Transcript Highlights:

• , or municipal building or adjacent grounds for the public benefit and good. ...or municipal building
• I don't know that we would really focus on starting with the counties, you know, the counties.
• Some clerks of court are county, and some are state.
• and not the actual counties.
• Instead, what the... ...counties do, the counties really have been subsidizing the state on this because

Summary: The task force reviewed survey results from state agencies on potential statutory revisions, with Levi reporting 70 proposals from 20 agencies and noting that about 33 might become agency pre-file bills. Members discussed the need to share the survey more broadly within higher education and to better coordinate issues involving IT and other cross-agency functions. The task force then heard from the Office of Management and Budget on three topics: concessions, architect/engineering pre-qualification, and legal notices. OMB said the concessions law is outdated and inconsistent with current practice, and suggested a collaborative rewrite to allow best-value evaluation, raise the threshold, and standardize solicitation templates. On architect/engineering pre-qualification, OMB proposed expanding authority beyond current state-agency limits and creating uniform templates. On legal notices, OMB proposed modernizing publication requirements, exploring online and abbreviated notices, and working with newspapers and other stakeholders on technology and accessibility improvements. Members asked about where concession revenues go, whether political subdivisions must follow the same rules, and how to move from discussion to action. The task force agreed to have OMB work with Legislative Council and affected stakeholders to develop bill drafts, and the motion passed unanimously. The University of North Dakota then presented a series of proposed revisions focused on public buildings and procurement. UND asked to rework the definition of construction so routine maintenance and one-for-one replacements over $250,000 would not automatically trigger public-improvement requirements, suggested raising the threshold to $500,000, and asked for more flexibility based on project complexity and risk. UND also proposed changes to public bid advertisements to reflect electronic bidding, revisions to construction manager-at-risk selection criteria, changes to architect/engineer procurement rules, an increase in the direct-hire design threshold, and a higher legislative-consent threshold for privately funded projects. The task force supported having UND work with counsel and OMB to develop bill drafts, and that motion also passed. The Department of Public Instruction concluded with proposed cleanup to credentialing and education statutes. DPI recommended reviewing its credential categories for relevance, possibly transferring credentialing authority to the Education Standards and Practices Board, removing outdated school safety patrol language, clarifying waiver provisions, and updating dyslexia screening reporting requirements so the statute reflects current practice. Members focused mainly on whether the dyslexia reporting requirement should remain, and DPI said the screening itself would continue even if reporting language were revised. No votes were taken on DPI’s suggestions, and the task force recessed after the presentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• County offices, typically the county recorder, would be subject to millions of new requests.
• County offices, typically the county recorder, would be subject to millions of new requests for birth
• These requests would come from people in their county, in a specific county, in other California counties
• some cheaper, smaller buildings.
• I'm in Glenn County.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 5 heard updates from the Secretary of State, EDD, the State Controller’s Office, CalHR, and DGS on a range of budget proposals and federal policy impacts. Secretary of State Shirley Weber opened with remarks about California’s election system, emphasizing its safety, transparency, high voter registration and vote-by-mail participation, and the office’s response to bomb threats and other election threats. Her staff then presented funding requests for the Cal-Access Replacement System (CARS) and Help America Vote Act/VoteCal activities, describing them as needed to modernize campaign finance and lobbying disclosure systems and maintain election security and voter services. A major portion of the hearing focused on federal election policy, especially the potential effects of a presidential executive order and the SAVE Act. Secretary of State staff said California would face significant, potentially unquantifiable costs if forced to comply, including new burdens on county recorders, county election offices, and the Secretary of State’s office, and warned of voter disenfranchisement, especially for students, seniors, disabled voters, military and overseas voters, rural residents, and people with limited transportation. Members and public commenters strongly opposed the federal proposals and argued California’s current system is functioning well. The committee also heard that federal HAVA funds were not expected to be at risk because the state draws them down into an interest-bearing account. EDD reported on paid family leave, explaining that recent delays were tied to a system transition and increased claim volume, and said it was simplifying applications and adding staff and automation. Public testimony supported expanding paid family leave to chosen family. EDD also said it is prepared for possible unemployment spikes, citing a recession plan, a command center, and recent hiring. The State Controller’s Office requested funding to continue the Fiscal migration project, which would move the state’s accounting book of record to the new system by July 1, 2026; Finance and LAO had no objections, and the committee expressed support for the project’s progress. CalHR presented a proposal for a statewide recruitment, outreach, and education paid media campaign under AB 1511, saying its current advertising budget is too small to reach diverse communities effectively. The final item addressed Governor Newsom’s executive order requiring a return to office on a four-day schedule. CalHR and DGS said they were working department-by-department to assess space, parking, transit, and other logistics, but had not completed a statewide cost analysis. Members and many public commenters criticized the order, arguing it was rushed, costly, harmful to telework benefits, and potentially disruptive to workers, especially those with disabilities, caregiving responsibilities, or long commutes. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• ,</c> Graves County over to Jefferson County, Graves County over to Jefferson County, but<00:33:13.600
• And in the repair of that building that the local Boyle County officials want to do and addressing the
• Meaning the county is 47%. courthouse. Meaning the county is 47%.
• </c> limited in Danville and Boil County. limited in Danville and Boil County.
• We just entered into an MOU with Boyle County officials to build a new judicial center that would be

Summary: The subcommittee heard a budget overview from the Kentucky Court of Justice focused on mandated services and several growth items in the judicial branch budget. Court officials said the requests were driven by legal and contractual obligations, including higher contractor rates for court interpreters and IT support, annual software-as-a-service costs, and upgrades to the court’s audiovisual record system (JAVS). They also discussed local facilities needs tied to Jefferson County lease space and the Boyle County Courthouse, though the bulk of the presentation centered on the court’s technology and service-delivery costs. Members asked detailed questions about interpreter services, including whether services are provided in person, by phone, or by Zoom, and whether Kentucky could train and certify more local interpreters instead of relying on contractors from around the country. Court officials said the certification process is rigorous, that the branch is working with the National Center for State Courts on an apprenticeship program, and that they believe Kentucky may have flexibility to develop state-level certification if it meets court needs. They also said they are exploring technology and AI tools for translation, but have not found a solution that reliably handles complex courtroom context. Representative Sharp asked whether cases had been delayed for lack of interpreters; officials said they could provide aggregated data later. The court also described its major IT modernization effort, including a statewide case management system, e-filing, and maintenance of many legacy applications. Officials said contractor rates need to be raised to compete for skilled labor during the implementation phase, but that those costs should decline once the new systems are fully built and only maintained. They explained that part of the request covers three SaaS initiatives: ongoing subscription costs for existing systems, annual fees for the CaseWorks system used in pretrial and specialty courts after federal grant funding ends, and adoption of DocuSign to streamline invoicing, procurement, and contract execution. In response to questions from Representative KC Carney, they said cybersecurity is taken seriously, that they recently conducted a tabletop exercise, and that some risk shifts to cloud vendors under contract, though no separate cybersecurity line item was included. A substantial portion of the discussion focused on the JAVS audiovisual court-record system. Court officials said not all courtrooms are on the same version, and they want funding to bring all locations up to the current version and prepare for version 9, which they said would standardize the system statewide and support the official court record. When asked about costs, they said each upgrade can cost about $70,000 to $80,000 per system, that they aim to upgrade about 50 per year, and that the request reflects the need to keep pace with a four-year refresh cycle. No votes or formal actions were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• transit—we build it all.
• transit—we build it all.
• I'm the chief officer of transportation and county engineer for Anoka County.
• beyond our county borders.
• I'm the public works director and county engineer for Chicago County.

Bills: HF2438

Committee: House Transportation Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• We support design-build.
• This bill would authorize design-build and progressive design-build for county offices of education,
• This bill would authorize design-build and progressive design-build for county offices of education,
• County offices of education are responsible for building and maintaining some of the most complex and
• It simply allows county offices of education to use the same design-build and alternative design-build

Committee: Senate Education

Transcript Highlights:

• County, Willis-E and Cameron counties were all impacted. area that floods though.
• County.
• Waz County.
• In Wise County, there's.
• of Harris County.

Bills: HB1520 , HB1525 , HB1530 , HB1535 , HB2068 , HB2091 , HB2347 , HB2372 , HB2805 , HB2815 , HB2867 , HB3154 , HB3482 , HB3483 , HB3663 , HB3781 , HB3901 , HB3915 , HB4135 , HB4153 , HB4158 , HB4329 , HB4331

Committee: House Natural Resources

Transcript Highlights:

• And then we also have to 2 county commissioners from Seminole County.
• I see county has one county commissioner that represents the county on our board.
• So we are redeveloping and we are trying to build more affordable housing in our county because we think
• Several counties.
• I mean, one point tell us County was Hillsborough County.

Transcript Highlights:

• buildings.
• And you can’t build the damn thing.
• If we needed to build a new substation, for example, or we needed to build a new transmission line or
• Partnerships take time to build.
• So I move in the building, you move in the building, Franklin moves in the building, and then 10 other

Summary: The joint informational hearing of the Select Committee on Electric Vehicles and Charging Infrastructure focused on California’s EV market, charging infrastructure, and the effects of recent federal actions. The chair opened by emphasizing California’s progress on EV adoption and charging reliability, but also noted ongoing challenges with affordability, access, interoperability, heavy-duty electrification, and federal headwinds. She highlighted interest in technologies such as inductive charging and thanked host organizations and staff before moving to the first panel. State agency witnesses from Go-Biz, CARB, and the California Energy Commission described current programs and priorities. Go-Biz outlined its role in coordinating agencies, supporting permitting, and advancing the state’s ZEV market development strategy and equity action plan. CARB discussed federal attacks on its clean vehicle regulations, litigation to defend waiver authority, and the importance of incentives and regulatory programs such as Advanced Clean Trucks, Advanced Clean Fleets, Clean Truck Check, HVIP, and Clean Cars for All. The CEC detailed its funding and regulatory work on charging and fueling infrastructure, charger reliability, payment methods, roaming, and statewide planning, while stressing the need for more charging in multifamily housing and more public DC fast charging. All three agencies said federal rollbacks and permitting delays are major obstacles, but that California remains committed to expanding ZEV adoption. The second panel featured advocates, local government, utility, and research perspectives. CalETC urged continuous state funding through the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and emphasized the low-carbon fuel standard, multifamily charging, and managed charging. An EV advocacy group proposed a conquest-style state incentive for new and used EV buyers and argued that multifamily housing is a major untapped market, while also favoring Level 2 charging over Level 1 for most home and apartment settings. Los Angeles County and LADWP described large-scale local deployment of chargers, fleet electrification, workforce training, and the need for sustained funding, agency coordination, and streamlined permitting and grid interconnection. UCS recommended prioritizing replacement of older high-emitting vehicles, using fuel policy revenues to support cleaner cars, and expanding bidirectional charging. The chair closed by asking for more discussion on Level 1 versus Level 2 charging and noted the importance of education, affordability, and practical deployment strategies.

Transcript Highlights:

• Members of the committee, Mark Nolte, District 51, East half of Lafayette County, and all of Saline County
• If in my county, in St.
• Louis County or Jackson County. Line, six-line, eight-line towers.
• The line they're building through Callaway County into Montgomery County is an Ameren line that they've
• Ameren says they're being forced to build. Why doesn't it build that?

Committee: House Special Committee on Rural Issues

Summary: The committee heard House Bill 3114, which would require operating railroads in Missouri to provide digital copies of valuation and station maps to the state land surveyor for inclusion in a public repository. The sponsor said the bill is intended to help surveyors locate abandoned railroad rights-of-way and determine center lines for adjoining landowners’ reversionary rights. Committee members asked about whether the bill would apply to active versus abandoned lines, whether records still exist for older railroads, and whether a deadline should be added for compliance. Railroad testimony raised concerns about the breadth of the request, potential security and proprietary issues, and the burden of compiling historical records, while indicating a willingness to continue discussions and possibly work with surveyors on a more targeted process. The committee then heard House Bill 2298, which would remove the current exemption for electric cooperatives from the requirement that condemning entities pay 150% of appraised value in eminent domain cases. The sponsor argued that co-ops should be treated the same as regulated utilities because landowners face the same burden when transmission lines cross their property, and he cited examples where co-op offers were far below what he believed comparable utility projects would pay. Landowners and a lawyer testifying in favor described alleged unfair treatment, uneven compensation, and the impact of transmission lines on farm operations and property value, while emphasizing that the bill would simply put co-ops on the same footing as other utilities. Opposition testimony from Associated Industries of Missouri and the Missouri Electric Cooperatives argued that the bill would interfere with the cooperative model, which is member-owned and governed by elected boards, and would reduce flexibility in negotiating easements. The co-op representative said the organizations are not partnered with Grain Belt Express, that any interconnection compensation is separate from the project itself, and that most easement acquisitions are settled by negotiation rather than condemnation. Committee members questioned whether co-ops already pay comparable amounts in practice, whether the bill would affect transmission projects tied to Grain Belt Express, and how co-op governance and member oversight should factor into eminent domain policy.

Transcript Highlights:

• As a result, the state's building sector, including housing developers, would have to switch out building
• materials with conventional building materials.
• The emissions reduction goals in AB 2446 aim to build a strong market for lower-carbon-intensity building
• The goals in AB 2446 aim to build a strong market for lower-carbon-intensity building materials by inducing
• counties statewide.

Summary: The committee heard several bills and one resolution focused on recycling, housing affordability, air quality, coastal protection, wildfire resilience, and nuclear policy. AB 2559, by Assembly Member Ward, would require local governments to return refundable construction and demolition permit deposits if compliance documentation is submitted within three years of final inspection; supporters said it would prevent homeowners and developers from losing deposits due to mismatched local deadlines, and it passed unanimously as amended to Appropriations. AB 1704, by Assembly Member Gonzalez, would require CARB to assess the cost of lower-embodied-carbon building materials and pause the embodied-carbon program if cost parity is not reached; supporters framed it as a housing affordability safeguard, while environmental groups argued it would delay implementation of a key climate law. The bill passed on a party-line vote to Appropriations. AB 2349, by Assembly Member Solache, would create regional air quality incident response centers for emergency monitoring and coordination; it drew strong support from air district and local government representatives and passed unanimously to Appropriations. ACR 149, commemorating the 50th anniversary of the California Coastal Act and Coastal Conservancy, highlighted coastal access, habitat protection, and climate adaptation; it passed the committee, though some members voted no. AB 1960, by Assembly Member Bennett, would let Cal Fire fund community-level wildfire hardening projects through the Wildfire Prevention Grants Fund; members raised questions about funding and implementation, but it passed to Appropriations. AB 2254, the Coastal Monarchs Protection Act, would require coastal local governments to add monarch overwintering protections when updating local coastal plans; supporters cited steep monarch declines and economic benefits, while local government groups opposed the mandate as duplicative and burdensome, and it passed to Water, Parks and Wildlife. AB 2253 would restrict deceptive recycled-content claims and mass-balance accounting practices; supporters said it would protect consumers and real recyclers, while business groups argued it would conflict with recognized accounting systems and EPR programs. The transcript also included AB 1757, which would create a limited carve-out from California’s nuclear moratorium for microreactors; supporters said it could provide clean, local power and support data centers, while opponents warned of cost, waste, and safety risks. The committee ultimately rejected AB 1757 on a divided vote, then granted reconsideration, and the discussion continued without a final action shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• John Kennedy with rural counties.
• We represent 40 counties in the state, but counties collectively in some cities operate just shy of 200
• Nancy Buremeyer, on behalf of Yuba County, Sutter.
• As a result, the state's building sector, including housing developers, would have to switch out building
• As a result, the state's building sector, including housing developers, would have to switch out building

Summary: The committee heard AB 839, which would allow up to three sustainable aviation fuel projects to qualify for expedited CEQA judicial review. The author and airline and airport supporters argued SAF is a key emissions-reduction strategy for aviation and that California needs to signal investment certainty after prior project litigation. Environmental Justice and Earthjustice opposed, saying the bill weakens the public’s ability to challenge polluting projects and that SAF facilities can harm already overburdened communities. The committee later took a roll call on the bill and it was held on call after a 3-0 vote, with the motion being due pass to Judiciary. Members then took up AB 762, which would ban the sale of disposable nicotine vapes in California. The author and a broad coalition of waste, public health, local government, and environmental groups said the devices create fire hazards, add lithium batteries to the waste stream, and burden local recycling and hazardous waste systems. Opponents, including retailers and business groups, argued the bill would mainly affect a small legal market while the illicit market would continue to supply most disposable vapes, and warned of unintended consequences. After discussion about illicit sales, EPR ideas, and reuse alternatives, the committee voted 2-2 on the motion to pass as amended to Revenue and Taxation, so the bill was kept on call. The committee also heard AB 907, which would compensate the six local air district representatives who serve on the California Air Resources Board the same as other board members. The author and supporters said the change would improve equity and help ensure local representation on CARB, and no opposition was presented. The chair expressed support, noting similar legislation had passed the committee previously, and the bill was held for a later vote once quorum issues were resolved.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is my home county, so welcome to Mercer County.
• megawatts, the first building.
• It built schools, hospitals, small businesses, and counties like Mercer County, Oliver County, and McLean
• County.
• Let's build. Let's lead.

Summary: The committee met at the Coteau Freedom Mine in Mercer County, approved the June 2 minutes, and heard an overview of the mine from Coteau Properties president Andrew Hawbaker. He described the Freedom Mine’s production history, customer mix, safety record, reclamation practices, workforce, community involvement, and economic impact. Members asked about how long land stays in production before reclamation, how quickly it returns to agriculture, labor shortages, groundwater impacts, and which skilled trades are hardest to fill. Hawbaker said the mine typically disturbs land for three to five years, reclamation returns much of the land to agricultural use, and the biggest hiring challenges are electricians, welders, mechanics, operators, engineers, and accountants. The committee then heard from Public Service Commission Chairman Randy Christman on coal mining reclamation. He reviewed the history of North Dakota and federal reclamation laws, the PSC’s permitting and inspection authority, bonding requirements, contemporaneous reclamation standards, and how the state handles topsoil, subsoil, drainage, and revegetation. He emphasized that North Dakota’s program is well regarded, with frequent inspections and no corrective-action issues in recent federal reviews. Christman also discussed problems caused by federal coal ownership that can delay mine plans, and he answered questions about reclamation timing, wildlife easements, wind and pipeline reclamation, and whether similar bonding concepts could apply to data centers. In the afternoon, the committee received an update from Lignite Energy Council President and CEO Jonathan Fortner on the lignite industry. He highlighted the industry’s long-term role in providing reliable electricity, jobs, and tax revenue, along with North Dakota’s low electricity rates and strong grid reliability. Fortner discussed severance and conversion tax revenues, federal regulatory changes, litigation over EPA rules, carbon capture, critical minerals, and the potential for large-load customers such as data centers to support new coal generation. He said the industry sees a window of opportunity for growth and expressed support for new large-load development, while noting that diversified energy companies are also pursuing natural gas and other resources. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken beyond approving the minutes and adjourning for the tour.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:02:58.200><c> a</c> responses, we must thoughtfully build a responses, we must thoughtfully build
• </c><00:05:07.120><c> to</c> families bill to require counties to families bill to require counties to
• counties pay for boarding and make choices that are not best for kids.
• counties pay for boarding and make choices that are not best for kids.
• counties pay for boarding and make choices that are not best for kids.

Transcript Highlights:

• to full counties or to bring online new counties?
• Every time Sonia takes a meeting in the counties that we’re looking to build outreach to, and in those
• Every time Sonia takes a meeting in the counties that we're looking to build outreach to, and in those
• Who did you, who in what county, just give me, Sacramento County.
• Who did you, who in what county, just give me, Sacramento County.

Summary: The follow-up informational hearing focused on the State Library’s oversight of the statewide Imagination Library and the Strong Reader Partnership (SRP), including how the original $68.2 million state investment was spent, why funds were not redirected sooner to the Dollywood Foundation, and whether spending complied with AB 157 and later SB 105. Committee members repeatedly raised concerns that SRP and the State Library had been slow to provide documents, that quarterly reporting and other contract requirements were not met on time, and that the State Library did not escalate issues earlier. State Librarian Greg Lucas said the library sent one demand letter, relied on counsel’s view that SRP could continue spending its $4.8 million so long as it furthered the program, and later redirected about $55 million to the Dollywood Foundation after paperwork was submitted. He also acknowledged the library should have shared SRP’s final report with the committee sooner and said the materials eventually received appeared satisfactory, though the chair and Senator Grove remained concerned that there was still no clear accounting of books delivered by SRP. A major portion of the hearing examined SRP’s expenditures and vendor contracts, including Shipyard for marketing and web services, SAGE Strategies for management consulting, Lotus Financial Solutions and other financial vendors, and United Way California Capital Region for a small marketing grant. Committee members questioned whether some spending, especially Changecraft’s work during the AB 157 period, amounted to lobbying or attempts to influence legislation, which the grant agreement prohibited. SRP representatives said the work was communications and stakeholder outreach, not lobbying, and that invoices reflected the board’s oversight and the nonprofit’s startup and closeout phases. They also said some work continued during the rescission and closeout period to unwind contracts and return funds, and that any reporting delays were due to transition, lack of a reporting mechanism from the State Library, and the need to collect records after vendors were canceled. Members of SRP said the nonprofit was created to build the infrastructure for a self-sustaining statewide program, expand local partnerships, and support multilingual outreach in underserved counties. They described a working board that met regularly, selected vendors collectively, and used multiple financial and administrative contractors to maintain checks and balances. However, committee members pressed them on the lack of detailed invoices, the absence of clear metrics showing how many books SRP actually delivered, and the limited apparent return on spending such as the $581,708 Shipyard contract, the $125,000 website work, and the $5,000 United Way grant. No formal vote or legislative action was taken during the hearing; it was an oversight session aimed at obtaining explanations and additional documentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• work for cities and counties.
• to Ventura County, San Diego, Los Angeles, Kern, and Sonoma County.
• building and are ready to open it.
• the building and are finishing the installation of the exhibits and artifacts in that building and are
• getting pushed to do a lot of design-build.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:40:32.960><c> health</c> county owned or county operated health county owned or county operated
• </c><00:40:58.680><c> health</c> county owned or county operated health county owned or county operated
• Hennepin County owns both the ground and the buildings on that property and is responsible for maintaining
• County. County.
• County. County.

Committee: Senate Taxes

Transcript Highlights:

• The surf industry in Santa Cruz County in Santa Cruz County, and the economics are clear.
• So again, we're just trying to build a better future for Mendocino County.
• We're trying to build a better future for Trinity County, which has a demonstration forest as well in
• So again, we're just trying to build a better future for Mendocino County.
• We're trying to build a better future for Trinity County, which has a demonstration forest as well in

Committee: House Natural Resources

Transcript Highlights:

• I have a lot of roots here in San Miguel County.
• The county maps we have here in San Miguel County are a significant problem.
• Because we were looking at the maps at the county level, and it showed this building as within our property
• So we've been working with the county, but I think they have an appointed person right now at the county
• This land grant also owns the senior center building. Does that building need any improvements?

Committee: House House Rural Development, Land Grants And Cultural Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• Stan Karwaski, Washington County Commissioner, representing Washington County.
• that county.
• So from what I can tell, at County Road 5 or Kasson 5, there's a signal at County Road 3.
• into Eureka and runs a mile up to County Road 32 of Washington County.
• the county.

Committee: Senate Transportation

Transcript Highlights:

• Different time in Jefferson County?
• </c> schools in Jefferson County. schools in Jefferson County.
• And that Jefferson County.
• </c> Fayette County. Fayette County.
• </c><01:40:16.440><c> those</c><01:40:16.640><c> buildings,</c> builders, they build those buildings,

Committee: House Primary and Secondary Education