Transcript Highlights:

• This bill requires development... ...other environmental and community partners to support it.
• And meanwhile, use a bond, which has a carrying cost of like 1% to pay that interconnection.
• Why does a bond have a carrying cost of 1%?
• But there are financing charges as well attached to that bond.
• Municipalities and state agencies are left to mitigate the environmental impacts.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on a wide range of energy bills, with much of the discussion focused on offshore wind, battery storage, solar, nuclear study proposals, and a bill to redefine clean energy. Several Barnstable-area legislators and witnesses raised concerns about offshore wind transmission infrastructure near neighborhoods, beaches, and drinking water supplies, and supported bills to create a special commission and increase local input and oversight. In contrast, environmental, consumer, labor, and clean energy groups strongly backed offshore wind expansion bills, arguing that offshore wind lowers long-term costs, improves winter reliability, reduces fossil fuel dependence, supports jobs and local supply chains, and should include wildlife protections, labor standards, and community benefits. Some witnesses and committee members noted that parts of the offshore wind legislation overlap with the Governor’s energy affordability bill, and asked for clarification on which provisions were new versus duplicative. The committee also heard testimony on battery storage and solar legislation. Two student witnesses and several industry representatives supported a bill to study grid battery storage, saying storage can reduce outages, lower peak prices, and improve grid resilience during extreme weather. Witnesses from solar and storage companies supported a broader clean energy transition bill that would expand storage procurement, create a retail-style storage program for distributed batteries, set a 10-gigawatt solar target by 2035, and streamline siting and interconnection. Committee members pressed witnesses on whether these provisions were already included in the Governor’s affordability bill and asked for a section-by-section breakdown of what was new. One witness also urged allowing developers to bond interconnection payments to reduce financing costs. Another major topic was a bill defining clean energy, especially whether existing pumped-storage hydropower should qualify for subsidies or be excluded. Supporters of the bill argued that existing pumped storage should not receive additional ratepayer subsidies because it is already built, can have environmental impacts on rivers and ecosystems, and could cost ratepayers hundreds of millions of dollars. Opponents said pumped storage is an important reliability resource and should remain eligible. The committee also heard testimony on nuclear-energy study bills: some witnesses supported creating a commission to examine nuclear power as a reliable, carbon-free option, while others opposed nuclear study bills and argued that nuclear is costly, unsafe, and inconsistent with the state’s clean energy goals. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Natural Resources Agency and Environmental Protection Agency.
• Many of the bond programs are continuing that were funded with previous bonds or General Fund, and it's
• So there is funding through the climate bond...
• This does not mean sacrificing environmental review or environmental protection.
• It is made up of state, federal, and bond funds.

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Resources, Environmental Protection, and Energy opened its first hearing with remarks from the chair and members emphasizing climate change, resiliency, clean energy, natural resources, and the need to make careful budget choices in a constrained fiscal environment. The Legislative Analyst’s Office presented an overview of the natural resources and environmental protection budget, warning that although current revenues are strong, the state faces significant out-year deficits and should apply a high bar to new ongoing spending, use special funds and fees carefully, and focus on critical health and safety needs. The LAO said the Governor’s Proposition 4 spending plan was generally reasonable and consistent with bond requirements, but urged legislative oversight and reporting, especially where bond funds interact with General Fund proposals. Secretary Wade Crowfoot then described the Natural Resources Agency’s recent accomplishments and priorities, including wildfire resilience, water reliability, coastal protection, outdoor access, biodiversity, tribal partnerships, and streamlining project delivery. He highlighted major investments in climate and resilience, the role of Proposition 4 in continuing those efforts, and the need to modernize water infrastructure, including Delta conveyance and other regional conveyance projects. Members asked about Delta conveyance, invasive species, permitting delays, and the impact of federal staffing cuts; Crowfoot said the administration is pushing projects forward, supports a beneficiary-pays approach for conveyance, and is filling gaps left by federal reductions where necessary. The committee then heard from the Department of Parks and Recreation. Director Armando Quintero reviewed the state park system, outdoor access programs, tribal agreements, wildfire and forest resilience work, and deferred maintenance funded by the climate bond. The LAO recommended rejecting the proposed ongoing General Fund transfer for the California State Parks Library Pass program, saying it did not meet the high bar for new spending, while several members strongly supported the program as a low-cost, high-value access tool. Members also pressed Parks on reservation system problems and no-show vacancies; staff said new rules and enforcement will take effect July 1 and that vacancies are being opened up sooner. The department also presented low-cost accommodation projects, which the LAO supported. Finally, the Department of Fish and Wildlife introduced its new director, Megan Hurdle, who outlined the department’s mission, staffing, service-based budgeting, and Proposition 4 proposals for salmon tagging, hatchery improvements, and public access lands. She emphasized the department’s role in biodiversity conservation, permitting streamlining, law enforcement, and human-wildlife conflict outreach, and said the agency is working to close a service gap identified in its budgeting analysis. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• I just wondered, is that coming from Prop 4 bond funds?
• being drawn down from within the bond.
• I would say that that's how it was laid out in the bond.
• And the response from the environmental community is because that's the only way we get environmental
• Raquel Mase with the California Environmental Justice Alliance.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And as the chairman has mentioned, environmental issue is very important.
• Natural Resources Agency and Environmental Protection Agency.
• Many of the bond programs are continuing that were funded with previous bonds or general fund, and it's
• This does not mean sacrificing environmental review or environmental protection.
• And scale of environmental restoration.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , subject to rules relating to tax-exempt bonds contained in federal and state tax law.
• So, Kelly, this is a very large bond, and I don't know if you can answer some of my questions.
• This is a very large bond, and I don't know if you can answer some of my questions.
• And they've recently approved a similar bond program as well to support dementia research.
• So they'll be funding... ...a similar bond program as well to support dementia research.

Summary: The Senate Higher Education and Workforce Development Committee held its final meeting of the 2026 session, opening a public hearing on Senate Bill 6321, which would authorize up to $6 billion in state general obligation bonds over six years and create the Washington Institute for Scientific Advancement within the Department of Commerce. Staff explained that the institute would oversee grants for scientific research and facilities, with the proposal requiring voter approval for the debt and institute creation. Senator Slatter, the prime sponsor, said the bill was intended to stabilize research funding in Washington in response to federal cuts and uncertainty, and noted it was modeled in part on similar efforts in California and Texas. Testimony was overwhelmingly in support. Representatives from Washington State University and the University of Washington described the state’s research enterprise as an economic engine and emphasized the importance of stable funding for jobs, innovation, and competitiveness. University of Washington witnesses said federal funding disruptions had reduced new NIH awards, cut student support, and threatened research programs in medicine, mental health, clean energy, forest resilience, and climate adaptation. Several early-career researchers and union members testified about personal impacts from grant terminations, furloughs, and delayed career transitions, arguing that the bill would help protect scientific work, workforce development, and public health outcomes in Washington. After closing the hearing on SB 6321, the committee moved into executive session. It voted do pass on Substitute House Bill 2525 and sent it to the Rules Committee. The committee also approved a slate of gubernatorial appointments for confirmation recommendation, and then adjourned after thanking staff and members for their work during the session.

Transcript Highlights:

• , the House Standing Committee on Bonding, we used to do oversight hearings.
• And we'll begin with the topic of environmental justice communities.
• So MEPA, environmental review under the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act, is only invoked by agency
• Department of Environmental Protection, and it's a very...
• Bonds. Bonds. Bonds. Bonds. Bonds. Two-thirds.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on State Administration and Regulatory Oversight held an oversight hearing on draft regulations implementing Article 97 of the Massachusetts Constitution under Chapter 274 of the Acts of 2022, the Open Space Act. Chairs Cabral and Collins framed the hearing as a review of how the new process for dispositions or changes in use of Article 97 land would work, including public notice, environmental justice protections, replacement land, appraisals, and the role of the legislature. Under Secretary Stephanie Cooper and Commissioner Adam Bakke testified for EEA/DCAM, followed later by Deputy Inspector General O’Neill and Deputy Inspector General Giles on appraisal review. Much of the discussion focused on how the draft regulations would operate in practice. EEA said the regulations would require advance public notice, define “comparable location” for replacement land, and allow the Secretary to make findings on whether an action would adversely affect environmental justice communities. Members pressed for longer public comment periods, clearer notice to local officials, more frequent updates to the site evaluation tool, and a clearer definition of terms such as “limited duration” for permits and licenses. EEA said the regulations are intended to standardize a process that has been handled through policy and case-by-case review, and that the legislature still retains the final authority to approve any Article 97 disposition. Committee members also questioned whether the draft rules shift too much discretion to the Secretary and whether the proposed “proponent” process could allow private entities to drive Article 97 actions. EEA responded that non-public proponents would still need municipal support and legislative sponsorship, and that the regulations do not create a new avenue to bypass the existing home rule and legislative process. Members raised concerns about the current policy’s unanimous-vote requirements for municipal commissions, the proposed waiver provisions, whether MEPA applies, and the lack of explicit enforcement or penalty language in the act or regulations. EEA and DCAM said the act does not provide an enforcement mechanism and that disputes would generally be handled through the courts or the Attorney General. The Inspector General’s office explained its role in reviewing appraisals for special legislation, including Article 97 matters, to ensure compliance with USPAP standards and to forward its review to DCAM. The hearing did not include any votes or formal committee action; members indicated that the committee may later issue recommendations to the executive agencies based on the testimony and questions raised.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh we have environmental policy analyst.
• We also have some bond initiatives or at least one.
• </c><00:02:28.560><c> Uh,</c> bond initiatives or at least one.
• Uh, bond initiatives or at least one.
• </c> clerk will read the bond initiative. clerk will read the bond initiative.

Keywords: Senate streaming session for Tuesday, January 27, 2026, 960, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And I've adding to capital bonding.
• for the bond, the money necessary for the bond, the revenue<00:55:41.920><c> needed</c><00:55:42.320
• </c><00:55:49.200><c> through</c> make up the money for the bond through make up the money for the bond
• ,</c><00:56:00.600><c> 5</c> 5 million dollars from capital bond, 5 5 million dollars from capital bond
• bonding over in through the bonding bonding over in Manchester.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Many of the bond programs are continuing that were funded with previous bonds or General Fund, and it's
• So there is funding through the climate bond... control board.
• So there is funding through the climate bond.
• This does not mean sacrificing environmental review or environmental protection.
• And scale of environmental restoration.

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Resources, Environmental Protection, and Energy convened for its first hearing and heard an overview from the Legislative Analyst’s Office and the Natural Resources Agency. The LAO emphasized California’s strong current revenues but warned of a structural budget problem, projected out-year deficits, and the need for a high bar on new spending. It generally supported the administration’s Proposition 4 spending plan as reasonable and consistent with bond requirements, while urging legislative oversight and caution about using special funds and adding ongoing commitments. Secretary Wade Crowfoot responded with an overview of climate, wildfire, water, coastal, and conservation challenges and highlighted progress under the Newsom administration, including clean energy growth, wildfire resilience investments, land conservation, tribal co-management, and outdoor access initiatives. He also discussed federal staffing cuts affecting California’s response capacity and said the state has had to fill gaps in flood forecasting, land management, and park access. Members then questioned the secretary about the Delta conveyance tunnel and broader water reliability issues. Crowfoot said the project remains important, is being pursued as a beneficiary-pays project, and is moving through the State Water Resources Control Board’s permitting process, while also stressing that it is only one part of a broader water strategy that includes levee strengthening, subsidence, groundwater storage, recycling, and conservation. Senators also raised concerns about permitting delays, invasive species, and the impact of position cuts on agency capacity; Crowfoot said streamlining is needed but that staffing remains essential. The committee then moved to the Department of Parks and Recreation, where Director Armando Quintero described the state park system, tribal agreements, wildfire and deferred maintenance work, and outdoor access programs such as the State Library Park Pass and Adventure Pass. The LAO recommended rejecting the proposed ongoing $6.75 million General Fund transfer for the library park pass, arguing it did not meet the high bar for new ongoing spending, but several senators strongly supported the program as a low-cost way to expand access. Members also pressed Parks on reservation system problems and campsite no-shows. Department staff said they are updating website guidance, working with the reservation vendor, and implementing new no-show and reservation-modification rules effective July 1, including penalties for repeated no-shows and immediate reopening of vacant sites. The committee then heard a low-cost accommodations proposal, which Parks said would fund planning and construction at several sites using Proposition 68, reimbursements, and donations; the LAO said it had no concerns. Finally, the new director of the Department of Fish and Wildlife, Megan Hurdle, introduced herself and outlined the department’s mission, staffing, service-based budgeting, and Proposition 4 requests, including funding for salmon genetic tagging, hatchery repairs, and public access improvements. She said the department is focused on biodiversity, permitting streamlining, law enforcement, and human-wildlife conflict prevention, and noted that the agency is still updating its service-based budgeting analysis to identify gaps and priorities.

Transcript Highlights:

• , subject to rules relating to tax-exempt bonds contained in federal and state tax law.
• So, Kelly, this is a very large bond, and I don't know if you can answer some of my questions.
• So this is a very large bond, and I don't know if you can answer some of my questions.
• And they've recently approved a similar bond program as well to support dementia research.
• That's different than the regenerative medicine bond. Is that right?

Bills: SB6321, SGA9245, SGA9247, SGA9250, SGA9252, SGA9253, SGA9254, SGA9259, SGA9260, SGA9261, SGA9262

Keywords: scientific research, innovation, economic growth, Washington Institute, public funding, 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, and there will be a bonding bill.
• And so since some of those bonding bill.
• The bonding bill is $700 million.
• That The bonding bill is $700 million.
• </c> very good basic uh bipartisan bonding very good basic uh bipartisan bonding bill<00:10:36.480><c

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> Babcock uh Department of Environmental Babcock uh Department of Environmental Services<00:20:48.840
• </c><00:20:58.360><c> Service</c> Department of Environmental Service Department of Environmental Service
• </c> to ensure that the environmental to ensure that the environmental injustices<00:26:14.720><c> that
• </c> measures related to environmental measures related to environmental changes<00:52:25.400><c> and
• All right, and we're adjourned. environmental stewardship and then um we environmental stewardship and

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee on Energy and Environmental Protection heard several measures focused on water quality, waste management, aquifer protection, wastewater, and climate-related funding. SB 984 on water pollution drew opposition from DLNR and the Hawaii Cattlemen’s Council, with the latter arguing the bill could unfairly blame landowners for runoff caused by terrain and storm events; the chair noted there were also supporters and commenters submitted in writing. SB 639 on underground storage tanks received support from the Department of Health, the Board of Water Supply, and the Sierra Club, with testimony emphasizing environmental restoration standards after jet fuel releases; no opposition was noted in the live testimony. SB 946 on wastewater management was presented as clarifying that the ban on discharging wastewater or raw sewage into state waters applies to treatment plants, and it drew support from the County of Maui, DOH, and Hawaii Reef and Ocean Coalition, with no questions or opposition raised in the hearing. The committee also heard SB 438 on waste disposal facilities near significant aquifers. DOH and the Water Commission offered comments, while the City and County of Honolulu’s Department of Environmental Services opposed the bill because of a provision affecting ash recycling; the Board of Water Supply and Sierra Club supported the measure, and the Makakilo-Kapolei-Honokai Hale Neighborhood Board and Energy Justice Network raised concerns about fly ash and bottom ash recycling, landfill capacity, and potential contamination of aquifers. Testimony reflected a split between environmental protection concerns and arguments that the bill could block beneficial reuse of ash. The committee then took up HB 1395 on state funds, which would direct interest from the Emergency and Budget Reserve Fund to the general fund when the reserve exceeds the state’s target. The Governor’s office, emergency management, the State Energy Office, the Hawaiʻi Green Infrastructure Authority, the Nature Conservancy, and several other groups supported the bill’s climate-resilience intent, while the Tax Foundation and committee discussion raised concerns that the measure functioned mainly as a revenue transfer without a dedicated spending mechanism. Members discussed whether a special fund or legislative appropriation process would better ensure the money was used for climate mitigation and related projects.

Transcript Highlights:

• It is a long-standing practice to disclose environmental hazards.
• These projects are among the most environmentally friendly in the state.
• These projects are among the most environmentally friendly in the state.
• Funds from the last statewide housing bond ran out last year.
• that we've received in previous housing bond issues.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Bills: SB2060, SB2342, SB2577, SB2580, SB2809, SB2397, SB2315, SB2442, SB2152, SB2380, SB2462, SB2055, SB2438, SB2533, SB2203, SB2087, SB768, SB877, SB1139, SB787, HB963, SB277, SB2663, SB2555, SB2140, SB2115, SB2761, SB2198, SB2032, SB2579, SB2671, SB2835, SB2356, SB2095, SB2093, SB2318, SB2323, SB2485, SB2309, SB2321, SB2405, SB2153, SB2129, SB2170, SB2259, SB2578, SB2544, SB2701, SB2861, SB2108, SB2089, SB2106, SB847, SB3326, SB2047, SB2695, SB2667, SB2919, SB2446, SB2146, SB2723, SB2210, SB2527, SB2645, SB3331

Keywords: rental housing revolving fund, HHFDC, Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation, mixed-income housing, mixed-income rental project, affordable housing, low-income housing, housing finance, housing development, preservation, rehabilitation, pre-development, construction financing, equity investment, credit enhancement, collateral, gap financing, area median income, AMI, perpetual affordability

Transcript Highlights:

• It is a long-standing practice to disclose environmental hazards.
• These projects are among the most environmentally friendly in the state.
• These projects are among the most environmentally friendly in the state.
• Funds from the last statewide housing bond ran out last year.
• that we've received in previous housing bond issues.

Summary: The committee heard a long housing agenda with several bills presented before quorum was established. AB 1725, as amended, would require disclosure of nearby oil wells and methane monitoring issues in a specific district; the author and community witnesses described serious health and safety risks in Vista Hermosa Heights, while the California Apartment Association, California Building Industry Association, and California Chamber of Commerce opposed, arguing the bill targeted the wrong industry and that the state should instead fix abandoned wells directly. AB 2110, a local finance tool to create tax increment districts for workforce housing for education, health care, manufacturing, and public safety workers, drew no witnesses in support or opposition and was presented as a way to help workers live closer to jobs. AB 1732 would expand CEQA streamlining for public university and college housing projects; UC and several housing and labor groups supported it, while housing advocates raised concerns about amendments affecting existing 100% affordable housing exemptions. AB 1771, amended into a study bill, would direct HCD to report on the long-standing resident manager requirement for apartment buildings with 16 or more units; the rental housing industry supported studying the issue, while the chair emphasized the need to consider tenant protections and the impact on current resident managers before changing the law. The committee also heard AB 2185, which would direct state affordable housing programs to update guidelines to better support factory-built housing; it drew broad support from housing, labor, technology, and local government groups, with no opposition. AB 2748 would delay new EV-readiness requirements for 100% affordable housing developments, keeping the prior 40% standard through 2035; supporters said the higher standard would add significant costs and threaten project feasibility, while clean air and transportation advocates argued the code changes are modest, important for equity, and should not be rolled back. Members split along those lines, with some emphasizing housing production and others urging more public subsidy for EV infrastructure rather than delaying the code. SB 417, a proposed $10 billion affordable housing bond for the November ballot, received extensive support from housing organizations, local governments, labor, and business groups, but Habitat for Humanity and the Los Angeles mayor’s office asked for specific allocations for CalHome and interim housing; the bill was ultimately moved to Appropriations on an 8-0 vote, with members noting ongoing negotiations over funding priorities. Finally, AB 1740 would create an urban multimodal community designation for Santa Monica, allowing local approval of certain low-impact coastal-zone activities—such as some housing, bike and bus lanes, outdoor dining, and building changes—without Coastal Commission review. The author and Santa Monica officials said the bill would reduce delays and uncertainty for infill housing and local economic recovery while preserving protections for sensitive coastal resources; supporters included housing, business, and city groups. The Coastal Commission and environmental organizations opposed, saying the bill would carve out broad exemptions, weaken public access and appeal rights, and bypass the local coastal program process that Santa Monica has not completed. Committee members debated the Commission’s role, with some criticizing it for opposing legislation and others arguing the bill was a common-sense way to modernize coastal permitting. A motion and second were made on AB 1740, and the bill was left pending with the committee’s action to be taken when appropriate.

Transcript Highlights:

• Environmental Protection Agency.
• Is that a bond? The financial assurance required from the EPA—is that a bond? So, Mr.
• And that's what I'm wondering: is that a bond? Mr.
• Chairman, my understanding is that that is a bond. That is a bond on the operator.
• as opposed to... ...a bond?

Summary: The committee first heard a presentation from the Environment Department on PFAS contamination in private wells in La Cienega, Santa Fe County. Staff said the plume likely came from historic use of firefighting foam associated with airport and National Guard fire-training activities, with possible additional contribution from septic systems and consumer products. They described the contamination as affecting about 200 private wells, the short-term response of providing residential filters through a $2 million legislative appropriation, and ongoing work to define the plume’s full extent, identify responsible parties, and consider longer-term regional water solutions. Members asked about filter costs, replacement schedules, disposal of used cartridges, follow-up testing, health studies, and whether cleanup or containment had begun; the department said cleanup would follow once the plume is fully mapped and that DOH is soliciting interest in a blood study. The committee also discussed the need to track disposal of PFAS filters and the possibility of broader statewide capacity for similar work. The committee then took up abandoned uranium mine cleanup. NMED and EMNRD staff reviewed the new uranium mine reclamation program created by HB 164, the state dashboard tracking sites, and the FY26 appropriation of $20 million for neglected contaminated sites, of which $12 million is being used for neglected uranium mines and the remainder for other contaminated sites. They said six contractors were hired, three priority sites in Grant County are moving forward quickly, and additional sites are being prepared for possible FY27 work. Members pressed for details on how funds are spent, why the revolving fund remains unfunded, how federal, state, tribal, and landowner requirements are coordinated, where contaminated material will be moved, and whether cleanup could also address homes built with contaminated materials. Staff said the work is governed by multiple regulatory layers, that the state is seeking an additional $25 million for FY27-FY28 plus a time extension, and that partnerships with tribes would require longer-term agreements. The committee also discussed federal cleanup efforts and the new Good Samaritan law, with members urging stronger advocacy for New Mexico sites, including tribal lands, and asking whether the Attorney General should pursue legal action against federal parties responsible for legacy contamination. Staff explained that some sites are already covered by settlement funds tied to responsible parties, while neglected sites are those with no responsible party and no other cleanup program. The committee then heard from EMNRD on Class VI carbon sequestration primacy. Staff said New Mexico currently has no operating Class VI wells, about 27 Class II acid-gas injection wells are operating, and only a small number might be candidates for conversion. They explained that the state’s primacy application would require more public outreach than federal rules alone, and that cost estimates for post-injection site care are based on long planning horizons, with some costs borne by operators and some by the state after closure. No votes were taken on the substantive items discussed; the committee approved the prior meeting minutes and took a brief recess between presentations.

Transcript Highlights:

• And that's what this bond will do.
• And so, colleagues, I know that bonds are always hard. It's always a negotiation.
• I teach AP Environmental Science and Biology at Albany High School.
• I teach AP Environmental Science and Biology at Albany High School.
• And as I mentioned earlier, the bonds, similar to the budget, require...

Summary: The Assembly Appropriations Committee met on June 24, 2026, but initially lacked a quorum and began by hearing presentations only. SB 308 was presented as a bill to streamline fiscal reporting for California community colleges by combining two overlapping annual audit reports into one. SB 895, the California Science and Health Research Bond, drew extensive testimony from the authors and many supporters, who argued it would help offset federal research cuts, protect California’s science infrastructure, support jobs, and preserve life-saving research in areas such as cancer, HIV, Parkinson’s, ALS, climate resilience, and quantum computing. The bill was described as a bond measure that would require a three-party agreement and was sent to suspense. After quorum was established, the committee took up the consent and suspense calendars. Several bills were approved on consent, including SB 308 and a large group of other measures, while the suspense calendar was deemed approved, including SB 895 and other bills listed by the chair. Public comment on SB 895 continued for a long period, with many researchers, students, labor representatives, university officials, and patient advocates speaking in strong support and urging the bill be moved to the floor. The committee also heard SB 1350, which would expand green hydrogen by allowing renewable portfolio standard credits for certain hydrogen use in power generation; the author and supporters said it would help clean energy development, create jobs, and support projects like ARCHES and Element. Later, SB 1306 was presented to align California law with federal exemptions for certain chemical mixtures containing GBL used in semiconductor manufacturing research. The author and SEMI’s representative said the bill would reduce unnecessary regulatory burdens, avoid disrupting semiconductor supply chains, and not change rules for pure GBL. The bill passed out of committee on a roll call vote, with one no vote and one not voting. The hearing then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's a bond issue, an appropriation, $55 million through a bond.
• </c> 35 Bridge interchange project and bond 35 Bridge interchange project and bond issue<00:37:12.720
• it's about a 30/70 split between trunk highway bonds and GO bonds.
• it's about a 30/70 split between trunk highway bonds and GO bonds.
• it's about a 30/70 split between trunk highway bonds and GO bonds.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Moving on from the climate bond, other significant investments...
• This would be one set of continued environmental improvements.
• This would be one set of continued environmental improvements.
• Specifically, on cap-and-invest, we submitted a letter earlier this month with 45 environmental, environmental
• Dan Seaman on behalf of California Environmental Voters.

Summary: The hearing focused on the governor’s May Revision proposals for transportation, natural resources, climate, and related programs, with the Department of Finance and the LAO presenting competing views on the state’s fiscal condition. Finance said the budget remains balanced over two years, with major climate-bond, water, parks, transportation, DMV, and agriculture proposals, while the LAO argued the state still has a structural deficit and should reject or defer many new discretionary spending items, preserve reserves, and be cautious about ongoing commitments. The LAO specifically questioned the timing and scale of new spending for programs such as Clean California, Healthy Rivers and Landscapes, and the Golden Gate Fields acquisition, and urged more clarity on future obligations and revenue scenarios, including for the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. A major portion of the hearing was devoted to the Healthy Rivers and Landscapes proposal for Bay-Delta water quality implementation. Secretary Wade Crowfoot and Finance described it as an enforceable, science-based alternative to a more traditional regulatory approach, with the state’s $25 million request intended to support early implementation, monitoring, habitat restoration, and environmental flows. The LAO countered that the Water Board has not yet adopted the updated Bay-Delta plan, that the proposal may be premature, and that the Legislature should wait for more information on the state’s total funding commitment and the program’s long-term costs. Several members expressed support for the program as a way to reduce conflict and protect water reliability, while others echoed concerns about timing and fiscal exposure. The committee also examined the proposed $125 million Proposition 4 contribution toward acquiring the Golden Gate Fields property for a shoreline park and habitat project. State officials said the acquisition is a time-sensitive, once-in-a-generation opportunity, with an appraised value of $175 million and additional philanthropic and local funding expected to close the gap. Members questioned whether the project had gone through the usual competitive process, whether the site is the best use of scarce park bond dollars, and how public access, habitat, and disadvantaged-community priorities would be protected. The discussion ended without a vote, and the committee moved on to transportation items including Clean California litter abatement, the Games Route Network, homeless encampment coordinators, and DMV modernization and field office proposals, with LAO recommending rejection or delay on several of those requests as well.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's why this bond is so important.
• in previous housing bond issues.
• Of bond funds for Cal Home. Thank you very much.
• bond, also important issues.
• The housing bond, yes. Okay. Housing bond, yes. Okay, and the vote is 8 to 1, and that bill is out.

Summary: The committee heard AB 736, the Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2026, which would place a $10 billion housing bond on the ballot to fund multifamily housing, supportive housing, homeownership, preservation of deed-restricted units, acquisition/rehabilitation of naturally affordable housing, farmworker housing, and tribal housing. The author and supporters said the bond is needed because existing housing bond funds are exhausted and California still faces a severe affordability and homelessness crisis. Support was broad, with many local governments, housing groups, labor, and business organizations testifying in favor; Habitat for Humanity opposed unless 10% of proceeds were reserved for CalHome. Committee members raised the CalHome issue and other priorities, but the bill passed on a do-pass motion to Senate Appropriations with a roll-call vote, with some members voting aye and the measure held on call for absent members. The committee then took up SB 1361, which would limit how SB 79 transit-oriented housing rules can be used to interfere with planned transit stops and routes. The author and supporters from L.A. Metro and the building trades argued the bill would prevent local governments from stalling transit projects out of concern that future density requirements could apply, while preserving existing housing standards. Several groups that had initially opposed or had concerns, including the League of California Cities, Streets for All, Greenbelt Alliance, California YIMBY, and Bay Area Council, withdrew opposition or moved to neutral after amendments. The bill was approved as amended to Senate Local Government and placed on call. Senator Grayson presented SB 1003, creating a pro-housing infrastructure financing program to help local governments and developers fund infrastructure needed for infill housing, and SB 1014, requiring local agencies to provide early good-faith estimates and itemized lists of on-site and off-site improvements so projects are not hit with late surprise costs. Both bills were supported by housing advocates, Habitat for Humanity, and other groups, with limited opposition or concerns from some cities about implementation details. Each measure received a do-pass-as-amended motion to Senate Appropriations and was held on call. The committee also heard SB 908 on window replacement streamlining, which would ease permitting for energy-efficient residential window replacements statewide and limit certain new-construction provisions to San Francisco; it passed as amended to Appropriations and was held on call. Later, Senator Allen presented SB 1092 and SB 1093 on mobile home park preservation and post-disaster protections. SB 1092 would require park owners who intend to sell to give residents or their representatives an opportunity to make a competitive bid to buy the park, with supporters citing wildfire losses and the need to preserve unsubsidized affordable housing; opponents argued it would devalue property and create litigation risk. SB 1093 would require clearer communication, access, and compensation protections for residents after disasters, and would require owners to consider rebuilding versus closure. Supporters emphasized the uncertainty faced by displaced residents in the Palisades and other fire areas, while opponents said the bill could impose onerous obligations, liability, and valuation requirements. Both bills were moved do pass as amended to Appropriations and held on call.