Transcript Highlights:

• , and our water supply projects.
• So we're excited about that project.
• Improvement Project is an alternative water supply development and water resource development project
• Those projects are chosen.
• and fund balances, all for projects only, followed by the $38 million from state, federal, and what we

Committee: Senate Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment, and General Government

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment, and General Government heard budget presentations from all five water management districts for FY 2026-2027: Northwest Florida, Suwannee River, St. Johns River, Southwest Florida, and South Florida. Each district described its preliminary budget, major funding sources, staffing levels, and how most of its spending is tied to the four core missions of water supply, water quality, natural systems, and flood protection. Several directors noted budget reductions from the prior year largely because major projects were completed or because grant/appropriation funding is not yet fully reflected in preliminary budgets. Committee members repeatedly asked how districts project operations and maintenance costs, how projects are selected, and what share of staff and spending is devoted to core missions versus administration or regulatory work. Northwest Florida Water Management District said its preliminary budget is $93.4 million, down about 15%, with 97% of spending tied to core responsibilities and a request for additional regulatory services funding. Suwannee River Water Management District presented a $70.4 million budget, emphasized its rural/agricultural character and spring protection work, and highlighted the Water First North Florida reclaimed-water recharge project; members also discussed its need for an additional FTE to handle consumptive use permit reviews tied to a new lower Santa Fe rule. St. Johns River Water Management District presented a $181 million budget, highlighted major water supply, water quality, flood protection, and land management projects such as Taylor Creek Reservoir, Water First North Florida, Black Creek, Crane Creek, and Lake Jessup restoration, and said about 93% of its budget supports core missions. Southwest Florida Water Management District presented a $227.6 million budget, with major spending on alternative water supply, water control structure repairs, watershed projects, and land management; officials said 93.4% of the budget supports core missions and discussed rising construction costs for aging infrastructure. South Florida Water Management District presented the largest budget at $1.05 billion, focused on Everglades restoration, flood control, water supply, and ecosystem recovery; the director described major reservoirs and treatment projects, the EAA Reservoir, and ongoing efforts to improve water quality and restore flows to the Everglades and Florida Bay. The committee took no formal votes on the district budgets and adjourned after the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• So you don't believe your projections aren't aligned with the projections from the Legislative Analyst's
• Another capital outlay project in this May Revision is the UCLA Powell Library project, which requests
• Of that, $2.6 million was issued for the UC Davis project, more specifically, the Sewindow project.
• In terms of the Prop. 2 capital outlay projects, there was a switch in the projects, as we saw in the
• This project would restore use of the facility, and it's a critical infrastructure project, so that's

Summary: The committee heard the May Revision presentation for the Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance, with public comment focused heavily on K-12 priorities such as universal school meals, kitchen infrastructure, food service and custodial support, youth leadership grants, Special Olympics funding, English learner support, universal pre-K, literacy investments, and concerns about community college funding shifts. Speakers also urged support for expanded learning, teacher recruitment and training, and maintaining or increasing funding for community colleges and student support programs. Finance and the LAO then reviewed the Proposition 98 outlook. Finance said the May Revision lowers the 2025-26 Prop. 98 guarantee to $114.6 billion, about $4.3 billion below January, due mainly to lower revenue estimates, with smaller effects from attendance and property tax changes. The administration also described rebenching for universal transitional kindergarten and a one-time rebench tied to Los Angeles fire-related property tax losses, along with changes to the Public School System Stabilization Account, deferrals, and updated COLA assumptions. The LAO said the budget relies too much on deferrals and one-time funds, creates a structural shortfall, and should instead align ongoing spending with the guarantee and preserve a reserve buffer. Members questioned the TK rebench and the shift of funding from community colleges to K-12, asking why it was being applied retroactively and how colleges would be held harmless. Finance said the changes align funding with where TK costs are being incurred and that reappropriation funding and other adjustments would offset impacts on community colleges. The LAO argued the historical split formula is outdated and should be abandoned in favor of budgeting around current priorities rather than fixed percentages. Members also raised concerns about draining the rainy day reserve and using deferrals, while the LAO said preserving reserves would better protect against future volatility. The committee then moved to specific K-12 and education proposals. Finance outlined May Revision changes including state operations adjustments for the Department of Education, technical trailer bill changes, a $100 million student teacher stipend program administered by Kern County, and updates to the charter school facility grant program. The LAO recommended rejecting the proposed increases for expanded learning, literacy coaches, and the student teacher stipend as currently structured, while supporting the minimum grant increase for expanded learning. Members expressed support for teacher recruitment efforts but questioned whether one-time funding can sustain ongoing programs and whether the student teacher stipend should be targeted to shortage areas or low-income communities.

Transcript Highlights:

• But these projects.
• The uncertainty of whether there's federal funding and whether projects are going to move forward has
• for project developers.
• These projects are grounded in market fundamentals and aided by tools like the Federal 45Q carbon sequestration
• The Lindy project is a great project for Jefferson County.

Committee: House Energy Resources

Transcript Highlights:

• I mean, if we're—well, who knows what federal money we're going to get in, but if we get in federal money
• So many of our federal grants, Mr.
• That are part of a federal demonstration project. There are five of them, Mr.
• Obviously, if you project...
• Project Fund.

Committee: House House Appropriations & Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• And that's 18 out of a total of over 500 projects, so a small percentage are ETO projects.
• No, that's how many total projects we have. Total projects you have.
• But now, if anyone takes this election, this federal election...
• And then are they all different among those 17 different projects?
• These tribal housing projects are on reservation land, most of them.

Summary: The Housing Committee heard two bills and received updates on scheduling. Chair Peterson announced that HB 2266 may move from Thursday to Monday for executive action due to ongoing talks with the city, and HB 2489 will move to next week for additional amendment work. HB 1542, concerning senior independent housing, was briefly opened, then suspended so HB 2527 could be heard first; the committee later returned to HB 1542 for public testimony. The committee adjourned after closing the hearing on HB 1542, with no votes taken during this meeting. HB 1542 would establish rights for residents of senior independent housing, allow enforcement under the Consumer Protection Act, and require a Commerce report to the legislature. The staff summary described the bill as creating protections such as respectful treatment, the ability to install certain safety devices, resident meetings, and timely management responses in emergencies. Rep. Reeves said the bill responds to seniors in Federal Way who lack protections in independent living settings and noted likely amendments to extend the reporting deadline and possibly add a registry to clarify which communities are covered. Testimony from the Alzheimer’s Association and AARP supported the bill as a needed consumer-protection measure for vulnerable older adults, while other witnesses asked for broader coverage, including manufactured home communities, and LeadingAge Washington requested more stakeholder work and a technical amendment related to CCRCs. HB 2527 would regulate eventual tenant ownership programs tied to federal low-income housing tax credits. Staff explained that the bill would require developers to create reserve or escrow accounts, inform tenants and partners of their rights and responsibilities, and comply with timely transfer obligations, with enforcement by the Housing Finance Commission and possible debarment from future tax-credit participation for violations. Rep. Pollet said the bill is intended to address cases where Native families were promised eventual ownership of homes but did not receive deeds or keys after years of renting, citing an audit and describing the bill as a needed accountability tool. Supportive testimony from Indigenous rights attorney Gabe Galanda emphasized that hundreds of families, many in tribal communities, were affected. The Housing Finance Commission opposed the punitive approach, saying it had already updated policies after the audit, that the projects are complex and vary by tribal housing authority, and that the bill could undermine collaborative work and potentially misdirect penalties away from the actual responsible parties. Committee members pressed the commission on accountability, ownership structures, escrow obligations, and the status of remaining households, and the exchange highlighted disagreement over whether the bill’s enforcement provisions are appropriate.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you very much. uh a large force of federal agents in uh a large force of federal agents in our<
• ><c> enforcement</c> don't control federal enforcement don't control federal enforcement decisions,<00
• Subdivision three federal actions.
• </c> received from uh the federal government. received from uh the federal government.
• </c><00:53:24.320><c> It's</c> important project for the city. It's important project for the city.

Committee: Senate Taxes

Transcript Highlights:

• So this is just some of the exploration projects or projects that Centera has going on right now.
• FAST-41, a federal program, we just received full project acceptance from that in January from the Federal
• Perpetua's Stibnite Gold Project is located in the project...
• So our Delamar project is a heap leach only project.
• So our Delamar project is a heap leech only project.

Committee: Senate Resources and Environment

Transcript Highlights:

• We are projecting a federal revenue loss of more than $700 million a year and a deficit of $2 billion
• additional federal relief that was...” “...was initially projected, but also there was significant additional
• This year we've projected growth, but we've consistently over-projected.
• But this year we've projected growth, but we've consistently over-projected.
• This year we've projected growth, but we've consistently over-projected.

Transcript Highlights:

• So if I am the mayor of my own city and we have a project, a large residential project comes in.
• project comes in.
• And whoever had a project that needed it would submit their project.
• Just a few weeks ago, my own lab felt those cuts directly when a five-year federally funded project on
• Another project for folks to know about is a project up in Butte County.

Summary: The committee heard SB 1135, which would reestablish the California Wildlife Coexistence Program to reduce human-wildlife conflict through nonlethal strategies such as deterrents, conflict reporting, and outreach. The author and supporters said the program had been effective but lost funding in 2024, and they argued it would help communities, ranchers, and wildlife by preventing conflicts before they escalate. Support came from conservation, animal welfare, local government, and county groups, while the California Cattlemen’s Association and California Farm Bureau opposed unless amended, saying the bill needed clearer limits on when nonlethal measures are practicable and protections so compensation funds for livestock losses are not reduced. Members discussed wolf-livestock conflicts, compensation, and the need for continued collaboration. The committee voted 2-0 on call to send the bill to Appropriations. The committee then heard SB 1085, which would preserve water supply assessments for large housing and development projects even when those projects are exempt from CEQA. The author and sponsor EBMUD said the bill is needed to keep water planning tied to land-use planning and avoid “paper water” problems, especially as climate and drought conditions worsen. Supporters included water agencies, environmental groups, labor, and local governments. The California Building Industry Association opposed the bill, arguing that current law already requires verified water supplies, that the bill could add unnecessary process and litigation risk, and that it could slow housing production. Members raised concerns about duplication in cities that also operate their own water systems, but the author said the goal was better coordination, not more bureaucracy. The committee voted 4-1 on call to send the bill to Local Government. The committee also heard SB 1270, which would expand the state wildfire mitigation home-hardening pilot to the top 10 counties by wildfire risk and social vulnerability, adding Riverside, Calaveras, Los Angeles, and Tehama counties and prioritizing future funds for those areas. The author said the bill responds to recent destructive fires and aims to extend home-hardening assistance to more high-risk communities. There was no opposition, and members discussed how to scale funding, whether the program should be broader than the listed counties, and how to focus on cost-effective mitigation. The committee voted 5-0 on call to send the bill to Emergency Management. Finally, the committee heard SB 895, a major science funding measure that would place a $23 billion bond on the ballot and create a California Foundation for Science and Health Research to support research in the state. The author and supporters said California’s research sector is a major economic engine and that federal funding cuts and instability threaten jobs, talent retention, and scientific progress. There was broad support from UC, CSU, labor, health, and research organizations, with no formal opposition. Some members raised concerns about the role of sponsoring unions and the potential for politicization, but the author said the new foundation would operate under California law and that the measure is meant to protect science funding and collaboration. The committee discussion continued, but the transcript excerpt ends before a final vote on SB 895.

Transcript Highlights:

• Those who are developing retail projects or developing residential projects are really under a squeeze
• rights of federal workers.
• Project 2025 is real, Mr.
• federal law to do that.
• We represent 900 federal employees.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Labor and Workforce Development

Summary: The hearing focused on employment rights legislation, especially the Protect Labor Act (H. 2086/S. 1327), which would create state-level labor protections if federal private-sector labor law is weakened or struck down, and would also add protections such as bans on captive audience meetings, virtual elections, stronger misclassification rules, and protections for health care workers and immigrant workers. Supporters from the AFL-CIO, nurses, SEIU, UAW, building trades, teachers, graduate workers, and policy groups argued that the bill is needed because of Trump administration actions, Project 2025, and threats to the NLRA and NLRB. They described the bill as a “trigger” law meant to preserve organizing and bargaining rights in Massachusetts if federal protections disappear or if the NLRB declines jurisdiction over certain workers. The committee also heard testimony on bills to restore a limited right to strike for certain public employees (H. 2078/S. 1311 or related filings). Supporters, including a representative, educators, and labor advocates, said the current ban on public employee strikes weakens good-faith bargaining and leaves workers without leverage to secure wages, staffing, and student supports. They argued that strikes are used as a last resort and that legalizing them under defined conditions would improve negotiations and better reflect the realities of recent teacher strikes in Massachusetts. The Massachusetts Municipal Association opposed the strike bills, warning that public employee strikes are already prohibited by state law, that strikes disrupt students and communities, and that local governments face budget constraints under Proposition 2 1/2. The committee also took testimony on paid family and medical leave bills (S. 1351/H. 2110 and S. 1352), which would improve notice to workers, expand public reporting on claim denials and demographics, and fix a technical definition issue that has limited access for some covered contract workers. Witnesses from legal aid, policy organizations, and a small business owner said the changes would improve transparency, equity, and access to benefits without imposing major burdens on employers. Additional testimony supported a railroad sick leave bill and a private construction transparency bill, with Senator Keenan urging favorable action on both. No votes were taken during the hearing; members asked questions, and several witnesses and legislators requested favorable reports on the bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• Federal funds. Normally, we don't spend a lot of money on maintenance with federal funds.
• We'll let those... projects out over the first quarter of the federal fiscal year—October, November,
• Exclusively on federalized projects, so that we can shift the payroll from the state road fund to federal
• employees out of federal funding.
• Typically what happens is you'll receive a federal fund or a federal grant.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then when it, what kind of criteria will say if it's going to a state project or a federal project
• 00:08:13.280><c> federal</c><00:08:13.759><c> project?
• </c> fuels reduction projects. fuels reduction projects.
• of federal royalties paid.
• of federal royalties paid.

Bills: SF0069 , SF0070 , SF0016 , HB0078 , HJ0002 , HB0085 , HB0086

Committee: House Agriculture, State and Public Lands & Water Resources

Transcript Highlights:

• Because of expected federal revenue cuts and other federal changes, the Health Care Authority's overall
• I mean, page three, $34 million increase in federal funds. What were those federal funds?
• funds for 33 new projects.
• These projects, as of last month, which is about halfway through the project timeline, were 85% encumbered
• Five pilot projects with...

Committee: House Legislative Health & Human Services Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• projects.
• And they could make us through the project? Absolutely. It's federally legal.
• federal government.
• probably deny projects.
• probably deny projects.

Summary: The committee took up public comment on a package of similar local-option bills related to carbon capture and sequestration, including House Bills 5, 6, 497, 498, 501, and 504. The bills would let parishes, or in some cases specific parishes such as Rapides and Livingston, decide by local vote whether Class VI wells, CO2 sequestration, and related pipeline infrastructure could be permitted. The chair grouped the bills together for testimony, adopted a three-minute public comment rule, and noted that the bills were not yet under consideration for a vote during the public-comment portion. Supporters, including Speaker Pro Tem Mike Johnson, parish officials, local activists, and residents, argued that communities affected by carbon capture projects should have a direct voice through local option elections. They said the bills were about self-determination, local control, and allowing residents to decide whether the risks are worth the benefits. Several speakers said their parishes had passed resolutions opposing carbon capture or asking for local choice, while others emphasized concerns about eminent domain, aquifer protection, lack of public understanding, and the need for more information about project impacts and financial benefits. Some supporters also said a local vote would force industry to engage more directly with communities and could improve transparency. Opponents, including representatives of the Department of Conservation and Energy, the Louisiana Chemistry Association, the Louisiana Mid-Continent Oil and Gas Association, and the Louisiana Association of Business and Industry, warned that the bills would create uncertainty, undermine Louisiana’s primacy over Class VI permitting, and invite litigation under federal preemption and the Supremacy Clause. They said the state already has a strict permitting process with public input and technical review, and that allowing parish-by-parish approval could delay or block billions of dollars in investment, jobs, and export-related projects. The department testified that if the state adopted a local-option referendum system, EPA could determine Louisiana was not implementing the program consistently and could move to remove primacy. No committee vote was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• So HIF comes in and makes a federal project be able to come to fruition.
• And when you look at the federal rental assistance programs, the Section 8 voucher, the project-based
• on, and one of them is project management of Project North Star.
• And so in all of these projects, whether you're looking at the projects north of the lake, the projects
• And so in all of these projects, whether you're looking at the projects north of the lake, the projects

Summary: The committee met as the Budget Section’s Regulatory Division and first reviewed base budget materials for the North Dakota Housing Finance Agency and the Department of Mineral Resources. Legislative Council explained the blue-sheet budget summaries and historical funding trends. The Housing Finance Agency then reported on its ongoing homeownership, housing incentive, and homelessness programs, noting that its new FTEs are being filled, loan servicing remains above benchmark, and the agency is operating largely on special and federal funds rather than general fund dollars. Housing Finance officials said the Housing Incentive Fund continues to be heavily oversubscribed, with requests far exceeding available dollars, and described how funds are being used for multifamily gap financing, rural single-family development, community land trusts, and homeless prevention/rapid rehousing. Members asked about performance measures, the number of people served, and the relationship between housing costs, wages, and homelessness. The agency said it uses scoring criteria tied to performance and outcomes, and requested that the Legislature maintain or increase funding for HIF, single-family housing, and homeless grants. Committee members also discussed the need to coordinate housing finance efforts with Commerce and broader site-preparation and workforce issues. The Department of Mineral Resources reported that it is on track with its budget, has filled most of its newly authorized reclamation positions, and is moving ahead on several initiatives, including IT modernization through Project North Star, organizational succession planning, and rulemaking for critical minerals and oil and gas programs. The director gave an extensive update on oil and gas activity, explaining that longer laterals and operational efficiencies are keeping production relatively flat even as rig counts decline, and that gas capture remains around 95 percent. Members asked about oil prices, hedging, spacing units, and the effects of geopolitical events on markets and state revenues. The committee also received an update on the enhanced oil recovery grant program and the Pipeline Authority. The EOR program’s $25 million appropriation was fully allocated to six projects, with additional oil and gas research funds also committed, and officials said the projects will require public status reports and final reports. The Pipeline Authority described major natural gas transmission projects, including the upcoming Bakken Express line and the proposed Bakken East project, which recently completed a binding open season after the Industrial Commission selected WBI Energy’s proposal to move forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• After federal land shutdowns, it went to small logs.
• Forest carbon projects have a track record of success.
• funding needed for critical facilities projects.
• It ensures that federal reserved rights are addressed accurately with active federal participation and
• and federal parties are negotiating.

Bills: HB2170 , HB2544 , HB2578

Committee: House Agriculture & Natural Resources

Keywords: natural climate solutions, ecosystem services, revenue generation, economic opportunities, environmental policy, water rights, adjudication, Columbia River, environmental impact, natural resources, tribal members, fish and wildlife, commission, indigenous rights, state regulation

Transcript Highlights:

• are based on those projections.
• are based on those projections.
• One, in the MIP program, a greater share of people projected to receive state-funded versus federally
• higher than projected carry forward in federal funding.
• From a federal perspective in fiscal year 2026, based on the most recent forecast, DHS is projected to

Committee: Senate Health and Human Services

Transcript Highlights:

• It also allows the state to unlock a lot of federal tax credits, a lot of federal funds.
• projects.
• funded projects.
• That just adds more time and cost for our projects when we need those projects the most.
• Against federal budget cuts.

Summary: Assembly Budget Subcommittee 5 on State Administration heard two housing-related trailer bill items tied to the Governor’s reorganization plan. The first item would codify the creation of a new Housing and Homelessness Agency and a Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency structure; the second would further streamline the state housing finance system by creating a Housing Development and Finance Committee and reserving most private activity bond capacity for affordable housing. Administration officials said the changes are intended to reduce duplication, speed awards to construction, and make housing funding more predictable and efficient. Agency leaders described recent housing investments and implementation steps, including work groups, coordination with Finance, the Controller, and the Treasurer’s Office, and development of new guidelines and staffing. Members raised concerns about limited funding, the need for better program-by-program outcome data, youth homelessness, excess sites, and fraud prevention. The Interagency Council on Homelessness presented new three-year action plan metrics, including goals to increase exits from unsheltered homelessness to 70% and move more people into permanent housing, while also noting current performance data and quarterly public reporting. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said it had no concerns with the first trailer bill, but supported the general concept of the second while recommending changes, including removing or revising the proposed 50% bond-cap floor for the new committee and adding attention to 9% and state tax credits. Public commenters, including local governments, nonprofit developers, housing authorities, and advocacy groups, largely supported the reorganization and streamlining goals, but several urged stronger protections for deeply affordable housing, earlier reallocation of unused bond authority, continued access to 9% credits, and more funding for housing programs. No votes were taken in the portion provided; the chair closed item one and moved to item two after member and public testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• Highway Administration allows toll credits to be used on all projects that use federal funds and all
• Every state-managed bridge project in the 10-year plan is 100% federally funded, but Concord's Loudon
• funds because it was a state federal funds because it was a state project<01:26:55.360><c> a</c><01:
• Of federal funds, so really we had funding for about $188 million of projects.
• </c><01:41:41.800><c> are</c><01:41:42.040><c> not</c> Federal Pro projects but those are not Federal

Committee: Senate Transportation

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:07:23.840><c> um</c> Community engagement to projects um Community engagement to projects um
• </c><00:46:39.400><c> did</c> the projects and all these projects did the projects and all these projects
• the state of Minnesota, particularly DNR, and if a project is being done on federal land purchased with
• </c><00:48:27.599><c> land</c> project is being done on federal land project is being done on federal
• It's a Middle Snake Tamarac River Watershed District large-scale project, and the watershed and the federal

Committee: House Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy