Transcript Highlights:

• That's why this bond is so important.
• in previous housing bond issues.
• in previous housing bond issues.
• 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.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• this goes, bonds compete, and it is so important that this bond get oxygen and see the light of day
• So, as with all bonds, it doesn't, it's not like you do a bond, it all gets issued on day one, right?
• As with all bonds, it doesn't, it's not like you do a bond. It all gets issued on day one, right?
• true with any bond.
• bit different, which was that a bond was appropriate because what we were buying with the bond wasn't

Summary: The committee first heard SB 1135, which would reestablish the California Wildlife Coexistence Program to promote nonlethal human-wildlife conflict reduction and support coexistence efforts for species such as wolves, bears, and mountain lions. Supporters, including wildlife groups and local government representatives, said the prior program was effective and that proactive tools like fladry, guardian animals, deterrents, reporting, and outreach reduce conflicts and costs. Ranching and agricultural groups were opposed unless amended, saying they supported the concept but wanted changes to the wolf-livestock compensation program, including clearer practicability standards, protection of compensation funds, and more flexibility on nonlethal requirements. The bill was moved to Appropriations on a 2-0 vote, with the measure left on call. The committee then took up SB 1085, which would preserve water supply assessments for large development projects even when those projects are exempt from CEQA, so local agencies still receive information about whether sufficient water exists for the project. The author and sponsor argued the bill would keep water planning and land use planning linked and prevent “paper water” problems, while the California Building Industry Association opposed it, warning it could add delay, uncertainty, and litigation risk for housing projects already subject to other water-supply safeguards. Members discussed how the bill would affect different local structures, especially cities that also operate their own water systems, and whether the assessment adds value in those cases. The bill passed 4-1 to Local Government and was left on call. SB 1270 was next, expanding the California wildfire mitigation home-hardening pilot beyond the original six counties to include four additional high-risk counties identified by Cal OES and Cal Fire, and directing future funding toward those areas. Supporters said the recent Los Angeles fires showed the need to broaden access to home-hardening assistance, while members discussed whether the program should remain geographically targeted or be made available statewide based on need. The bill was amended in committee and passed 5-0 to Emergency Management, left on call. Finally, the committee heard SB 895, a major proposal to place a $23 billion bond on the ballot to create a California Foundation for Science and Health Research and stabilize scientific research funding in the state. The author, UC, UAW, and many research, labor, health, and university groups supported the measure, arguing that federal cuts and instability threaten California’s research workforce, innovation, and economy. Some members raised concerns about the size of the bond and about political issues involving one sponsor, but the author said the foundation would operate under California law and the bill is intended to keep science funding open and collaborative. The bill was moved out of committee on a 5-0 vote and left on call.

Transcript Highlights:

• This proposal spends a net of almost $911 million in total funding, of which $400 million is from bonds
• Excuse me, the Bonneville Environmental Foundation.
• We, along with others in the environmental community, will follow up with more written comment.
• Kent is one of the most diverse and environmentally burdened It's more than solar panels.
• Kent is one of the most diverse and environmentally burdened cities in Washington.

Summary: The Capital Budget Committee held a hearing on Proposed Substitute House Bill 2295, the supplemental capital budget. Staff said the proposal totals nearly $911 million, including about $400 million in bonds and $511 million from other state and federal sources, with much of the increase over the governor’s proposal coming from Climate Commitment Act (CCA) funding. Major spending areas include housing and homelessness, K-12 construction, human services facilities, and CCA-funded clean energy, decarbonization, and habitat restoration projects. The chair said the committee would not take amendments at the hearing and planned to vote out the budget on Thursday, with a technical fix striker expected. Testimony was largely supportive of the House proposal, with many witnesses asking the committee to preserve or increase specific items in final negotiations. Housing advocates urged support for the Housing Trust Fund, manufactured housing preservation, and projects such as Alliance Place, Cloverdale Cottages, Cherry Street Village, Somos, and the Thrive Center. Education and public facility witnesses backed investments in school seismic safety, small district modernization, Healthy Kids Healthy Schools, community college and university maintenance, and projects at Cascadia College, WSU, CWU, and UW. Health and human services testimony supported behavioral health, Tubman Center, HealthPoint, pregnant parenting treatment, and the Yakima Behavioral Health Hub. Natural resources, climate, and infrastructure witnesses praised funding for Flood Plains by Design, community forests, trust land transfer, salmon recovery, the Skokomish land purchase, and the Lower Columbia River dredging project. Several local governments and organizations requested additional support or Senate-level funding for specific projects, while Climate Solutions cautioned against using CCA dollars to backfill existing obligations. The committee heard no votes during the hearing, and the chair closed by saying the budget would be executed on Thursday.

Transcript Highlights:

• Product Declaration Act, creating the Environmental Product Declaration Program, enabling the Department
• of Environment to receive and analyze environmental product declarations, creating the Environmental
• Product Declaration Act, creating the Environmental Product Declaration Program, enabling the Department
• of Environment to receive and analyze environmental product declarations, creating the Environmental
• An act relating to financing of highway projects, providing for additional bonding authority to the State

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Hinman said House File 1362 is a bill requested by the Environmental Quality Board, also
• Representative Hinman said House File 1362 is a bill requested by the Environmental Quality Board, also
• environmental environmental review<00:12:24.639><c> representative</c><00:12:25.240><c> Nisa</c><00:
• , not general obligation bonds, which is under the Capital Investment Committee's jurisdiction.
• which is under the obligation bonds which is under the capital<00:19:51.960><c> investment</c><00:19

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• It requires environmental testing before an owner can close a park for good.
• Obviously, there's an environmental set of challenges that ought to be considered.
• Obviously, there's an environmental set of challenges that ought to be considered.
• ...parcel maps and by failing to provide federally required bond issuance approvals.
• And then the bill is currently written, um, ties TEFRA bond approvals to the HAA.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The agency bond portion of the plan includes $30 million for leverage bonds for each year of our two
• The agency bond portion of the plan includes $30 million for leverage bonds for each year of our two
• The agency bond portion of the plan includes $30 million for leverage bonds for each year of our two
• for leverage bonds includes $30 million for leverage bonds for<00:30:12.000><c> each</c><00:30:12.320
• These bonds will assisted loan programs.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Attendance Roll Call 00:00:09 Approval of Minutes 00:01:10 Welcome New Members 00:01:26 Information Items 00:01:49 COT Special Report 00:02:38 Review of Executive Branch Agency Plans 00:07:41 A. Department of Military Affairs 00:08:07 B. Department of Veterans’ Affairs 00:20:34 C. Kentucky Infrastructure Authority 00:25:54 D. Tourism, Arts, and Heritage Cabinet 00:35:05 E. Transportation Cabinet 00:55:53, 958, all

Summary: The Capital Planning Advisory Board met with a quorum, approved the May 21 minutes, and welcomed a new executive branch member, Secretary Keith Jackson of the Justice and Public Safety Cabinet. The board also received two informational items: agency responses to prior questions and amendments made to capital plans after the last meeting. It then heard the Commonwealth Office of Technology’s report on executive branch IT capital project scoring, which reviewed 16 IT requests totaling about $330.5 million. COOT said projects were ranked through an independent panel using standardized criteria focused on feasibility, statewide alignment, readiness, impact, and risk; the CIO recommended moving an enterprise application and artificial intelligence inventory system from rank 11 to rank 4 because of its enterprise-wide impact and connection to Senate Bill 4. The Department of Military Affairs presented its capital plan, describing 43 million in projects for the current period and 13 projects totaling $65 million for 2026–2028, with most funding coming from federal sources and restricted agency funds and no general fund request in the latter period. Its projects included maintenance pool adjustments, a statewide Army master plan, the Somerset readiness center, Shelbyville and Ashland armories, a future home for the Kentucky Army National Guard band, and other facility upgrades. Members asked about the Somerset project’s cost growth and federal delay; the department said the project remains in conceptual design, is awaiting federal MILCON action, and would require a state match of about $9.8 million against $29.6 million federal funding if it is approved. Members also asked about staffing levels, and the department said state employee and Title 32 numbers have been relatively steady, while technician positions have declined. The Department of Veterans Affairs outlined seven projects for 2026–2028, led by a Radcliff Veterans Center HVAC replacement that needs an estimated additional $16 million to finish phase two after phase one was already funded. Other requests included a maintenance pool increase, renovations and exterior upgrades at Eastern and Western Kentucky veterans facilities, a cooling tower replacement at Thompson Hood, and parking lot and lighting improvements. The department said some projects were already in the six-year plan and that the Radcliff phase two could be bid in June 2026 if funded. Members confirmed that a columbarium wall project at Grayson is federally funded. The Kentucky Infrastructure Authority presented its six-year capital plan, citing more than $3 billion in loan commitments since 1988 and over $5 billion in supported infrastructure projects. KIA requested $298.439 million in the first biennium, including $27.742 million in state match for federal clean water and drinking water revolving funds, $25 million for its state Infrastructure Revolving Fund, $185.697 million in federal capitalization grants, and $30 million in leverage bond authorization for each year of the two federally assisted loan programs. Members asked about drinking-water quality, and KIA said that function is handled by the Energy and Environment Cabinet’s Division of Water, not KIA. KIA also said its loan rates currently range from 0.5% to 2.25%, averaging just under 1%, and that its revolving loan programs have had no defaults. The Tourism, Arts, and Heritage Cabinet began its presentation at the end of the transcript, with staff identifying themselves, but no project details or board action from that presentation were included in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then what happens after that bond in the next three-year program? Sure.
• And then what happens after that bond in the next three-year program? Sure.
• Smart program, less than 2% in Gateway Cities and environmental justice communities.
• Smart program, less than 2% in Gateway Cities and environmental justice communities.
• And then how about the environmental attributes?

Keywords: 995, all

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:

• Senate Budget Subcommittee Number Two on Resources, Environmental Protection and Energy.
• The Senate Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Resources, Environmental Protection and Energy will come to order
• As was noted, in 2024 the voters of California approved this $10 billion bond, Prop. 4.
• And last year, in last year's... ...this $10 billion bond, Prop. 4.
• Grushina Mohobeer with California Environmental Voters.

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Resources, Environmental Protection and Energy heard presentations on six budget-related issues and took no votes; all items were held open for a future hearing. The first item concerned funding for the California Transmission Accelerator Revolving Fund under SB 254 and Proposition 4. GoBiz and IBank requested nearly $26 million over five years and 10 limited-term positions to evaluate and finance eligible transmission projects. The LAO said the proposal was broadly consistent with Prop. 4 but noted many implementation details remain unresolved. Senators questioned how the program would lower ratepayer costs, how funds would be protected, and whether the full requested amount was necessary; the administration said the financing strategy is still being developed and that consultants are needed. The committee then discussed trailer bill language to redirect $22 million in General Fund money from the DEPA program to DSGS for summer 2026, and to use roughly $70 million in CalSHAPE interest for ratepayer relief through ELRP or an equivalent program in 2027-28. CEC and CPUC staff said DSGS and ELRP are reliability tools, not PSPS programs, and explained that DSGS had enrolled over 1,000 MW and was expected to have about $52 million available for 2026. Senators and the LAO raised concerns about ending a successful DSGS program, the complexity of transitioning customers to ELRP, and whether CalSHAPE funds should instead continue school HVAC and plumbing projects. Public commenters largely supported extending CalSHAPE and continuing or expanding DSGS rather than shifting funds to ELRP. The subcommittee also heard on petroleum market oversight under SBX1-2 and ABX2-1. The CEC and its Division of Petroleum Market Oversight requested about $1.67 million and a small permanent staffing increase to implement new inventory, resupply, and market analysis duties. Senators pressed the agencies on gasoline price spikes, refinery maintenance, price gouging, and the status of the transportation fuels transition plan, which staff said would be released in draft form soon. Public testimony supported DPMO’s work and called for continued oversight of gasoline pricing. Finally, the CPUC presented three additional budget proposals: resources to implement AB 1207’s changes to the California climate credit, funding for a study of large electrical loads such as data centers under SB 57, and staffing for AB 825’s regional market participation requirements. The LAO said the AB 1207 request may go beyond the statute and urged the Legislature to decide whether it wants a simpler or more complex climate credit redesign. Senators questioned the cost of the work, the need for ongoing staffing, and how ratepayer interests would be protected. The CPUC said the work is needed to adapt to changing load patterns, electrification, data center growth, and potential regional market participation. Public commenters also supported DPMO funding, CalSHAPE, and DSGS, and some urged the Legislature to keep DSGS at the CEC rather than shift funds to ELRP.

Transcript Highlights:

• relating to an exemption from the requirement to obtain a permit from the Texas Commission on Environmental
• relating to an exemption from the requirement to obtain a permit from the Texas Commission on Environmental

Bills: SB8, SB4, SB43, SB1, SB2, SB13, SB6, SB10, SB16, SB14, SB3, SB8, SB4, SB43, SB1, SB2, SB13, SB6, SB10, SB16, SB14, SB3

Keywords: education, accountability, public school assessment, state law, transparency, intervention, performance ratings, Texas congressional redistricting, U.S. House districts, congressional map, redistricting, gerrymandering, 2020 Census, census tracts, block groups, voting districts, election law, Texas House of Representatives districts, federal congressional districts, 2026 elections

Transcript Highlights:

• Aaron Bond, Researcher with the Council Service.
• I think we need to be environmentally conscious; I'm all for that.
• With that being said, I think we can still be environmentally conscious.
• Our state is very environmentally conscious.
• Bond, yes, there is a resource.

Transcript Highlights:

• HB 3453 by Bond, relating to the liability of nonprofit entities contracted with the Department of Family
• HB 3459 by Bond, relating to the distribution of state traffic fine revenues received by the Comptroller
• HB 3461 by Bond and Ellington, relating to memorial markers and designations on highways in the state
• HB 3483 by Combs, relating to the authority of a special utility district to issue revenue bonds, referred
• HCR 121 by Dorazio, urging the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to take immediate and decisive

Summary: The House met briefly to read a large number of first-reading bills, joint resolutions, and concurrent resolutions and refer them to the appropriate committees. The measures covered a wide range of topics, including public health, education, criminal justice, taxation, transportation, water and natural resources, elections, housing, veterans issues, local government, and constitutional amendments. Several bills focused on school policy, health care regulation, property tax and sales tax changes, criminal penalties, and local or state agency authority. Among the notable items were proposals on name and sex changes on birth records, college admissions inquiries into criminal history, foster care contractor liability, school nutrition and assessment policy, election procedures, homestead and franchise tax exemptions, public retirement system reporting, and numerous transportation and infrastructure measures. The House also received resolutions designating local honors and observances, including Brownsville as the bicycling capital of the Rio Grande Valley, Port Aransas as the fishing capital of Texas, and Selena Quintanilla Perez Day. Some measures proposed constitutional amendments on legislative procedure, homestead taxation, and election-law enforcement authority. No debate or testimony occurred in this segment; the action was limited to first reading and referral. The session also referred several resolutions to the Local and Consent Calendars. At the end of the proceedings, the House adjourned without objection until 2 p.m. Tuesday.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> When the bonds are issued, yes. All right.
• </c><00:57:38.360><c> calculation</c> and institute a new bond calculation and institute a new bond calculation
• </c> and Environmental Cabinet. and Environmental Cabinet.
• </c><01:04:18.240><c> You</c><01:04:18.280><c> know,</c> environmental sustainability.
• You know, environmental sustainability.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Attendance Roll Call 00:01:28 Introduction of Guests 00:02:08 American Electric Power and Kentucky Power Presentation 00:03:31 SB 89 Discussion 00:53:55 SB 89 Roll Call Vote 01:07:46, 958, all

Summary: The committee met for an initial natural resources hearing with a quorum present and introductory housekeeping, including prayer, roll call, and recognition of guests. Chair Smith outlined ground rules for questions and then invited Kentucky Power and American Electric Power representatives to the table to discuss a proposed plan involving the Mitchell Power Plant and future generation needs in Eastern Kentucky. Witnesses Cindy Wiseman, Alex Vaughn, and AEP CEO Bill Fehrman said the company’s goals are to stabilize and lower rates, reduce rate volatility, and expand generation in the Commonwealth. They explained that Kentucky Power seeks legislative authority to securitize its 50% interest in the Mitchell coal plant, describing securitization as a refinancing mechanism that would lower annual plant costs by about $34 million and help offset roughly one-third of the expected cost of adding new generation in Kentucky. They emphasized that the proposal is not intended to close Mitchell, and said Kentucky Power currently has no plan to divest its interest; the company still needs the plant to serve customers while it pursues additional dispatchable generation in Kentucky. Members pressed the witnesses on the plant’s book value versus fair market value, whether the Mitchell interest had ever been assigned a nominal value, how any divestiture proceeds would be handled, whether Kentucky Power owns Wheeling Power, and how long Mitchell can continue operating. The company said it values Mitchell at net book value for accounting purposes, not fair market value, and explained that Wheeling Power is a separate AEP affiliate and that West Virginia affiliates have already proposed securitization of their share. Witnesses said Kentucky Power’s interest cannot technically operate past 2028 without additional environmental control investment, while the West Virginia side is depreciating through 2040. They also described the financing timeline, saying securitization would require enactment of legislation, a PSC financing order, bond issuance, and then parallel work to acquire or build new generation, with any reinvestment terms to be addressed through the regulatory process.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senate Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Resources, Environmental Protection, and Energy.
• The Senate Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Resources, Environmental Protection, and Energy will come to
• That bond did initiate with the Legislature.
• That bond did initiate with the legislature.
• Madam Chair, members, Mark Murray with the environmental group California is Against Waste.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

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

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It also ensures that all parties agree to a bond before a bond is reinstated.
• A bill to be entitled, an act relating to bail bonds.
• It also ensures that all parties agree to a bond before a bond is reinstated.
• Does this override local environmental protections?
• If there was some water, whatever, whatever, some environmental impact, then the environmental impact

Summary: The Senate convened with a quorum, opening prayer, Pledge of Allegiance, several introductions, and an announcement that there would be no weekend conference. The chamber then took up a long special-order calendar of bills, generally moving each measure through third reading and final passage, often by substituting House companion bills. Early measures included trust law modernization (SB 786/HB 895), military affairs changes and Guard retirement corrections (SB 474), rounding rules for cash transactions as pennies phase out (SB 1074), podiatric medicine regulation and informed-consent requirements (SB 1092), veterans court expansion (SB 50/HB 199), RV park special assessment clarification (SB 118), concurrent jurisdiction for juvenile offenses on military installations (SB 502/HB 351), alcoholic beverage loss deductions (SB 678/HB 1137), and bail bond/pretrial release revisions (SB 600). Most passed unanimously or near-unanimously; SB 600 passed 36-1 after questions about charitable bail bonds and an amendment aligning with the House version and prosecutors’ concerns. The Senate also considered bills on portable electronics and eyewear insurance (SB 772), the linking industry to nursing education fund and health science workforce programs (SB 1246), recovery residences and behavioral health licensing (SB 1030, with a technical amendment on background checks and probationary licenses), felony battery enhancements for repeat offenders and offenses against law enforcement (SB 436), and child welfare changes including foster-home visitor screening, a permanent statewide Step Into Success program, and a best-practices repository (SB 1718). These measures were explained by sponsors as efforts to streamline regulation, improve workforce and health-care training, strengthen public safety, and reduce administrative burdens while preserving safeguards. Votes on these bills were overwhelmingly favorable, with final tallies typically 36-0 or 37-0. A major portion of the meeting was devoted to a farewell tribute to Senator Lori Berman. Members from both parties praised her leadership, collegiality, policy work, and advocacy on issues including voting rights, women’s rights, Israel and antisemitism, school safety, breast cancer, and family law. Berman delivered a lengthy farewell reflecting on her 16 years in the Legislature, her caucus leadership, and the importance of dignity, respect, and public service. The Senate adopted a motion to spread her remarks upon the journal and then recessed before returning to continue the calendar.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senate Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Resources, Environmental Protection and Energy.
• Senate Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Resources, Environmental Protection and Energy will come to order
• All right, let's start with issue number one: Proposition for climate bond expenditure plan for clean
• As was noted, in 2024 the voters of California approved this $10 billion bond, Prop. 4.
• Grushina Mohobeer with California Environmental Voters.

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Resources, Environmental Protection and Energy heard six budget-related items and took no votes, holding all items open for a future hearing. The first item concerned a climate bond expenditure plan for the California Transmission Accelerator Revolving Fund under SB 254. GoBiz, IBank, and the Department of Finance described a request for nearly $26 million and 10 limited-term positions to develop financing strategies and evaluate transmission projects, while the LAO said the proposal was broadly consistent with Prop. 4 but noted that the Legislature may want to provide more direction on program design. Senators questioned how the proposal would lower ratepayer costs, protect state funds, and ensure accountability for billion-dollar transmission projects. The second item covered trailer bill language to redirect funding among demand-side reliability programs. Finance proposed moving $22 million from the DEPA program to DSGS for summer 2026 and using CalSHAPE interest funds for ELRP or an equivalent CPUC program in 2027-28, with CEC and CPUC coordinating the transition. Senators and LAO questioned why CalSHAPE funds should not continue supporting schools, and several members argued DSGS has been more successful and should continue rather than be shifted to ELRP. CEC and CPUC explained that DSGS and ELRP serve different reliability functions and do not address public safety power shutoffs. Public commenters, including school groups and clean energy advocates, split between extending CalSHAPE for school HVAC/plumbing projects and preserving or expanding DSGS. The committee also heard on petroleum market oversight implementation under SBX1-2 and ABX2-1, with the CEC and its Division of Petroleum Market Oversight requesting additional staffing to support inventory monitoring, refinery resupply analysis, and market oversight. Senators pressed for details on investigations, refinery margins, gasoline price spikes, and the transportation fuels transition plan, while staff said the draft plan would be released soon and that DPMO’s work on branded versus unbranded gasoline remains ongoing. Finally, the CPUC presented three additional proposals: implementing AB 1207’s climate credit reforms, studying large-load/data center cost impacts under SB 57, and preparing for regional market participation under AB 825. The LAO repeatedly cautioned that some of these requests may go beyond statutory minimums and urged the Legislature to decide how much policy direction and staffing it wants to provide. Public commenters supported DPMO funding, opposed ending CalSHAPE, and strongly favored continued DSGS funding over a new ELRP structure.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's tomorrow, by the way, because some of these wells didn't have bonds.
• Some of the wells that have bonds or smaller bonds, and some of them, these are bigger issues than we
• They had to post a bond, they had to post financial credibility.
• Who were orphaned before statutory bonding requirements were put in place.
• Their main goal was safety, environmental protection, and regulatory clarity and efficiency.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• That's why this bond is so important.
• in previous housing bond issues.
• in previous housing bond issues.
• 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, a proposed $10 billion Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2026, with Assembly Member Buffy Wicks and numerous housing, local government, labor, and advocacy groups testifying in strong support. Supporters said the bond would fund multifamily housing, permanent supportive housing, homeownership, preservation, farmworker, tribal, and other programs, and argued that the state needs new capital because prior bond funds are exhausted and many shovel-ready projects are waiting. Habitat for Humanity California opposed the bill unless it was amended to dedicate 10% of bond proceeds to Cal Home for affordable homeownership, and several senators said they supported the bond but wanted Cal Home strengthened. The committee voted do pass to Senate Appropriations, with the measure placed on call for absent members. The committee also heard SB 1361 by Senator Durazo, which would limit local governments from using SB 79 transit-oriented housing requirements as a reason to stall or condition planned transit projects. Los Angeles Metro, the Building Trades, and several cities and advocacy groups supported the bill, saying it would protect transit investments, jobs, and federal funding from opposition tied to future density around transit stops. Several groups that had initially opposed or been concerned about the bill, including West Hollywood, Streets for All, Greenbelt Alliance, California YIMBY, and the Bay Area Council, withdrew opposition or moved to neutral after amendments. The committee approved the bill as amended to Senate Local Government, with the measure also placed on call. Senator Grayson presented SB 1003, creating an Infrastructure Partnership Financing Program to help local governments and developers fund infrastructure needed for infill housing, and SB 1014, which would require local agencies to provide early, good-faith estimates and itemized lists of required on-site and off-site improvements for housing projects. Both bills were supported by housing advocates, Habitat for Humanity, SPUR, and industry groups, who said the measures would reduce uncertainty, late fees, and project delays. The committee advanced both bills as amended to Senate Appropriations, placing them on call. The committee also took up SB 908, which streamlines energy-code-compliant window replacement and limits aesthetic review, especially for residential replacements; it passed as amended to Appropriations after support from affordable housing and green building groups and no opposition. Later, Senator Allen presented SB 1092 and SB 1093 on mobile home park preservation and post-disaster protections. SB 1092 would give residents notice and an opportunity to make a competing bid when a park owner intends to sell, with supporters arguing it would help preserve unsubsidized affordable housing and protect displaced residents, while park owner representatives argued it would devalue properties, create litigation risk, and interfere with market transactions. SB 1093 would require more communication, access, and consideration of rebuilding or closure after disasters, and would restore certain resident reimbursement rights; supporters cited the Palisades fire and survey data showing residents lacked information and access, while opponents said the bill imposed onerous timelines, liability issues, and penalties and could force owners into rebuilding or compensation assumptions they disputed. Both bills were discussed at length, but the transcript ends before final recorded votes on them.

Transcript Highlights:

• Local voters have approved $25 million in bonds, and during this year's legislative session, we secured
• We have to reevaluate the environmental.
• So we can move forward into the environmental phase and then eventually the acquisition phase and then
• Not only that, but in 2018 we did pass a bond issuance, and in 2023 passed another bond issuance.
• So the local voters, 70% or more, voted in favor of this bond issue.

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