of youth, such as immaturity, susceptibility

Bills: HB46, HJR35, HJR47, HJR182, HB 113, HB983, HB4847, HB1449, HB3833, HB5151, HB265, HB1845, HB782, HB 108, HB1960, HB158, HB1954, HB1955, HB2512, HB605, HB2581, HB2803, HB627, HB2667, HB1738, HB636, HB3679, HB2638, HB2655, HB871, HB2438, HB 1107, HB1765, HB1822, HB2153, HB4099, HB3732, HB3171, HB3178, HB3182, HB3749, HB2814, HB3977, HB4204, HB4207, HB4449, HB1820, HB1876, HB1939, HB1347, HB2593, HB2136, HB2132, HB2658, HB2413, HB2757, HB2080, HB3154, HB3063, HB3009, HB3448, HB3006, HB2844, HB3241, HB3680, HB3169, HB2078, HB2507, HB4559, HB3946, HB3460, HB3405, HB475, HB3463, HB3441, HB3520, HB2060, HB4731, HB4991, HB1991, HB5596, HB2014, HB2142, HB2673, HB2731, HB2417, HB2399, HB2301, HB3335, HB3234, HB3320, HB5573, HB4848, HB4748, HB4769, HB4795, HB2086, HB2234, HB2203, HB4916, HB5624, HB4505, HB139, HB5093, HB5302, HB5402, HB5606, HB2333, HB4630, HB4701, HB2583, HB2983, HB4924, HB3339, HB3793, HB3631, HB4882, HB5509, HB5499, HB5430, HB5561, HB5611, HB5043, HB5064, HB3733, HB3781, HB3219, HB32, HB4515, HB5348, HR559, HB4506, HB1646, HB3185, HB3388, HB2761, HB3233, HB1534, HB5129, HB5394, HB3619, HB2867, HB3672, HB2434, HB4903, HB3687, HB3675, HB4609, HB4582, HB3866, HB4534, HB2446, HB3984, HB700, HB4088, HB229, SB2419, SB842, SB1257, SB2550, SB996, HB 1186, HB4327, HB3221, HB2588, SB552, HB4870, HB2494, HB3940, HB4838, HB3177, HB1441, SB1841, HB3962, HB2225, HJR112, HB897, HB2695, HB4670, HB3602, HB3317, HB3717, HB3138, HB3704, HB1403, HJR218, HB4921, SJR37, HJR138, HJR144, HB3892, HB4, HB46, HJR35, HJR47, HJR182, HB4234, HB722, HB4136, HB4105, HB4413, HB170, HB551, HB2858, HB3053, HB3142, HB3180, HB3722, HB2200, HB1794, HB1784, HB1581, HB2530, HB4308, HB1896, HB2974, HB3359, HB4580, HB2458, HB2215, HB3332, HB2278, HB3015, HB3151, HB1368, HB40, HB 101, HB 112, HB146, HB168, HB214, HB413, HB1523, HB493, HB521, HB594, HB557, HB305, HB549, HB854, HB 1057, HB 1052, HB842, HB3174, HB3311, HB2486, HB3196, HB824, HB 1039, HB2529, HB2713, HB4936, HB4995, HB4830, HB4864, HB5219, HB5263, HB5154, HB2674, HB5525, HB5623, HB2545, HB2587, HB2625, HB5520, HB5436, HB4926, HB1573, HB5165, HB4811, HB5081, HB4755, HB3179, HB4310, HB4611, HB2159, HB4626, HB3637, HB3153, HB3066, HB2786, HB2966, HB638, HB640, HB876, HB497, HB5539, HB4809, HB5308, HB4687, HB4070, HB4421, HB4412, HB3284, HB3369, HB3420, HB3449, HB4098, HB4281, HB4120, HB4504, HB4370, HB 1106, HB2370, HB2404, HB3863, HB2407, HB2253, HB2273, HB2040, HB1586, HB3788, HB3993, HB4690, HB4309, HB4696, HB2308, HB 1142, HB1533, HB1621, HB2242, HB2012, HB2193, HB2442, HB2464, HB2348, HB2313, HB2289, HB1942, HB2011, HB1629, HB2993, HB3592, HB3824, HB4076, HB4535, HB4623, HB4773, HB 1091, HB5115, HB5515, HB3372, HB5659, HB 127, HB386, HB 115, HB2868, HB 1249, HB4766, HB3720, HB4656, HB4879, HB 105, HB5383, HB4621, HB5431, HB5678, HB5534, HB4174, HB4212, HB3954, HB3966, HB3636, HB3918, HB1422, HB4765, HB4732, HB4742, HB5122, HB4518, HB5084, HB3986, HB4045, HB4144, HB3911, HB3976, HB4473, HB3425, HB3641, HB3642, HB3475, HB3509, HB3424, HB3383, HB4744, HB4531, HB4539, HB3159, HB5228, HB5370, HB4359, HB4398, HB4443, HB4466, HB3861, HB3849, HB4240, HB4706, HB4685, HB5354, HB5141, HB5686, HB3629, HB3554, HB3567, HB2015, HB3575, HB5381, HB1431, HB3514, HB4614, HB4546, HB4683, HB5681, HB5673, HB5663, HB4271, HB4350, HB4035, HB3807, HB3812, HB3552, HB3540, HB3715, HB3710, HB3664, HB4196, HB4233, HB4173, HB1998, HB3333, HB3510, HB4222, HB2070, HB2854, HB2347, HB 113, HB983, HB4847, HB1449, HB3833, HB5151, HB265, HB1845, HB782, HB 108, HB1960, HB158, HB1954, HB1955, HB2512, HB605, HB2581, HB2803, HB627, HB2667, HB1738, HB636, HB3679, HB2638, HB2655, HB871, HB2438, HB 1107, HB1765, HB1822, HB2153, HB4099, HB3732, HB3171, HB3178, HB3182, HB3749, HB2814, HB3977, HB4204, HB4207, HB4449, HB1820, HB1876, HB1939, HB1347, HB2593, HB2136, HB2132, HB2658, HB2413, HB2757, HB2080, HB3154, HB3063, HB3009, HB3448, HB3006, HB2844, HB3241, HB3680, HB3169, HB2078, HB2507, HB4559, HB3946, HB3460, HB3405, HB475, HB3463, HB3441, HB3520, HB2060, HB4731, HB4991, HB1991, HB5596, HB2014, HB2142, HB2673, HB2731, HB2417, HB2399, HB2301, HB3335, HB3234, HB3320, HB5573, HB4848, HB4748, HB4769, HB4795, HB2086, HB2234, HB2203, HB4916, HB5624, HB4505, HB139, HB5093, HB5302, HB5402, HB5606, HB2333, HB4630, HB4701, HB2583, HB2983, HB4924, HB3339, HB3793, HB3631, HB4882, HB5509, HB5499, HB5430, HB5561, HB5611, HB5043, HB5064, HB3733, HB3781, HB3219, HB32, HB4515, HB5348, HCR76, HCR127, HCR9, HCR40, HCR118, HR559

Keywords: low-THC cannabis, dispensing organization, Texas Compassionate-Use Program, medical use, patient access, registration, healthcare, legislation, Grow Texas fund, economic stabilization, infrastructure, oil and gas, constitutional amendment, severance tax, Texas STRONG defense fund, funding, public health, workforce development, revenue transfer, Veterans' Land Board

Transcript Highlights:

• That includes over 3,000 flood mitigation evaluations, over 600 flood mitigation projects, and nearly
• 900 flood mitigation solutions or strategies, excuse me.
• The FMA, the Flood Mitigation Assistance program, focuses on these efforts.
• Program as part of FEMA's Hazard Mitigation Assistance Grant Program.
• Let the floodwater mitigate the flooding, separating...

Keywords: 997, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• These funds are administered through disaster recovery and mitigation programs to eligible communities
• So you can see that breakdown here of the $2.1 billion total across all of our CDBG-DR and mitigation
• programs, including the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, the Flood Mitigation Grant Program, the Flood
• Mitigation Grant Program, the Flood Mitigation... ...administering multiple federal programs, including
• the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, the Flood Mitigation Assistance Grant Program, the Community Rating

Summary: The Committee on Community Affairs met with a quorum and heard two bills, a confirmation, and two agency presentations. SB 48 by Senator Gates would require local governments to allow voluntary accessory dwelling units, preserve homestead exemption for the owner-occupied portion, limit parking restrictions, require 30-day minimum leases, extend density bonuses for military-family housing, and allow reusable tenant screening reports. The bill drew strong support from the Florida Association of Mortgage Professionals and several others, and it was reported favorably on a unanimous roll call. SB 34 by Senator Sharief would expand the Historic Cemetery Program, particularly to help historic African-American cemeteries preserve and maintain themselves by allowing sale of excess vacant land only if proceeds are used for long-term upkeep; it also passed unanimously and was reported favorably. The committee also recommended confirmation of Fox Henderson to the Florida Housing Finance Corporation Board of Directors by unanimous vote. In addition, the Department of Commerce presented on the Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery program and Rebuild Florida, describing more than $4.3 billion in HUD disaster recovery funds since 2017, housing repair and replacement efforts that have completed more than 5,200 homes, and infrastructure and mitigation projects across the state. Members asked about average project costs, contractor oversight, corrective actions for deficient work, and clawbacks from a prior vendor; Commerce said it had ended the earlier vendor relationship, imposed about $3.6 million in financial consequences, and now uses stronger oversight and competitive procurement for contractors. The Division of Emergency Management then presented on Elevate Florida, a federal mitigation program that allows homeowners to apply directly for elevation, reconstruction, acquisition, or wind-mitigation projects, with a 75/25 federal-homeowner cost share and no state funds used. Director Kevin Guthrie said the program is intended to reduce repetitive flood losses, keep homeowners in their communities, and serve as a national model; he reported more than 12,000 applications, about 1,500 prioritized for review, 500 on a wait list, and 305 submitted to FEMA for final approval. Members asked about assistance for seniors who cannot meet the 25% match, the wait-list process, contractor selection, and the mix of project types, and Guthrie said contractors were selected through competitive procurement and that most projects are elevations, though some may become reconstructions or acquisitions depending on inspection results. The committee adjourned after the presentations.

Transcript Highlights:

• , not just the utility mitigation that's been taking place, California can accelerate statewide mitigation
• On safety, the wildfire mitigation plan process is working.
• They need money to do wildfire mitigation, but we, Wildfire mitigation—they need money to do wildfire
• The utilities all get money allocated for wildfire mitigation.
• We invest heavily in wildfire prevention and mitigation.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The committee held the first of several informational hearings on the SB 254 Natural Catastrophe Resiliency Study, focused on wildfire risk, utility liability, and how to finance catastrophic losses. Chair Allen opened by describing California’s recent utility-ignited wildfires, the creation of the wildfire fund under AB 1054, and SB 254’s extension of that fund and requirement for a study. The California Earthquake Authority, as wildfire fund administrator, presented the report’s process and findings, emphasizing that the study was intended to be neutral and broad, based on extensive stakeholder outreach, and that the status quo is not working well for survivors, communities, ratepayers, insurers, or utilities. CEA’s report organized recommendations into three policy pathways: continued mitigation investment, more equitable allocation of catastrophe burdens, and expanded state roles in catastrophe financing. For utilities, the report discussed options such as setting a binding risk-tolerance standard, preserving safety certificate accountability, tying executive compensation more directly to safety, creating confidential reporting with safe-harbor protections, reforming utility liability including possible changes to inverse condemnation, limiting damages, reducing insurance subrogation, and creating a fast-pay facility for survivors. The financing analysis compared a more durable wildfire fund, risk transfer/reinsurance, liability reforms, and state-backed mechanisms such as a state insurer, a state backstop, and broader funding for community wildfire mitigation. The CPUC said wildfire mitigation oversight has improved, but wildfire-related costs are driving electricity bills higher and creating an affordability crisis. The Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety highlighted its wildfire mitigation plan review and field inspections, and recommended stronger safety reporting and more safety-weighted executive compensation. In member discussion, senators and assemblymembers focused on the cost of the status quo, whether the burden should be shared by ratepayers, utilities, the state, or other parties, and whether California should consider broader disaster-financing approaches. Several members raised concerns about inverse condemnation, the pace of survivor compensation, local land-use responsibility, and the need for a more comprehensive statewide solution rather than piecemeal bills. No votes or formal actions were taken; the hearing was informational only.

Transcript Highlights:

• The last mitigation is really the neighborhood.
• And I'm also still the acting state hazard mitigation officer overseeing FEMA's hazard mitigation program
• Our 58 county hazard mitigation plans have over 500 individual mitigation actions targeted at reducing
• In this new landscape of federal hazard mitigation, In this new landscape of federal hazard mitigation
• We are your wildfire prevention and mitigation agency.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Climate Crisis, Resources, Energy, and Transportation held an oversight hearing on home hardening and defensible space as wildfire mitigation strategies. The chair opened by stressing that California has reached a tipping point, with repeated community-scale wildfire losses, rising insurance costs, and growing utility wildfire mitigation expenses. The hearing was organized around four panels: what home hardening and defensible space are, community risk reduction and coordination, evaluation of current defensible space programs and proposed investments, and the future of home hardening and the California Wildfire Mitigation Program. The first panel featured IBHS, the Legislative Analyst’s Office, and local wildfire mitigation advocates. IBHS described wildfire spread through embers, flames, and radiant heat, emphasizing that structure separation, removing combustible materials within the first five feet of a home, and combining multiple mitigation measures significantly reduce loss. It highlighted its Wildfire Prepared Home and Wildfire Prepared Neighborhood standards, including an “essential” and “enhanced” level, and said California is ahead of other states but still needs scalable, standardized, and sustainably funded mitigation. The LAO outlined key policy questions for the Legislature, including the state’s role, intergovernmental coordination, cost-effectiveness, program design, measurement of success, long-term sustainability, and barriers to implementation. The chair and panelists discussed estimated costs, including roughly $15,000 for a basic retrofit and about $50,000 for more extensive ignition-resistant construction, and whether state funding should focus on the most cost-effective initial measures. The second panel focused on scaling adoption through local coordination, education, financing, and community-based programs. Megafire Action argued that home hardening is a market adoption problem and said the state should not try to pay for every home, but instead target high-leverage interventions across the “customer journey,” including education, financing, trusted certification, and neighborhood network effects. Ventura Regional Fire Safe Council described free home assessments, small retrofit grants, Firewise community support, and the importance of neighborhood-level action, local capacity, and cultural change. Marin Wildfire Prevention Authority described its locally funded model, grant program, public education efforts, and an Ember Ready program that helps residents navigate home hardening and Zone Zero compliance. The chair repeatedly emphasized the need for a coordinated statewide marketing campaign, stronger incentives, better insurance discounts, and more use of local, utility, federal, and private funding sources. The third and fourth panels addressed Cal Fire’s defensible space inspection program, the proposed defensible space financial assistance program, and broader state investments. Cal Fire said homes lacking compliant defensible space are far more likely to be damaged or destroyed and requested ongoing funding and staffing to stabilize inspections statewide; the LAO suggested the Legislature consider alternative funding sources such as GGRF or a reinstated SRA fee. Cal Fire and the State Fire Marshal explained that Zone Zero sets a minimum standard, local governments cannot go below it, and grant prioritization will favor jurisdictions that submit inspections. Cal Fire also said the new defensible space financial assistance program would focus on ember-resistant zone-zero work and, in the Southern California counties covered by the legislation, would assist about 3,125 homes at an estimated $8,000 per home. In the final panel, the State Fire Marshal described California’s layered strategy of parcel-level home hardening, defensible space, and neighborhood-scale mitigation, along with technical support, financial assistance, and incentives such as insurance discounts and builder marketing. The overall theme was that California must move from isolated efforts to a coordinated, science-based, and scalable statewide approach to reduce wildfire losses.

Transcript Highlights:

• So is it possible under your bill that if you needed a mitigation credit you could get, say, a mitigation
• In terms of the mitigation bankers, how many mitigation bankers are there and how secure are they?
• So if I can mitigate on-site, that's a win for the developer.
• If I can mitigate on-site, that's a win for the developer.
• And there's not the mitigation banks to provide those credits.

Summary: The Natural Resources and Disaster Subcommittee heard and acted on several bills related to wetlands, emergency management, fishing licenses, disaster recovery, the Florida Keys, brownfields, wastewater treatment, and spring protection. HB 1175 on mitigation banking drew the most discussion, with supporters saying it would create more predictable release of mitigation credits and help address shortages, while opponents warned it could weaken watershed-based wetland protection and allow credits to be used farther from the impact site. The committee adopted a strike-all amendment making the changes prospective after July 1, 2025, and then reported the bill favorably with committee substitute by a 12-3 vote. The committee also considered HB 1535, a broad emergency management strike-all that would expand local storm-preparedness information, debris removal coordination, shelter planning, permitting procedures after storms, limits on post-storm fee increases and moratoria, and changes to election procedures after disasters. Members raised questions about FEMA coordination, shelter standards, impact fees, and the 100-mile post-storm land-use restrictions. After adopting the strike-all, the bill was reported favorably with committee substitute on a 17-0 vote. HB 673, which would extend the same fishing-license convenience to freshwater guides that saltwater captains already have, and HB 705, which extends a public-records exemption for disaster recovery assistance applicants, were both reported favorably without amendment. Later, the committee approved HB 995 for the Florida Keys, which combines affordable-housing incentives, a Habitat for Humanity bond exemption, an extension of the Florida Keys Stewardship Act, and a modest increase in hurricane evacuation time to allow additional residential permits; it was reported favorably on a unanimous vote. HB 733 on brownfields received a technical strike-all and was also reported favorably. HB 645 creating a general permit for distributed wastewater treatment systems passed unanimously, and HB 691 on a reclaimed-water project tied to Outstanding Florida Springs passed 16-1 after concerns were raised about cost, water quality, and whether the bill could broaden the intent of existing spring-protection law. The meeting adjourned after all agenda items were completed.

Transcript Highlights:

• It depends on the mitigation bank, et cetera.
• There's new mitigation banks we're going to need.
• We certainly don't want to have mitigation taking place.
• There's new mitigation banks we're going to need.
• We certainly don't want to have mitigation taking place.

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment, and General Government heard and advanced a large slate of bills, beginning with SB 978, which directs DEP to report on large sewage disposal facilities, rank them for wastewater treatment upgrades, and provide progress reports; it was reported favorably without public opposition. The committee also adopted an amendment and favorably reported SB 1388, which restricts vessel safety inspections without probable cause, creates a five-year safety decal, addresses spring protection zones, and bars FWC fishing licenses for commercial vessels owned by alien powers. Members raised some questions about spring protections and boating access, and one public witness urged further review of the spring-zone language. The committee then favorably reported SB 880, designating the American flamingo as state bird and the Florida scrub jay as state songbird, after testimony supporting both birds as symbols of Florida’s identity and conservation values. Several other measures were heard and passed. SB 830, dealing with lost or abandoned migrant vessels and aligning with House language, was amended and reported favorably. SB 1326, which requires local plans to maintain hurricane evacuation clearance times and allocates building permits in Monroe County and nearby municipalities, was amended to spread allocations over at least 10 years and then passed. SB 490, expanding off-duty concealed carry eligibility to correctional officers and correctional probation officers and exempting certain public safety personnel from the waiting period for rifles and shotguns, was reported favorably after support from the Florida PBA. SB 26, an uncontested claim bill for injuries from a 2022 crash, also passed, with one member suggesting future consideration of health insurance coverage for victims in similar cases. The committee additionally approved SB 98 on securities regulation and fingerprinting requirements, SB 1212 on firefighter health and safety, SB 196 on labeling food and cosmetics that contain vaccine materials or certain chemicals, SB 1300 restricting oil and gas drilling structures in sensitive areas, SB 1612 on financial institution assessment and stock offering timelines, and SB 492 on mitigation banking and wetland conservation easements. SB 1212 drew strong support from firefighters, while SB 492 drew both support and opposition from environmental and development interests, with concerns raised about wetland function, credit release timing, and conservation easement releases. Finally, the committee unanimously recommended confirmation of 12 appointees to water management district governing boards and adjourned after members recorded individual votes on selected bills.