Transcript Highlights:

• Um, so hopefully you'll take some time to digest after the fact, um.
• Um, we've already talked about the limited nature of, of the market.
• Every time we have a vacancy, we post it.
• What happens at that point in time?
• We'll see if that applies to the upper payment limit.

Transcript Highlights:

• It limits their input. It limits our input. We don't have the chance.
• We're limited, extremely limited on debate time. 14 hours on 21 bills.
• It limits our input. We their input. It limits our input.
• :27:42.400> on<00:27:42.799> debate limited, extremely uh limited on debate limited, extremely
• uh limited on debate time.<00:27:44.720> 14<00:27:45.120> hours<00:27:45.360> on

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• NOW IS THE TIME.
• THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. >> Chair Gruters: RIGHT ON TIME.
• MOST TIME PEOPLE FORGET. MAYBE THEY HAVE SIGNED ONE.
• MAY BE 80 AT A DIFFERENT TIME.
• SO I AM WONDERING WHY THAT PERIOD OF TIME IS SUCH A LONG PERIOD OF TIME?

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, first of all, to the witnesses, we've imposed a two-minute time limit on witness testimony.
• of time, right?
• There's no time limit, and I don't know that we want to dabble in that, but this presumption applies.
• of your time.
• Then, setting a time limit for that evidence to stay in your hands and then be destroyed as opposed to

Bills: HB 1194, HB 1221, HB1738, HB1913, HB2177, HB2178, HB2180, HB2229, HB2282, HB2448, HB2492, HB2777, HB2984, HB3357, HB3553, HB3602

Keywords: emergency protection order, protective order, magistrate, criminal procedure, victim safety, family violence, domestic violence, stalking, assault, magistrate's order, temporary protection, court order duration, defendant restrictions, Article 17.292, Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, emergency restraining order, victim protection, firearm restriction, pretrial intervention, reimbursement fee

Transcript Highlights:

• California is on our side this time.
• Perfect timing. Perfect timing. All right. Welcome. Madam Chair, members, forgive me.
• Is the bill limited to those areas?
• So at the present time, we would oppose the bill.
• I don't have time to go into that right now.

Bills: HB2042, HB2052, HB2055, HB2056, HB2094, HB2098, HB2185, HB2328, HB2758, HB2798

Keywords: solar radiation management, environment, prohibition, Arizona Revised Statutes, public health, complaint process, Attorney General, groundwater management, water conservation, irrigation, water supply, brackish groundwater, water supply development, desalination, water infrastructure, financial assistance, environmental reviews, brackish water, groundwater, water resources

Summary: The committee first received an update from Arizona Department of Water Resources Director Tom Buschatzky on Colorado River negotiations and post-2026 operating rules. He described the legal framework governing Arizona’s allocation, argued that Arizona and the lower basin have already made substantial conservation cuts, and said the upper basin is pressing positions Arizona views as inconsistent with prior Supreme Court rulings. He emphasized the need to move water from upstream reservoirs to Lake Mead, warned of continued shortage risk, and said the state is seeking an equitable deal through ongoing federal and interstate negotiations. Members asked about outside water use, tourism and recreation impacts, and tribal water rights, including the Navajo-Hopi-San Juan Southern Paiute settlement. Buschatzky said the state’s delegation and bipartisan support have been helpful and urged continued public and legislative backing. The committee then heard House Bill 2758, which would expand McMullen Valley groundwater transportation authority and add related requirements and guardrails, including an amendment increasing the La Paz County transportation cap from 10% to 50% of the annual volume and adding conditions for sales or leases from historically irrigated acres. Supporters, including bill sponsor advocates, the Arizona Municipal Water Users Association, and the Home Builders Association, said the bill would create a lawful, regulated transfer option similar to the Harquahala model, support housing growth, and include oversight through hydrologic studies, pumping limits, and monthly reporting to ADWR. Opponents, including La Paz County Supervisor Holly Irwin’s statement, local residents, Sierra Club, and rural advocates, argued the bill would accelerate aquifer depletion, harm private wells and subsidence conditions, and benefit a New York hedge fund at the expense of rural communities. After debate, the committee adopted the Griffin amendment and then passed HB 2758 as amended on a 6-4 due-pass vote. The committee next took up House Bill 2098, which would modify bonding authority and public hearing notice requirements for county water augmentation authorities and allow local repayment agreements with WIFA. Pinal County Supervisor Stephen Miller and other supporters said the bill would clean up statutory language so the Pinal County Water Augmentation Authority can finance future water augmentation and infrastructure projects, including potential Bartlett Dam-related work, and better prepare for future Colorado River uncertainty. The Home Builders Association also supported the bill, saying it included proportionality protections for private utility water charges. The bill was moved for a due-pass recommendation and the committee proceeded to a roll call vote, with the transcript ending before the final vote result was shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'd like to take this time to remind our testifiers that due to time restrictions on our hearing, we
• that due to time restrictions testifiers that due to time restrictions on<00:18:56.400> our<00
• on our hearing, we will be limiting on our hearing, we will be limiting testimony<00:18:58.400><
• that the the land area might be limited. that the the land area might be limited.
• And I know you long time. We worked long time together. You know the projects we worked on.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Joint Senate Committee on Education, Hawaiian Affairs, and Housing heard House Bill 1088 HD1, which would exempt housing developed by the Department of Hawaiian Homelands (DHHL) from school impact fees. The Department of Education said it was open to working with DHHL and the Legislature, including possibly eliminating the construction-cost portion of the fee for DHHL and other government affordable housing projects, but it wanted to retain the land-dedication requirement for future school sites where growth would exceed existing school capacity. The School Facilities Authority supported the bill, and DHHL strongly supported it, noting that its testimony referenced an earlier emergency proclamation but that the exemption remains in the current proclamation. DHHL also said it had no objection to a proposed amendment from the Wahiawa Hawaiian Homestead Association. The Tax Foundation of Hawaii testified in opposition to the broader school impact fee program, arguing that the fund has accumulated about $29 million that has not been spent and citing concerns raised in State Auditor Report 19-13, including administrative and constitutional issues. Committee discussion focused heavily on whether the fee system is being applied fairly, especially to smaller projects and homeowners, and whether the districts and calculations used to assess fees have been updated. Members questioned the DOE and SFA about the distinction between land and construction costs, the use of fees in areas like Kīhei, Kalihi, Ala Moana, and Ewa, and whether the department had revisited district calculations as recommended in the audit. DOE said it had collected about $500,000 in construction money and $2.8 million in land contributions for Kalihi-related areas, and said it would follow up on questions about land conveyances and district updates. After discussion, the chair called for a vote. The Education committee recommended passing HB 1088 HD1 as is, with Senator San Buenaventura voting with reservation and Senators Ihara and Kole voting aye. The recommendation was adopted. The Housing committee then also deferred the measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, realizing time, I'll try to keep this quick.
• Limiting the author's DE amendment.
• <00:19:28.799> in why I'm spending so much time in why I'm spending so much time in paperwork
• Again, no other member questions at this time.
• Thank you for your<00:20:02.960> time.<00:20:03.360> Neck.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Kind of a good time for review.
• At the time, the senior centers just didn't feel like it was quite worth their time.
• us, their their limit is at $4,000. us, their their limit is at $4,000.
• that time. that time.
• but we have little time. but we have little time.

Keywords: 916, all

Summary: The committee opened by explaining it would work through a long list of interim topics one at a time and asked members to complete a selection form at the end. The first topic, long-term care, drew testimony from AARP Wyoming and the Wyoming Long-Term Care Association. AARP emphasized Wyoming’s aging population, the state’s roughly $200 million annual Medicaid spending on long-term care, and the need to examine whether more support for home-based care could reduce nursing home use and costs. The association agreed with supporting people at home as long as possible, but asked that any study also consider increased support for nursing homes and assisted living when home care is no longer feasible. Committee discussion also touched on adult day care and PACE-like services, with Mr. Laycock noting prior Department of Health discussion and limited adult day availability due to reimbursement concerns. The committee then heard proposals for neonatal intensive care unit family leave, expanded midwifery scope, and a modification to workers’ compensation law. The NICU leave idea, presented by the Wyoming Women’s Foundation, would explore leave options for families with premature infants in intensive care, potentially paid or unpaid, while considering business size and the burden on families who may need out-of-state care. The midwifery topic was framed as a way to address rural maternity and women’s health gaps by allowing midwives to practice to the full extent of their training. On workers’ compensation, the Wyoming Association of Municipalities sought to classify dispatch personnel as first responders so they could receive mental health coverage under workers’ compensation; the Department of Workforce Services explained that current law covers dispatchers under workers’ compensation generally, but the first responder mental health provision added in 2018 applies to law enforcement and firefighters and does not currently include dispatchers. Other topics included problematic gaming and program funding, breast cancer diagnostic and supplemental exams, prescription drug coverage for advanced metastatic cancer, SNAP education, behavioral health workforce clinical training site shortages, CPR in schools, and broader midwifery oversight. The behavioral health workforce proposal, brought by a WICHE commissioner, focused on increasing psychology internship slots in Wyoming, noting that the state currently has only three and that expanding placements could improve recruitment and retention. The CPR in schools topic drew strong support from the American Heart Association, which argued that CPR training in high school could improve bystander response in a rural state with long EMS response times; committee members asked about cost and curriculum fit, and the witnesses said hands-only CPR could be taught by school staff rather than requiring expensive certification. The midwifery discussion later broadened into concerns about oversight and standards after a representative described a constituent’s pregnancy loss and said complaints involving midwifery practice and staffing delays in investigations warranted a deeper review. No votes were taken during the portion provided, and most topics were simply introduced, discussed, and left open for further testimony or later committee selection.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's $500,000 one time.
• And when I say on average, it's taking into account full-time, part-time status.
• 50% of a full-time state only receiving 50% of a full-time state grant<00:18:20.320> award.
• We really mean it This time is for real. We really mean it this<00:32:09.519> time.
• <00:35:13.839> part-time those part-time students. part-time those part-time students. part-time

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm for that and have done it thousands of times.
• Um, so the per se limit for alcohol... Um, so the per se limit for alcohol is...
• Uh, there isn't a per se limit for THC. It varies by... A per se limit for THC varies by user.
• It's time to regulate, and it's time to get it in control and make it a risk versus benefit.
• And it's just time.

Bills: SB191, HB84, HB79, SB132, HB108, HB109, HB110, HB114, HB118, HB120, HB122, HB124, HB126, HB128, HB129, HB131

Keywords: postpartum depression, mental health, Medicaid, screening, education, maternal health, Chiropractic, Board of Chiropractic Examiners, license renewal, continuing education, election procedures, off-label, pharmacists, medical treatment, state board of pharmacy, employment protection, SB132, Alabama, controlled substances, Schedule I

Transcript Highlights:

• members actually earn a limit of $15,000, even if they're working on a part-time basis, they increased
• That's hence the need for those limits around. return-to-work limitations.
• , and there was no period of time in which you were limited to that work.
• I think it's about 85% of the time. Time we achieve that.
• the limits on returning to work?

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there a time limit for somebody to apply?
• I mean, five years out, 10 years out, is there a time limit where that application has to be done?
• What is your current wait time to get a patient in for the first time in referral?
• It’s not ideal, but it’s a long time. A year. That’s a long time. Okay, thank you.
• So this is very timely.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They're not all active at this time.
• And obviously, people have limited contracts, right? Limited salary levels.
• And obviously, people have limited contracts, right? Limited salary levels.
• And obviously, people have limited contracts, right? Limited salary levels.
• And obviously, people have limited contracts, right? Limited salary levels.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Workforce Support Subcommittee met to discuss using registered apprenticeships to help address workforce shortages in disability services, human services, and other high-need fields. Co-chairs and staff introduced the session as a follow-up to earlier discussions with state labor officials and representatives from developmental disability and behavioral health provider associations. The panel focused on how apprenticeships can create paid, structured pathways into jobs while also supporting credentialing and retention. Amara Ramon of the Division of Apprenticeship Standards explained how Massachusetts apprenticeship programs are registered and supported, including the roles of apprenticeship liaison staff, operations, quality assurance, and grant support. She described the core features of apprenticeships—paid on-the-job training, related technical instruction, wage progression, and industry credentials—and contrasted them with internships or co-ops. Melissa Chabelli of the MassHire Hampden County Workforce Board described the intermediary role her board plays in designing programs, registering apprentices, coordinating employers, and handling compliance. She emphasized flexibility, employer investment, tax credits, retention benefits, and the importance of mentors and local workforce partnerships. Lisa Morris of UMass Chan/For Health Consulting described a developing apprenticeship for medical interpreters, built from an existing training foundation and designed to address the gap between classroom preparation and work experience. She said the model would combine pre-apprenticeship training, employer interviews, 2,000 hours of apprenticeship, and related technical instruction tied to national certification. Speakers also discussed examples for nursing, early childhood education, CNC machining, and programs serving neurodivergent learners, including Bridgewater State’s Excel program. In response to audience questions, panelists said state agencies can serve as intermediaries, recruitment can come through career centers, youth programs, community colleges, ESL centers, and incumbent workers, and accommodations or modified curricula can support apprentices with disabilities. No votes were taken; the session ended with encouragement for attendees to contact the presenters and Division of Apprenticeship Standards for help developing programs.

Transcript Highlights:

• So to be respectful of everyone's time, you'll be limited to testimony to 2 minutes.
• Yeah So it's a 1 hour time limit, which sounds very short, but I noticed in your layout that you said
• default settings, just to make that clear, limiting the amount of time to an hour.
• much time to present.
• Thank you for the time.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:04:22.320> equivalent reporting on full-time equivalent reporting on full-time equivalent
• instead puts in new language limiting instead puts in new language limiting agency's<00:06:25.760
• Line 62 contains a one-time Line 62 contains a one-time appropriation<00:19:43.800> for<00
• For our testifiers, we are hoping to stick to about a 2-minute time limit for testimony, because we have
• time and consideration. time and consideration. Thank<00:35:02.240> you. Thank you.

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: The conference committee on the housing omnibus bill began with member introductions and a staff walk-through comparing House and Senate provisions. House Research staff reviewed major policy differences affecting Minnesota Housing Finance Agency operations, including limits on how much the agency may retain from state appropriations for administrative costs, new reporting requirements, restrictions on transfers between appropriated accounts, and House-only language requiring annual expenditure of investment income from state appropriations. Senate provisions were also summarized, including tighter rules on when appropriations may be placed into Housing Development Fund bookkeeping accounts, updated operating-cost reporting, and Senate-only changes to how investment earnings may be used. Staff also described shared and differing provisions on program-money transfers, a lived-experience earnings exemption, and a long list of Senate-only policy changes, including manufactured home park tenant protections, low-income housing tax credit and bond-related changes, a task force on housing taxes and fees, and repealers affecting Housing Development Fund authority and certain older programs. Fiscal staff then reviewed the budget impacts. The House side included one-time appropriations for workforce housing development, family homeless prevention and assistance, a Minnesota Nice Home Share pilot, and homebuyer education, along with debt service for $100 million in housing infrastructure bonds and transfers/cancellations that produced a net zero general fund impact across the budget window. The Senate side noted a fiscal note for the housing taxes and fees task force and a smaller housing infrastructure bond authorization, with corresponding debt service costs and a total Senate budget-window impact of about $1 million in general fund debt service. After the staff presentations, the committee moved to public testimony. Commissioner Jennifer Ho of Minnesota Housing said the bill’s housing infrastructure bonds and continued support for family homeless prevention were important, and she supported the lived-experience earnings exemption, while noting concerns about the interest-earnings provisions. Testifiers from Greater Minnesota groups praised the workforce housing investments and Senate updates to the state housing tax credit and infrastructure grant program, though they suggested changes to the geographic distribution language. HOME Line urged funding for statewide tenant hotline services, citing rising demand and asking for $1 million if additional money becomes available. The Minnesota Consortium of Community Developers supported the bill’s investments and emphasized the need to pair housing development with supportive services. Housing First Minnesota praised housing infrastructure bonds and other investments but criticized the omission of the Minnesota Starter Homes Act. The Minnesota Multi Housing Association began testimony opposing certain rent-control-related provisions in the House bill. No votes or final actions were taken during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• limit of 3 minutes per witness during the public testimony period.
• The last increase to the bond limit, uh, I believe was in November 2009.
• an adjustment to that limit since then, and due to the continued inflation, we are limiting the number
• of veterans that the Veteran Land Board can serve by not raising this bond limit.
• Uh, an increase in this bond limit so that we can provide more home loans to veterans.

Transcript Highlights:

• will be a time limit of two minutes per witness during the public testimony period.
• Members, the Senate took a lot of time with this.
• The first time he got one, he and his prom date came back.
• I've been told that many times on college campuses.
• Thank you for your time, I'm happy to answer any questions.

Bills: SB650, HB3667, SB28, HB3201, SB1184, HB1800, SB 28

Keywords: permit issuance, regulatory framework, business operations, efficiency, application process, lottery, gambling, internet gaming, mobile application, criminal offenses, lottery regulations, occupational licensing, fraud prevention, criminal background checks, lottery couriers, SB 1184, Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code, wine collection seller, collectible wine, vintage wine

Transcript Highlights:

• And so it's really, to me, this is a very timely hearing.
• This continuous monitoring approach has shifted from a point-in-time review to real-time scanning of
• From a point-in-time review to real-time scanning of networks, reducing exposure to threats by enabling
• early detection of anomalies and faster response times.
• And I think it takes time. There's networks are complex and unique. I think it takes time.

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Cybersecurity and the Assembly Committee on Emergency Management held a joint informational hearing focused on maximizing the value of state cybersecurity investments, especially by fully using security features already included in existing vendor contracts. The first panel included representatives from Microsoft, Zscaler, and Palo Alto Networks, who described the products and services they provide to California and generally agreed that agencies often have strong adoption in some areas but still face challenges from tool overlap, limited staff, lack of awareness of available features, and the need for ongoing training and configuration support. They also discussed major threats such as ransomware, data loss, attack-surface exposure, IoT/OT vulnerabilities, and the growing role of AI in both attacks and defenses. Members pressed the vendors on whether state departments underuse purchased cybersecurity tools, how to improve utilization, and how to address the cybersecurity workforce shortage. The vendors said utilization is often constrained by staffing, procurement complexity, and the need to align tools with agency missions and maturity levels, but emphasized that training, leadership buy-in, and regular vendor-agency collaboration can improve results. They also discussed how AI can help with phishing triage, data-loss prevention, and security operations, while warning that agencies must manage AI safely and with human oversight. The second panel featured officials from the Department of Technology, Cal OES/CalSIC, and the California Military Department. They described statewide oversight efforts including audits, independent security assessments, continuous monitoring, advisory services, vulnerability disclosure programs, and workforce development initiatives such as the Information Security Leadership Academy and Cybersecurity Education Summit. Officials said some underutilization is real, but it is often tied to differing agency maturity, overlapping tools, and deliberate feature restrictions to reduce attack surface and complexity; they emphasized a balanced approach using people, process, and technology, with plans of action and milestones to hold departments accountable. They also noted federal uncertainty around MS-ISAC and the state and local cybersecurity grant program, saying California is advocating through federal partners and monitoring the impact. The hearing ended after public comment and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• the last time you saw that friend.
• time, but Lord, why did this happen?"
• Against the point in time, why did it have to be now?
• So with that, I move to spend the rest of my time.
• Yeah, so you're limiting...

Bills: SCR46, SB31, SB39, SB227, SB330, SB401, SB407, SB467, SB482, SB500, SB506, SB512, SB527, SB584, SB619, SB636, SB646, SB647, SB648, SB659, SB663, SB715, SB732, SB758, SB801, SB816, SB847, SB870, SB884, SB1020, SB1055, SB1065, SB1137, SB1169, SB1181, SB1283, SB1383, SB1395, SB1410, SB1433, SB1490, SB1558, SB1574, SB1626, SB1666, SB1718, SB1727, SB1756, SB1757, SB1845, SB1924, SB1964, SB1972, SB2018, SB2031, SB2075, SB2076, SB2080, SB2111, SB2117, SB2154, SB2161, SB2173, SB2206, SB2225, SB2253, SB2268, SB2314, SB2322, SB2351, SB2371, SB2476, SB2533, SB2540, SB2570, SB2589, SB2623, SB2658, SB2660, SB2692, SB2693, SB2717, SB2722, SB2753, SB2779, SB2877, SB2880, SB2900, SB2920, SB3031, HJR4, SB5, SB260, SB1786, SJR3, SJR18, SB1, SJR36, SJR50, SJR63, SJR84, SJR59, SCR12, SCR39, SCR46, SCR48, SCR19, SB2023, SB62, SB666, SB847, SB284, SB854, SB1073, SB810, SB1505, SB583, SB1502, SB507, SB1026, SB1433, SB1434, SB1376, SB1585, SB1772, SB2016, SB1163, SB619, SB1122, SB732, SB731, SB397, SB508, SB1436, SB287, SB261, SB1882, SB393, SB1791, SB529, SB209, SB2429, SB1999, SB511, SB2309, SB510, SB1924, SB2253, SB2018, SB2206, SB584, SB1085, SB1490, SB2314, SB2046, SB1975, SB2717, SB1262, SB1524, SB1137, SB636, SB2056, SB1558, SB884, SB227, SB517, SB1200, SB1410, SB1626, SB1845, SB1863, SB2681, SB2200, SB2199, SB1757, SB2050, SB2458, SB2201, SB1055, SB2660, SB2662, SB1065, SB801, SB2533, SB3014, SB3013, SB758, SB648, SB647, SB512, SB1721, SB2268, SB2366, SB1013, SB2692, SB2570, SB2797, SB2111, SB2371, SB2383, SB646, SB1169, SB1754, SB1718, SB2779, SB2004, SB1756, SB2119, SB527, SB2322, SB2448, SB1777, SB1283, SB407, SB2392, SB2076, SB2786, SB3031, SB2877, SB2876, SB2284, SB2225, SB1540, SB2920, SB2929, SB1395, SB1972, SB2540, SB2742, SB2595, SB2217, SB2117, SB715, SB2330, SB1964, SB1383, SB500, SB1640, SB2001, SB2080, SB2722, SB506, SB2514, SB2623, SB2658, SB1574, SB2900, SB2753, SB2398, SB401, SB1241, SB2927, SB2173, SB2538, SB898, SB467, SB1449, SB2529, SB1531, SB2846, SB2476, SB2031, SB986, SB1181, SB2075, SB2154, SB2864, SB31, SB2880, SB1359, SB2386, SB771, SB2844, SB2550, SB1351, SB1423, SB1931, SB2245, SB2589, SB2707, SB2807, SB2351, SB410, SB659, SB816, SB2776, SB2693, SB2580, SB1980, SB1886, SB1234, SB739, SB482, SB456, SB127, SB1666, SB2843, SB2801, SB800, SB2055, SB784, SB2986, SB735, SB1012, SB324, SB2926, SB2938, SB2007, SB2138, SB1242, HJR4, HB135, HB1109, SCR30, SCR3, SB2615, SB1049, SB2310, SB1224, SB2972, SB1568, SB2841, SB2885, SB3016, SB2858, SB2610, SB2139, SB1856, SB2035, SB2308, SB2306, SB2041, SB1528, SB1681, SB1141, SB2401, SB2530, SB2375, SB547, SB1266, SB1373, SB1467, SB2069, SB2269, SB2480, SB2544, SB672, SB904, SB2695, SB2891, SB2422, SB2543, SB1854, SB317, SB2539, SB2532, SB2925, SB1250, SB2082, SB2203, SB457, SB2357, HCR35, HCR64

Keywords: Texas beef, cattle industry, agricultural heritage, Texas strip steak, economic growth, SB 31, Life of the Mother Act, Texas abortion law, medical emergency, reasonable medical judgment, pregnancy complications, maternal health, life-threatening condition, ectopic pregnancy, spontaneous abortion, miscarriage, unborn child, abortion exception, abortion ban, physician liability

Transcript Highlights:

• There will be a time limit of 2 minutes per witness during the public testimony period.
• Thank you for your time, members.
• Thank you for your time and leadership. Thank you, Ms. Mitchell.
• Thank you for your time and leadership. Thank you, Ms. Mitchell.
• Chairman, members, thank you for your time.

Bills: HB3115, HB5671, HB5693, SB790, SB1055, SB1302, SB1504, SB1625, SB1663, SB2692

Keywords: Cow Creek Groundwater Conservation District, groundwater, water wells, domestic well, livestock well, exempt well, metering device, well meter, groundwater conservation district, Special District Local Laws Code, Water Code, Section 36.117, groundwater regulation, water rights, aquifer management, municipal utility, retail public utility, groundwater export, water supply contract, election

Summary: The Committee on Natural Resources heard testimony on a series of water, utility, and groundwater-related bills. Early items included HB 5693, which would let Drainage District 7 hold board elections in November of odd-numbered years when a countywide election is occurring, and HB 5671, which would update the Johnson County Special Utility District by clarifying board eligibility, allowing bond issuance, and removing redundant TCEQ approval language to reduce costs and delays. Both bills were left pending after brief testimony from bill sponsors and local witnesses. The committee also heard SB 1504, which would update the Gulf Coast Authority to allow video-conference participation in meetings, and SB 1302, aimed at closing a TCEQ permitting loophole that allowed dischargers with prior denials or suspensions to reapply through an automated process without meaningful review. SB 2692 drew substantial discussion: it would change the signature threshold for outside-city-limits customers appealing municipal utility rates to the PUC by customer class. Valero supported the bill as a way to avoid requiring large-volume users to gather signatures from unrelated residential customers, while the City of Corpus Christi opposed it, arguing that lowering the threshold to one customer could trigger expensive appeals costing $500,000 to $1 million. A PUC witness said such cases are increasing and that the agency would need additional staff under the fiscal note. SB 790, creating a simplified PUC complaint process for small water and wastewater billing disputes, and SB 1663, expanding TCEQ notice requirements for nearby residents when groundwater contamination is discovered, were also heard and left pending. Additional bills included HB 3115, clarifying that the Cow Creek Groundwater Conservation District cannot require meters on exempt domestic or livestock wells; SB 1055, raising the Southeast Texas Groundwater Conservation District’s production fee cap from 1 cent to 7 cents per 1,000 gallons; and SB 1625, requiring private water and wastewater utilities to report cybersecurity incidents to TCEQ and DIR. The committee then took up pending business and adopted a substitute for SB 7, which made several changes to water fund use, eminent domain coordination, and EDAP-related provisions, and voted 10-0 to report it favorably. The committee also adopted a substitute for HB 2347, a county water conservation program bill, and reported it favorably 9-1. HB 5675 and SB 2476 were each reported favorably 10-0. The meeting concluded with adjournment.