Transcript Highlights:

• Managed Care Organizations, the procurement and managed care contracts under Medicaid and managed health
• Managed Care Organizations, the procurement and managed care contracts under Medicaid and managed health
• Managed Care Organizations, the procurement and managed care contracts under Medicaid and managed health
• Managed Care Organizations, the procurement and managed care contracts under Medicaid and managed health
• Managed Care Organizations, the procurement and managed care contracts under Medicaid and managed health

Transcript Highlights:

• In New Mexico, less than 10% of wildfire starts can be attributed to utilities, but these same utilities
• It's not giving the utility an out and no lawsuits, but it's giving the ratepayer of that utility protection
• If a utility is in compliance with the plan set forward and accepted by the PRC, a utility could still
• I really do think that's the problem is this situation wasn't created by the utility, utilities.
• The electric utility wasn't prevented from complying with the plan, and the utility acted intentionally

Committee: House House Energy, Environment & Natural Resources

Transcript Highlights:

• Act in the first hour, and we'll take a look at utility, take a deep dive into utility wildfire risk.
• And depending on the utility type and the resourcing that's available within that utility, there may
• And depending on the utility type and the resourcing that's available within that utility, you know,
• manager of the infrastructure.
• We are not-for-profit, we are publicly managed. We're privately funded, but publicly managed.

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:

• Utilization management involves measures used to ensure... Overall health outcomes.
• The first option is expanding the existing a la carte utilization management practices.
• Further building upon the utilization management concept could be to introduce a more comprehensive utilization
• incorporate the PBM's proprietary utilization management practice.
• On slide 14, you talk about the different pharmaceutical utilization management.

Summary: The Budget Committee met with a quorum and took up several bills. HB 677, relating to state-covered fertility preservation for employees undergoing cancer treatment, was introduced as coverage for egg and sperm preservation for up to three years, with an estimated fiscal impact of about $813,000. After brief questions and no public testimony or amendments, the bill passed unanimously and was reported favorably. The committee then considered CS/HB 59, which would reform Florida’s wrongful incarceration compensation process by extending the filing deadline from 90 days to two years, removing the clean-hands requirement, and allowing exonerees to choose between the state compensation process and a civil lawsuit; it was supported by the City of Flagler Beach and passed unanimously. CS/HB 1313, which recreates the Resilient Florida Trust Fund in the Department of Environmental Protection before its scheduled termination in 2025, also passed unanimously after supportive testimony from advocacy groups. The committee received a lengthy presentation from the Department of Management Services on the State Group Insurance Program and the recent Revenue Estimating Conference. The presentation covered enrollment, revenues and expenditures, rising medical and pharmacy costs, emergency room utilization, GLP-1 drug spending, and options for tighter formulary and utilization management. Members asked about ER cost growth, GLP-1 coverage and copays, PBM oversight and potential conflicts, avoidable ER visits, cancer screening claims, dental and vision costs, specialty drug biosimilars, and possible savings from more restrictive pharmacy models. DMS said it would follow up on several questions and noted ongoing work on cancer coordination, preventive screening, biomarker testing, and a proposed member-facing benefits platform. The committee also heard extensive testimony on HB 301, which would raise sovereign immunity caps from $200,000 per person and $300,000 per incident to $1 million and $3 million, align limitations periods with private claims, and allow government entities to settle above the caps without a claims bill. Local governments, school-related entities, and county and city associations opposed the bill, warning of major fiscal impacts, higher insurance costs, and pressure on services; several speakers urged smaller increases or a tiered approach. Proponents, including families affected by catastrophic injury or death, argued the current caps are too low and the claims bill process is inefficient and unfair. After debate, the bill passed on a recorded vote, with some members voting no, and was reported favorably.

Transcript Highlights:

• I manage the solid waste management program at the Department of Ecology.
• I manage the Solid Waste Management Program at the Department of Ecology.
• This means utilities could overbuild their infrastructure leaving houses to foot This means utilities
• And I'm already seeing my constituents and other utilities around the state increasing utility prices
• And I'm already saying my constituents and other utilities around the state increasing utility prices

Summary: The committee heard House Bill 2343, which would require the Department of Fish and Wildlife to obtain CAFO or individual discharge permit coverage for its game farms, and to treat game farms with at least 5,000 birds as large CAFOs. The prime sponsor and local officials from Centralia said the WDFW pheasant farm has contributed to nitrate contamination in a critical aquifer, affecting drinking water and public health, and argued the state should be held to the same standards as private operators. WDFW testified that it has already voluntarily secured the permit the bill would require and is working with Ecology and local partners. Testimony from county health and residents largely supported the bill, citing elevated nitrate levels and health risks, especially for infants and pregnant people. The committee then heard House Bill 2301, which expands Washington’s paint stewardship program to cover additional paint-related products, aerosol paints, and certain non-industrial coatings. The sponsor and industry supporters said the existing paint recycling program is working well and should be broadened to keep more materials out of landfills and reduce local hazardous waste costs. Local government witnesses supported the expansion but asked for changes on convenience standards, packaging coverage, and reimbursement for local collection costs. Ecology supported the overall concept but raised implementation concerns, including the need for uniform standards, full reporting, and more time for rulemaking. A wood preservatives industry representative opposed including wood preservatives, saying they are not paint and have different handling requirements. The committee also took testimony on House Bill 2515, a proposed substitute addressing emerging large energy use facilities, defined mainly as large data centers and virtual currency mining facilities. The bill would require utilities to adopt tariffs or policies to protect other ratepayers, require long-term contracts, demand response or curtailment provisions, reporting on energy and water use, and new clean energy targets for these facilities, while also changing how no-cost allowances under the Climate Commitment Act are allocated and creating an annual fee for the facilities. Supporters, including environmental groups, community action agencies, some utilities, and labor and tribal representatives, said the bill would protect ratepayers, improve transparency, and keep Washington on track for climate goals. Opponents, including data center and business groups, some ports, and several labor organizations, argued the bill is too prescriptive, could raise costs or discourage investment, may affect existing contracts and other large industrial loads, and could reduce construction jobs. No votes or final actions were taken in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• Towns, cities, municipal utilities, public utility districts, and joint operating agencies formed from
• It's important that we utilize it.
• The utility gets a bonus if it uses certain kinds of energy.
• It's completely optional for utilities, so each utility can make their own decision for what serves their
• Utilities are facing a significant need for new resources.

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several local government bills. HB 2006 would extend the deadline for certain rural counties that collect a sales and use tax for economic development to designate industrial land banks under the Growth Management Act. Supporters, including the sponsor and Kittitas County representatives, said the bill would help counties identify industrial land for job growth and economic development; Futurewise opposed it, citing concerns about large industrial land banks and impacts to agricultural lands. HB 2244 would let a city that forms a fire protection district after July 1, 2026, keep its levy rate without reducing it by the district’s levy, and would also allow online notice and interlocal contracting for fire services. City and fire officials supported it as a practical tool to fund fire service, while one witness opposed the broader trend of appointed taxing authorities. The committee also heard extensive testimony on HB 2316, which would limit shrub-step vegetation inside urban growth areas from being treated as wildlife habitat, critical area, or conservation area, and would bar related mitigation or replacement requirements. Tri-Cities officials, builders, housing advocates, and the sponsor argued the bill would reduce delays and costs for housing and development on already designated urban land, while conservation groups, tribal representatives, and some individuals opposed it as a broad rollback of habitat protections and a harmful precedent for ecosystems and wildlife. No vote was taken on the bills during the hearing. HB 2103 would expand public utility contracting authority so cities, utilities, and joint operating agencies could enter “capability” contracts for renewable or non-emitting generation projects, including nuclear, renewable hydrogen, and fusion, and repeal certain price-limit restrictions. Supporters said it would align older contracting law with the Clean Energy Transformation Act and help utilities plan for future power needs; opponents warned it would shift risk to ratepayers and revive concerns tied to the WPPSS nuclear debacle. The committee also heard HB 2388, which would classify pivot-corner solar and agrovoltaic facilities on agricultural land as distributed energy resources and accessory uses; the sponsor and supporters said it would help meet energy needs without harming productive farmland, while Futurewise asked for clarification to avoid unintended loss of agricultural land. The hearing then returned to HB 2103 for additional testimony, with the same basic split between utility and clean-energy supporters and ratepayer or anti-nuclear opponents.

Transcript Highlights:

• our electric utilities.
• utility exposure.
• , local governments, land managers, and property owners, and not concentrated on investor-owned utility
• utilities as well.
• that utilities caused.

Summary: The hearing focused on the SB 254 Natural Catastrophe Resiliency Study and its recommendations for addressing California’s wildfire risk, utility liability, and the financing of catastrophic losses. Committee members and presenters discussed the history of the wildfire fund created after the 2018 fire crisis and PG&E bankruptcy, the role of the California Earthquake Authority as fund administrator, and the report’s three broad policy pathways: continuing mitigation investments, more equitably allocating catastrophe costs, and considering expanded state involvement in catastrophe financing. Presenters emphasized that the report was intended as a neutral, stakeholder-informed analysis rather than an advocacy document, and that the status quo is not working well for survivors, ratepayers, insurers, or utilities. CEA, CPUC, and the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety each described their contributions and recommendations. CEA outlined options such as risk-tolerance standards for utilities, preserving safety certificate accountability, tying executive compensation more directly to safety, confidential near-miss reporting, liability reforms, and a fast-pay facility for survivors. CPUC stressed that wildfire mitigation and liability costs are a major driver of electricity affordability problems, and said the state should broaden how wildfire recovery and mitigation are funded beyond ratepayers alone. Energy Safety highlighted its wildfire mitigation plan oversight and recommended stronger safety reporting and stronger safety weighting in utility executive compensation. The modeling portion of the report estimated that a more durable wildfire fund could require about $36 billion in capitalization, with lower initial capital needs if risk transfer or liability reforms are used, but potentially higher ongoing premium or assessment costs. The report also examined state-backed insurer or backstop models, post-event funding mechanisms, and targeted community wildfire mitigation, which could reduce overall funding needs. Members raised concerns about the cost burden on ratepayers, the financial stability of utilities, the fairness of asking communities outside high-risk areas to pay, the role of local governments and home hardening, and whether broader climate-related liability or insurance reforms should be considered. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational and ended with plans for further committee hearings and stakeholder discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• You know, to manage and support these electric buses.
• I can work with our program manager.
• Are the utilities generally being responsive?
• Are the utilities generally being responsive?
• I'm joined by Jason Hattari, our capital programs manager.

Committee: House Transportation

Transcript Highlights:

• And depending on the utility type and the resourcing that's available within that utility, there may
• We also see a lot of barriers with smaller utilities, so rural co-ops, munis, public utility districts
• So here, any utility company infrastructure that sparks a wildfire, that utility company is going to
• manager of the infrastructure.
• We are not-for-profit, we are publicly managed. We're privately funded, but publicly managed.

Committee: House Environment & Energy

Summary: The committee first heard an update on the Model Toxics Control Act (MOTCA) and related cleanup programs. Department of Ecology staff described how MOTCA and the hazardous substance tax fund cleanup, prevention, stormwater, and other environmental work across state agencies, but warned that forecasted revenues have fallen while appropriations and transfers have outpaced incoming funds. Ecology said the operating account will require spending reductions to stay solvent this biennium, and that further cuts may be needed if forecasts worsen. Ecology also reviewed the state cleanup process and the scale of the problem, noting more sites are being discovered each year than are being cleaned up. The Pollution Liability Insurance Agency said its dedicated petroleum-tax-funded accounts remain stable, and highlighted its newer financial assurance and heating oil loan/grant programs, while noting concerns about equity for small property owners facing large cleanup liens. Practitioners and stakeholders then offered differing views on how MOTCA should work. One cleanup attorney argued the program has become too slow, expensive, and process-heavy, and urged a more risk-based, collaborative approach with less reliance on conservative assumptions. Environmental and community advocates countered that MOTCA is essential for cleanup, pollution prevention, stormwater control, and public participation, especially in communities of color and low-income neighborhoods that bear disproportionate toxic burdens; they urged stronger funding, tighter scrutiny of tax exemptions and budget diversions, and more accountability for stormwater spending. Port and city representatives emphasized that MOTCA grants are critical for large brownfield and waterfront cleanup projects that support redevelopment, but said long timelines, permitting delays, and funding uncertainty can stall projects and jeopardize existing commitments. The committee then shifted to utility wildfire risk. Staff summarized recent legislation on wildfire mitigation plans, captive insurance, securitization, and the wildfire response and resilience account. Chelan PUD described extensive mitigation work including vegetation management, grid hardening, undergrounding, AI cameras, weather stations, and partnerships on forest-health projects, and asked the Legislature to restore funding to the wildfire response and resilience account. Puget Sound Energy described similar investments across its service territory, including undergrounding, tree wire, sensors, cameras, weather stations, drones, and public safety power shutoffs, and said wildfire is its top risk. The Office of the Insurance Commissioner summarized a 2022 utility liability market study and a 2025 wildfire mitigation work group, recommending restored community resilience funding, clearer wildfire risk information for property owners, and a grant program based on recognized home-hardening standards. Committee members asked about insurance cancellations, neighborhood-level risk, and whether utilities’ or insurers’ maps are used; the commissioner’s office said insurers generally use their own data and that Washington’s FAIR Plan remains small compared with other states.

Transcript Highlights:

• Utilities are managing catastrophic legal exposure, and no one has a clear answer for what comes next
• From the utilities.
• in utility-caused wildfires.
• from utility shareholders sort of half half split and half for utility from utility shareholders were
• , other utilities, and the return they demand And, uh, can invest in California utilities, other utilities

Committee: House Utilities and Energy

Transcript Highlights:

• It's including price and utilization.
• Again, not all in the same place, differences in how we utilize those or can utilize those, but the data
• Again, not all in the same place, differences in how we utilize those or can utilize those, but the data
• Again, not all in the same place, differences in how we utilize those or can utilize those, but the data
• Again, not all in the same place, differences in how we utilize those or can utilize those, but the data

Summary: The committee began with an extended work session on the long-term care workforce. DSHS Assistant Secretary B. Rector described the new Home and Community Living Administration and outlined major workforce pressures: Washington had about 126,000 long-term care workers in 2022, with demand expected to outpace supply as the 85-plus population and dementia prevalence rise sharply. She emphasized that direct care workers are largely women, people of color, and immigrants, and that family caregivers are also a major part of the system. She highlighted recruitment and retention efforts funded through federal Money Follows the Person dollars, including high school training partnerships, a retention toolkit, transportation support, caregiver newsletters, tribal workforce navigators, and a remote caregiving pilot. Committee members asked about career pathways, technology use, and turnover drivers; Rector said wages, benefits, unstable hours, and workplace support are key issues and promised follow-up data. Aidan Swain of the Washington Health Care Association said skilled nursing and assisted living facilities face acute RN vacancies, wage pressures, and Medicaid reimbursement that does not cover costs, and urged modernization of training, better reimbursement, and continued support for facility-based care. Maddie Fouch of SEIU 775, representing about 55,000 caregivers, said low wages, weak benefits, lack of voice, and certification delays are driving turnover and shortages, and argued for higher compensation, better worker protections, and more transparent reimbursement. Catherine Smith of Behavioral Health Solutions described growing behavioral health needs in nursing homes, the role of expanded behavioral supports programs, and credentialing delays that slow hiring. No votes were taken; the panel was informational only. The second agenda item was an overview of the palliative care benefit work group report required by 2024 legislation. Nico Jansen of the Office of the Insurance Commissioner explained that the work group, convened with the Health Care Authority, studied a potential palliative care benefit for fully insured commercial plans and also Medicaid, PEBB, and SEBB. He said palliative care is a philosophy of care focused on symptom management, coordination, and support for serious illness, and is distinct from hospice because it can be provided alongside curative treatment. The actuarial analysis concluded that creating a new benefit would likely increase costs, estimating about a 28-cent per member per month increase overall and roughly $2.6 million to $4.5 million in annual state Medicaid costs if implemented in 2027. Jansen said the consultants did not find sufficient evidence to assume savings from avoided hospitalizations or long-term care, though several work group members disagreed and submitted response letters. Senators asked about other states, Medicare, health homes, and whether more research could clarify cost savings; OIC said some states, including Hawaii, are moving ahead with Medicaid palliative care benefits, Medicare covers some related services but not in the same way, and further evidence may emerge over time. OIC did not take a position on whether the Legislature should create the benefit. The final presentation covered health care price transparency tools in Washington and federally. Evan Klein and HCA Chief Data Officer Vishal Chaudry reviewed federal hospital and health plan transparency rules, the state all-payer claims database, prescription drug price transparency, the Health Care Cost Transparency Board, the Prescription Drug Affordability Board, and other reporting systems. They explained that the APCD contains claims from fully insured commercial plans, Medicaid, and public employee programs, but not self-insured employer data except for limited voluntary submissions. They also described how machine-readable files, consumer price tools, and aggregated dashboards are used, and noted that data limitations, delays, and complexity remain significant. Senators asked about voluntary self-insured participation, the role of AI in making data more usable, and whether transparency can really help consumers given access barriers and medical debt. HCA said AI is increasingly used by private entities to mine large transparency datasets, but state agencies still face limits in data access and analytic capacity. The committee did not take action; the session was informational and ended with a discussion of how transparency data might better inform policy and purchasing decisions in the future.

Transcript Highlights:

• Utilities are managing catastrophic legal exposure, and no one has a clear answer for what comes next
• The utilities that paid for it.
• From the utilities.
• in utility-caused wildfires.
• , other utilities, and the return they demand And, uh, can invest in California utilities, other utilities

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Utilities and Energy held a hearing on the California Earthquake Authority’s SB 254 report and broader options for reforming California’s utility wildfire recovery system. The chair framed the discussion around the Palisades and Eaton fires, the scale of wildfire-related costs on utility bills, and the need to weigh trade-offs among survivors, ratepayers, utilities, insurers, and taxpayers. The first panel featured wildfire survivors William Abrams and Joy Chen, who described long delays in compensation, housing insecurity, and what they viewed as a system that protects utility shareholders more than victims. They urged greater transparency, clearer accountability for utility spending and safety performance, faster and fuller compensation for survivors, and reforms such as independent audits and better alignment of utility incentives with wildfire prevention and restitution. The second panel began with Tom Welsh of the California Earthquake Authority, who explained that the SB 254 report was intended as a broad inventory of policy pathways rather than recommendations. He described the report’s process, including stakeholder submissions, workstreams, and a convergence process, and outlined the current wildfire fund structure: utilities remain liable, the fund reimburses eligible claims after a covered wildfire, and the CPUC later determines prudency and possible reimbursement back to the fund. RAND’s Lloyd Dixon summarized compensation data, saying utilities paid about $38 billion between 2017 and 2024, with major shares going to injured parties, insurers, and public entities, while litigation costs and survivors’ own losses remain substantial. He noted that legal fees and delays reduce the amount survivors ultimately receive. Utility and public-interest witnesses offered differing views on the report’s pathways. PG&E’s Tyson Smith said the report shows inaction is the worst outcome and argued for community wildfire risk reduction, equitable allocation of catastrophe costs, and state-led resilience tools. LADWP’s Fernando Valero emphasized the vulnerability of municipal utilities and cities, and supported inverse condemnation reform, a state-sponsored liability insurance framework, damages and subrogation limits, and stronger insurance access. Consumer Attorneys of California’s John Fisk argued that IOU-caused fires are not natural disasters but the result of negligence and sometimes criminal conduct, and opposed reducing utility liability while supporting stronger oversight and audits. The Public Advocates Office’s Nathaniel Skinner focused on affordability, saying ratepayers already bear large and growing wildfire costs and warning against shifting more costs onto bills without measurable risk reduction and tighter accountability. Committee members then began questioning witnesses about what counts as measurable mitigation, how to define full and fair compensation, and how any fast-pay process should work.

Transcript Highlights:

• If Administrative Manager Vaughn would want to come forward.
• The Public Utilities Commission has 50 FTP allocated to them.
• , and those fees are paid by utilities subject to the jurisdiction of the Public Utilities Commission
• of care for electric utility wildfire mitigation plans.
• of care for electric utility wildfire mitigation plans.

Summary: The committee met with a quorum present and first reviewed the Industrial Commission’s base budget and FY 2027 requests. The analyst and agency staff described the commission’s dedicated-fund structure, the IRIS technology modernization project, and several requested adjustments: ongoing support for IRIS maintenance, additional funding for the annual seminar and CWICS training, an increase for the Peace Officer Temporary Disability Fund due to rising claims, and replacement IT hardware. Members asked about the IRIS contract, seminar fees, and the crime victims compensation fund and general fund support. Agency staff said IRIS is still being supported by an outside vendor because OITS lacks the needed expertise, that seminar and training fees are already competitive and the plan is to expand services rather than lower fees, and that crime victims compensation could be covered temporarily by dedicated or federal funds if needed. No votes were taken on the Industrial Commission budget during the meeting. The committee then heard the Public Utilities Commission budget review. The analyst explained the commission’s dedicated funds, staffing, and the FY 2026 trailer appropriation tied to the Wildfire Standard of Care Act, along with a FY 2027 request for IT hardware only. Questions focused on a large variance in the indirect cost recovery fund, which staff attributed to timing of federal reimbursements and rent not being charged to that fund at the time. Commissioners and staff also received positive comments about the implementation of the wildfire-related duties. No action was taken on the PUC budget. Next, the Secretary of State’s budget was presented. The analyst outlined the office’s election, business, and commission functions, noted the prior $10 million election system upgrade, and described FY 2027 requests for a voter pamphlet and guide, overtime for the post-election audit team, and replacement technology. Secretary of State Phil McGrane and staff emphasized the rapid growth in business filings, the office’s revenue generation, and the need to maintain service levels, arguing against ongoing cuts. He said the voter pamphlet request is tied to statutory election-year mailings, the overtime reflects cyclical election workload, and the office is considering AI cautiously due to sensitive voter data. Members asked about business filing growth, the difference between a pamphlet and a voter guide, and the possible impact of hand-counting ballots; McGrane said hand-counting would mainly affect counties, not the state office. The meeting ended with scheduling remarks for the next day’s budget work and a note that the FY 2026 rescission bill was still being processed.

Transcript Highlights:

• Utilities and eliminates liability from the utilities.
• Those are the utilities. So I'll use investor and utilities. And co-ops that participated in green.
• , data related to utilities.
• There's an emphasis on the utility data that we heard from emergency managers that would be really valuable
• management and protocols, incorporating that into utility practices.

Committee: House Water & Natural Resources Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• Why the emphasis on... ...utilities?
• It's also about utilizing innovation and technology to help customers manage their energy uses and reduce
• And we need to talk about utility return on equity and reforming the utility business model.
• Did you use your utility bill? I did. It is not utilities.
• Did you use your utility bill? I did. I was, it is not utilizes. Jennifer Bosco. Thank you.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy

Summary: The committee heard testimony on H. 4144, the Governor’s Energy Affordability, Independence, and Innovation Act, with the administration arguing the bill would lower bills in the short and long term while expanding clean energy supply and innovation. The Governor and Secretary said the bill would reduce or restructure charges on customer bills, reform Mass Save, expand securitization as a financing tool, speed interconnection, create energy-ready zones, strengthen consumer protections in competitive supply, and allow broader state procurement of energy resources. They said the package could save consumers billions over time and would help address high energy costs, especially during extreme heat and winter spikes. Committee members pressed the administration on several provisions, especially securitization, asking whether the bill requires an apples-to-apples comparison of total costs over time, including interest and lost tax revenue, versus paying through rates. Administration witnesses said DPU review and public comment would be required and said they would work to clarify the language if needed. Members also questioned the bill’s solar and procurement provisions, including reduced net metering compensation for some large facilities, the scope of all-resource procurements, and whether hydro, solar, and nuclear would be included; the administration said those resources were contemplated and that procurement would still be reviewed by DPU. Other questions focused on the short-term relief from bill changes, the treatment of low- and moderate-income discounts, and whether the bill’s heat pump and Mass Save reforms would help customers who cannot afford upfront costs. Several witnesses and committee members discussed Mass Save reforms, including securitization of program costs, on-bill financing, pre-approval of rebates, and shifting program administration away from gas utilities. Administration witnesses said the changes were intended to reduce volatility, lower administrative costs, and better align costs with long-term savings. Questions also touched on geothermal permitting, municipal participation in offshore wind procurement, and the proposed repeal of the ballot requirement for nuclear power, which the administration defended as preserving future options under heavy review. No votes were taken during the hearing portion described. Supportive testimony came from labor, environmental, business, planning, and development groups. The AFL-CIO, NECA, and the Environmental League of Massachusetts backed the bill, emphasizing lower bills, job creation, labor standards, just transition protections, and cleaner energy. NAIOP, the Massachusetts Business Roundtable, and MAPC supported provisions on energy-ready zones, interconnection reform, microgrids, extreme-heat shutoff protections, and Mass Save improvements. A HEET representative praised the bill’s use of securitization, geothermal, and utility financing tools but urged guardrails and workforce protections. Overall, testimony was broadly favorable, with most witnesses calling for refinements rather than opposing the bill outright.

Transcript Highlights:

• to value avoided utility, and only utility, electric utility, greenhouse gas emissions that they achieve
• And so what this does is it allows the utility to factor that into their utility costs and how, how..
• So everyone's utility... ...behalf of the bill. So everyone's utility rates could go up.
• And why is it only electric utilities? Aren't there other utilities that could...
• Is it only electric utilities?

Committee: House House Energy, Environment & Natural Resources

Transcript Highlights:

• In 2017, I founded Abode Energy Management.
• We call the electric utilities, or the utilities now, perhaps soon to be the electric utilities only,
• This idea of the utility...
• I’m a senior policy manager with Sunrun.
• called by the utility.

Committee: Senate Senate Committee on Climate Change and Global Warming

Summary: The committee held a hearing on the value of Mass Save, with opening remarks emphasizing that despite past criticisms the program has delivered major energy, cost, climate, and equity benefits. The chair cited large avoided system costs, strong benefit-cost ratios, and recent legislative changes that set emissions goals, restricted fossil-fuel equipment incentives, and increased focus on low- and moderate-income households. Department of Energy Resources Commissioner Elizabeth Mahoney testified that Mass Save has weatherized hundreds of thousands of homes, reduced bills, avoided emissions, and that the current plan includes budget controls after the DPU ordered $500 million removed from the approved budget. She said the governor’s proposal to have only electric utilities administer the program was intended to reduce administrative costs and align with current implementation trends. Members questioned Mahoney about what counts as marketing and administration, and she said the category includes traditional advertising as well as community-based outreach, customer resource centers, and other customer engagement work, much of it in low- and moderate-income communities. She said administrative and marketing costs are under 5% of the budget, while more than 80% goes to incentives and direct program delivery. Several witnesses then focused on workforce and contractor impacts. Dave Betcher of Abode Energy Management and Rick Taglienti of Rogers Insulation said Mass Save sustains small businesses, creates careers, and supports thousands of jobs; both warned that budget cuts would reduce hiring, training, and work in homes and businesses. They also described a broad ecosystem of suppliers, trainers, and service providers that depends on stable program funding. Other witnesses addressed cost-effectiveness, affordability, and emissions. Anna Johnson of ACEEE said Massachusetts remains a national leader, with Mass Save returning about $2.80 per dollar invested, reducing peak demand, and lowering bills for participants, especially through weatherization and heat pumps. Kyle Murray of Acadia Center said the program is statutorily required to be cost-effective and has avoided billions in supply and infrastructure costs for all ratepayers, including nonparticipants, by lowering overall demand and peak prices. Amy Boyd-Rabin of the Environmental League of Massachusetts argued that efficiency is the cheapest way to meet climate targets and that cutting the budget would force more expensive power generation. The hearing also featured testimony on equity and housing: Mary Wampo described historic under-service to renter-heavy and lower-income communities and said recent reforms, including designated equity communities and performance incentives tied to equity, are helping correct that imbalance; Brian Biot and James Collins of LEAN/ABCD described low-income delivery systems and wraparound services; Barney Heath and John Nannari said Mass Save incentives are essential to affordable housing, passive house construction, and keeping projects on time and on budget. The final witnesses highlighted Connected Solutions and electrification: Sunrun’s Bronte Payne said the virtual power plant program saved more than it cost and helps avoid peaker plants and grid upgrades, and Highland Electric Fleets’ Ben Sondaga said electric school buses can provide similar grid benefits while lowering transportation costs for districts.

Transcript Highlights:

• In 2017, I founded Abode Energy Management.
• We call the electric utilities or the utilities now, perhaps soon to be the electric utilities only,
• This idea of the utility... ...from DOER or from somebody else, this idea of the utilities running the
• I'm a senior policy manager with Sunrun.
• that are called by the utility.

Committee: Senate Senate Committee on Climate Change and Global Warming

Summary: The hearing focused on the value of Mass Save, with committee members and witnesses largely emphasizing that the program lowers energy bills, reduces peak demand, supports climate goals, and delivers benefits beyond direct participants. The chair opened by noting Mass Save’s long-term savings, its role in weatherization and heat pump deployment, and recent statutory changes directing the program toward emissions reductions, low- and moderate-income households, and fossil-fuel restrictions. Elizabeth Mahoney of the Department of Energy Resources said the program has evolved to broaden access and control costs, citing large weatherization totals, heat pump installations, avoided emissions, and budget controls that removed $500 million from the approved plan. She also said the governor’s proposal to have only electric utilities administer Mass Save was intended to reduce administrative and procurement costs, and she explained that outreach to low- and moderate-income communities is counted within marketing spending. Several witnesses addressed the program’s workforce and business impacts. Dave Betcher of Abode Energy Management and Rick Taglienti of Rogers Insulation said Mass Save sustains small businesses, contractors, and thousands of jobs by creating stable demand for energy-efficiency work, while warning that sharp budget cuts would lead to layoffs and discourage investment in training, equipment, and hiring. Committee members pressed them on who administers the program, and both said the program administrators and utilities collaborate, with day-to-day contractor oversight and customer work largely delegated to private vendors and community partners. Other witnesses, including Brian Biot and James Collins of the low-income network, described the “quarterbacking” model used for income-eligible customers, where community action agencies provide full project management, technical support, and wraparound services to help households access fuel assistance, discount rates, weatherization, and electrification measures. A major theme was cost-effectiveness and system-wide savings. Anna Johnson of ACEEE and Kyle Murray of Acadia Center said Mass Save returns more than it costs, reduces peak demand, and lowers prices for all ratepayers, including those who do not participate directly. They cited avoided costs in the billions, strong state rankings, and examples of peak-hour savings that avoid expensive generation and infrastructure. Amy Boyd-Rabin of the Environmental League of Massachusetts argued that energy efficiency is the cheapest way to achieve greenhouse gas reductions and that cutting the program would force more expensive power plants to run. Bronte Payne of Sunrun and Ben Sondaga of Highland Electric Fleets highlighted Connected Solutions, a Mass Save-funded virtual power plant program, saying it saves ratepayers money and can use home batteries and electric school buses to reduce peak demand and support grid reliability. Equity and affordable housing witnesses, including Mary Wampo and Barney Heath, said Mass Save has become more responsive to renters, low-income households, and designated equity communities, while also helping affordable housing projects meet passive house and electrification standards; no votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• to value avoided utility...
• State law doesn't allow utilities to value avoided utility and only utility electric utility greenhouse
• And so what this does is it allows the utility to factor that into their utility costs and how much it
• And why is it only electric utilities? Aren't there other utilities that could...
• Is it only electric utilities?

Summary: The House Energy, Environment and Natural Resources Committee met on February 5 and heard three measures. House Bill 246 would provide state matching funds for local governments already approved for federal flood mitigation assistance to buy out and rehabilitate floodplain properties, especially in Lincoln County, to reduce repetitive flood damage and restore land to a more natural floodplain. Supporters included county officials, emergency management, and a racetrack lobbyist, all emphasizing public safety, reduced disaster costs, and community recovery. Some members raised concerns about pre-flood property valuation and anti-donation issues, but the bill passed on a do-pass motion. House Bill 271 would appropriate funds through the Office of Natural Resources Trustee for natural resource recovery and public land access, including disaster recovery projects and expansion of recreational opportunities. Supporters argued it would help restore watersheds, improve access to public lands, and support hunting, fishing, and local outdoor economies. Several members questioned whether the bill was too open-ended, whether it could affect grazing or other existing rights, and why the trustee’s office was the right vehicle; the sponsor and trustee said the office has a transparent public process and that the bill would not create new eminent domain authority or adverse changes to existing rights. The committee approved the bill 9-1, with one member explaining support but noting lingering concerns. House Bill 254 would allow investor-owned electric utilities to count avoided greenhouse gas emissions when evaluating the cost-effectiveness of energy efficiency programs under the utility cost test. The sponsor and utility witnesses said this would help expand programs such as heat pumps, HVAC upgrades, and all-electric development, while opponents worried it could function as a rate increase or “double dipping” because customers already pay fees supporting efficiency programs. The committee passed the bill 7-3. Finally, House Joint Memorial 3 would ask the Environment Department to study PFAS exemptions and report back during the interim as rulemaking on the PFAS Protection Act proceeds. The memorial drew both support and opposition, with critics saying it conflicted with existing statute and was unnecessary, while supporters said it would ensure a thorough review of federal changes and consumer-product exemptions. The memorial passed 8-2, and the committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are joined today by our city manager, Mr. Derek Fiatcher, our deputy city manager, Mr.
• Jim Morris, Deputy City Manager. I manage permits and licensing. Jim Morris, Deputy City Manager.
• I manage permits and licensing.
• But if we're utilizing it, we're the ones that are, you know, utilizing it at the main use.
• I'm city deputy city manager. If we do not utilize the money, we are aware that it has to go back.

Summary: The committee first took up a long-running audit finding involving the City of Daytona Beach’s unexpended building permit fund balance, which has exceeded the statutory cap for several years and was reported at $10.8 million in the latest audit. Mayor Derek Henry and city staff said the city had analyzed the fund, adopted a corrective action plan, waived more than $5.5 million in permit and inspection fees, used some excess funds for a training facility rehabilitation, and is pursuing a $9.4 million City Hall expansion that they say is allowed under a November 2024 Attorney General opinion permitting construction of a building to house the building code enforcement function. Committee members repeatedly questioned whether the city was simply trying to spend down the money, whether the proposed uses were truly lawful, why the balance kept growing despite fee waivers, and where the interest earnings were going. The mayor and deputy city manager said the city’s growth and staffing needs justified the plan, but several members expressed frustration and skepticism. A public commenter also urged accountability and raised concerns about the city’s spending plans and the size of the remaining balance. The committee then received an Auditor General presentation on the Town of Greenville, which found 31 operational audit findings and described pervasive control failures, possible fraud, waste, and abuse. The findings included election paperwork problems that left a council seat vacant, conflicts of interest, late financial disclosure filings, related-party transactions, inadequate meeting notices and minutes, quorum and voting documentation problems, council members’ involvement in day-to-day operations, missing ethics training, budget adoption and monitoring deficiencies, inaccurate accounting records and bank reconciliations, utility billing and rate issues, grant compliance problems tied to an unfinished grocery store project, weak personnel and contracting controls, improper severance and compensation issues, late vendor payments, weak procurement and P-card controls, vehicle-use and property-control weaknesses, poor public records access, and IT access and fraud-policy gaps. Greenville’s mayor and staff said the audit largely reflected the prior administration and that the current council and staff are taking corrective action. They said the town terminated the former manager, adopted seven new policies since the audit began, and is working with the Auditor General to improve procurement, financial controls, inventory management, grant oversight, and ethics compliance. The town attorney said he had alerted federal authorities earlier about concerns, and committee members noted that FDLE has received a criminal referral and is investigating. Several members praised the new leadership’s cooperation but also suggested the town consider consolidation or dissolution if problems persist.