Transcript Highlights:

• Swipe cap or fee caps.
• those fees every single time.
• Banks should set their own fees.
• Where do those fees come from?
• Fee caps aren't the answer.

Bills: HB245, HB245, HB700, HB2783, HB3526, HB3900, HB4061, HB4124, HB4166, HB4395, HB4534, HB4609, HB4641, HB4736, HB4738, HB4739, HB4945, HB5015, HJR175

Keywords: property tax, delinquent taxes, ad valorem, penalties, interest cap, military service, retirement, law enforcement, custodial officer, Employees Retirement System, commercial financing, brokers, registration, disclosures, finance, consumer protection, fees, deferred compensation, automatic participation, county employees

Transcript Highlights:

• And a license is reinstated once all the fees are paid? Witness: Yes.
• Witness: There isn't a fiscal note, but of course there were fees for the first three late fees, so there
• would be some impact.
• I'll ask you online here: is that, I mean, we're raising fees on one.
• I'm interested in putting a voluntary fee on for litter abatement.

Bills: SCR58, SB309, SB514, HCR63, HCR69, HB401, HB487, HB722, HB730, HB745, HB988, HB989, HB1001, HB1024, HB1032, HB1050, HB1081, HB1086, HB1108, HB1172, HB1173, HB1175, HB1192, HB1218, HB1244

Keywords: SCR 58, Senate Concurrent Resolution, DOTD, Department of Transportation and Development, public-private partnership, P3, public-private partnership contracting, Belle Chasse Toll Bridge, Belle Chasse Bridge, toll bridge, tolling, tolls, transportation infrastructure, roads and highways, Plaquemines Parish, bridge project, toll fees, unauthorized charges, contract oversight, procurement

Transcript Highlights:

• ,<00:15:09.360> a said, you know, immediate impact, a said, you know, immediate impact, a
• So, so tornadoes and winds impact those.
• So we go through the formula fees; that’s $184 million for rural and secondary roads.
• So we go through the formula fees; that’s $184 million for rural and secondary roads.
• Riggs. uh of a potential aviation impact study uh of a potential aviation impact study and<01:15:41.440

Keywords: 00:00:39 Roll Call 00:02:57 Severe Weather Damage 00:39:00 Work Zone Safety 00:47:12 Local Assistance Road Program 01:10:18 Admin. Regs 01:15:37 Aviation Impact Study, 958, all

Summary: The committee’s first interim meeting opened with roll call, a quorum, and a briefing from Transportation Cabinet officials on the Cabinet’s response to severe weather and tornadoes in Kentucky, especially the May 16–17 storms that caused deaths and widespread damage in Pulaski and Laurel counties, with an additional tornado noted in Washington County. Secretary Jim Gray, State Highway Engineer James Ballinger, and District 11 engineer Chris Jones described how crews in all 120 counties were placed on alert, how roads were cleared of debris, and how KYTC coordinated with emergency management, law enforcement, local governments, and utilities to restore access and power. They reported major impacts on roads, signals, and other infrastructure, including the EF4 tornado path through Pulaski and Laurel counties, and said KYTC also helped with debris hauling, airport cleanup, and delivery of water and meals. The officials gave specific recovery figures for Laurel County, including 1,800 loads of construction and demolition debris hauled, about 11,000 tons and 22,000 cubic yards removed, with roughly 50% of vegetative debris cleared at that point. They said all state roadways in Laurel County were reopened, the London-Corbin Airport was returned to flight operations by Sunday, and a transition plan was underway for Laurel County Fiscal Court’s contractor to take over debris operations. Gray also noted that KYTC had helped issue replacement IDs, licenses, registrations, and titles at no cost in disaster areas, and said the Team Kentucky Storm Relief Fund had raised nearly $1.5 million from more than 6,000 donors. Members praised KYTC staff as first responders and thanked them for their quick response and coordination. Several legislators recounted local impacts in Washington, Pulaski, and Laurel counties, including blocked roads, rescue challenges, looting concerns, and the scale of property damage. One member asked how KYTC inspects bridges and infrastructure after disasters to check for hidden damage, and officials said the process depends on the event and can include bridge inspections and checks of tall infrastructure such as light poles. No votes or formal committee actions were taken during the discussion.

Bills: SB154, SB362, SB544, SB714

Keywords: conservation, water management, Colorado River, environment, sustainability, mining, federal minerals, Bull Mountains, Montana, coal, land management, environmental impact, mining regulation, hardrock mining, land use, environmental protection, Abandoned Hardrock Mine Fund, critical minerals, energy regulation, material designation

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm here to talk about the sheriff's<00:04:06.640> fees. sheriff's fees. sheriff's fees.
• There's a fee for summoning another.
• There's fee for summoning grand case.
• Is it fee increases, inflation? volume? Is it fee increases, inflation?
• Back and these fees to be reimbursed.

Keywords: Call to Order: 00;15 Approval of Minutes: 01:22 Update on Generator replacement: 01:52 Update on Sheriff Fees: 13:28 Adjournment: 25:22, 958, all

Summary: The committee met for its fourth budget subreview session focused on personnel, public retirements, and finance. Members approved the minutes from the prior meeting and then heard from Finance Cabinet staff on two main items: a $7.5 million request related to generator systems and a sheriff’s fees budget request. The generator request was described as a preventive, life-cycle replacement and capacity-enhancement effort for 26 generators serving Frankfort-area state buildings, intended to protect continuity of government and expand beyond basic emergency power to support continuity of services. Members asked detailed questions about how many generators would be replaced, the cost per unit, the scope of the study, and whether the work could be phased. Staff said the $7.5 million would cover a full evaluation and any resulting engineering/replacement work, but the exact number of replacements was not yet known. They estimated the initial study would cost about $500,000 to $750,000, would take six to nine months once funded, and would produce building-by-building recommendations. Staff also said typical generator life cycles vary widely, often around 15 to 20 years but sometimes longer depending on run hours and usage. The committee then reviewed sheriff’s fees, with the Division of Local Government explaining that the state reimburses counties for several statutory sheriff-related costs, especially court security, which accounts for more than 90% of the claims. Staff said the current budget base is about $20 million, while actual spending has been running above $23 million, leading to a $3.5 million growth request to align the base with projected spending and reduce the need for non-general fund expenditure (NGE) adjustments. Members asked about claim volume, county participation, reimbursement controls, and whether the request reflected growth or underfunding; staff said all 120 counties submit claims, volumes have been fairly steady, and reimbursements are governed by statute and signed monthly certifications. No votes were taken on the requests, and the meeting adjourned after questions concluded.

Transcript Highlights:

• It is not in lieu of impact fees. So how would impact fees and... ...specific items, correct.
• It is not in lieu of impact fees.
• So currently an impact fee relative to a lot gets paid when they pull a permit... ...an impact fee relative
• It's basically how impact fees are paid, impact fees are paid for, right?
• But what specifically in an impact fee bucket and then what specifically in the non-impact fee public

Bills: HB2091, HB2140, HB2320, HB2384, HB2398, HB2502, HB2780, HB2918, HB2939, HB2950, HB2999, HB4020, HB4026, HB4029

Keywords: insurance, financial surveillance, regulations, assessments, Arizona Revised Statutes, investment, state treasurer, gold bullion, treasury management, financial regulations, school districts, bonds, financial advisors, elections, municipal advisors, cost of borrowing, lease agreements, school property, tax exemptions, impact aid revenue bonds

Summary: The Senate Finance Committee approved the minutes from March 16, 2026, then heard testimony on a series of bills, with the chair noting that testimony and votes would be handled in batches because members were coming and going. HB 2939 would raise the rural qualified facilities tax credit from $20,000 to $25,000 per job for certain projects with initial investment under $2 billion. Lucid Motors supported the change as a tool to attract manufacturing jobs to rural Arizona, while opponents questioned whether the higher credit would actually create new jobs and pointed to a fiscal note that could reach $48 million. The committee later passed the bill 5-2. HB 2950 would authorize municipalities and counties to form tourism improvement areas funded by lodging business assessments for marketing and tourism promotion. The Arizona Lodging and Tourism Association and Visit Phoenix supported the measure, describing TIAs as voluntary, locally controlled tools already used in other states and useful for rural destinations; senators pressed on whether the assessments were truly voluntary and how the districts would be formed and administered. The bill passed 5-2. HB 2780, a technical cleanup bill related to property tax lien foreclosure and excess proceeds sales, was described as conforming changes to a prior law creating a mechanism for delinquent taxpayers to recover equity; it passed 6-1. HB 2502 would allow certain ASRS members who are elected officials to retire at normal retirement age without resigning their elected office, with the employer paying the alternate contribution rate. ASRS said it was neutral, and the sponsor and a lobbyist argued the bill would create parity with non-elected members who can retire and return to work; the committee passed it 5-2. HB 2140, as amended by a striker, would let the state treasurer invest up to 10% of trust and treasury monies in physical gold or silver bullion held in secure U.S. depositories. The sponsor and Sound Money Defense League supported it as a diversification and inflation hedge, while opponents argued gold is volatile, costly to store, and not a better use of taxpayer funds; the committee adopted the striker and passed the bill 4-2. HB 2398 would require commercial liability insurance for watercraft rented or hired in Arizona, including peer-to-peer boat-sharing programs, while not affecting ordinary personal boat ownership. The sponsor, insurers, and rental operators said the bill responds to uninsured boats being rented through apps and to safety and liability problems; some members said training should also be addressed. The committee adopted an amendment and passed the bill 6-1. Finally, HB 2999 would create state affordable infrastructure districts to finance public infrastructure for housing through bonds, taxes, and assessments, with unanimous landowner consent and disclosure requirements. Home builders and contractors said the districts could lower upfront housing costs and improve financing, but contractors sought stronger payment protections and some senators worried the bill could add red tape and costs without guaranteeing savings to homebuyers. After adopting a large amendment, the committee passed HB 2999, though at least one member voted no and another passed on the vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so the immediate impact would be the negative economic impact to my county, which the largest employer
• Environmental impacts, how much mitigation is needed for all those impacts.
• These impacts highlight...
• Impact on that overlying fresh.
• that impact.

Bills: HB1523, HB2109, HB2694, HB3525, HB3898, HB4646, HB5188, HB5219, HB5320, HB5651, HB5655, HB5659, HB5662, HB5672

Keywords: aquifer conservation, Class V injection well, environmental regulation, groundwater protection, municipal water supply, temporary prohibition, water management, reservoir construction, state water plan, Texas Water Code, environmental impact, Brazoria Drainage District, commissioners, elections, vacancies, resignation, HB 3525, North Texas Groundwater Conservation District, groundwater permit, permit amendment

Summary: The Committee on Natural Resources heard House Bill 2109, which would remove certain long-proposed reservoir projects from the state water plan after 50 years without progress. Chairman Van Deaver and many landowners, local officials, timber interests, and conservation advocates testified in support, arguing that the Marvin Nichols Reservoir has burdened Northeast Texas landowners for decades with the threat of eminent domain, depressed property values, and uncertainty over homes, farms, ranches, schools, churches, and cemeteries. Supporters also said the project would flood tens of thousands of acres, require extensive mitigation, harm timber and agriculture, and that Texas now has better alternatives such as conservation, reuse, aquifer storage and recovery, and desalination. Several members expressed sympathy for the affected families and questioned whether a project could remain in the plan indefinitely without progress. Opposition came from North Texas water interests, including the North Texas Commission, Tarrant Regional Water District, and the Texas Water Association, who argued that the bill would interfere with the state’s long-term water planning process and remove needed future supply options for a fast-growing region. They said Region C faces major projected shortages by 2070, that conservation and reuse have already delayed the need for new supplies, and that reservoirs remain one tool in the state’s water-planning toolbox. TWDB staff explained the existing inter-regional conflict process and noted that the substitute would affect several unique reservoir sites, not just Marvin Nichols. After testimony, Chairman Van Deaver closed by urging passage of the bill, but the committee withdrew the substitute and left HB 2109 pending. The committee then took up House Bill 5188, a brackish groundwater bill. The author said the bill would reduce permitting burdens for wells in designated brackish groundwater production zones, and the committee substitute added requirements on monitoring, groundwater-rights ownership, and allocation of pumpage limits while removing some exclusions and export-fee provisions. Texas Wildlife Association testified against the bill, warning that the exemptions could weaken groundwater conservation districts’ ability to protect freshwater resources and surface-owner rights. San Antonio Water System testified in favor, saying brackish groundwater is a key future supply and that the substitute would help speed development of desalination and brackish projects. The Texas Alliance of Groundwater Districts testified neutrally but raised concerns about reduced district oversight, especially around injection-well exclusions and the loss of export fees, and said discussions on the bill were ongoing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Creating this reservoir would also have a devastating impact... ...impact on wildlife habitat by flooding
• It can't be developed, and so the immediate impact would be the negative economic impact to my community
• and we don't think about the regional impact.
• Environmental impacts. How much mitigation is needed for all those impacts?
• that impact.

Bills: HB1523, HB2109, HB2694, HB3525, HB3898, HB4646, HB5188, HB5219, HB5320, HB5651, HB5655, HB5659, HB5662, HB5672

Keywords: aquifer conservation, Class V injection well, environmental regulation, groundwater protection, municipal water supply, temporary prohibition, water management, reservoir construction, state water plan, Texas Water Code, environmental impact, Brazoria Drainage District, commissioners, elections, vacancies, resignation, HB 3525, North Texas Groundwater Conservation District, groundwater permit, permit amendment

Transcript Highlights:

• location under review, questions about the models used, questions about how Austin would mitigate impact
• host of local leaders, groundwater experts, and landowners concerned about the potential negative impacts
• It even creates regional drawdowns effects where impacts are not isolated to one area.
• This prohibition would significantly impact the region's long-term water supply planning.
• And we just want to know exactly what the impact is we understand how many gallons we understand how

Bills: HB1523, HB2109, HB2694, HB3525, HB3898, HB4646, HB5188, HB5219, HB5320, HB5651, HB5655, HB5659, HB5662, HB5672

Keywords: aquifer conservation, Class V injection well, environmental regulation, groundwater protection, municipal water supply, temporary prohibition, water management, reservoir construction, state water plan, Texas Water Code, environmental impact, Brazoria Drainage District, commissioners, elections, vacancies, resignation, HB 3525, North Texas Groundwater Conservation District, groundwater permit, permit amendment

Transcript Highlights:

• This predictability is vital, where every project can have a big impact on the local economy.
• The Law Enforcement Training Center in Dallas County is not impacted. And we achieved that by.
• fee rates, and will hit residents in the pocketbook pretty hard.
• However, the impact of this bill will largely be felt in our southern sector, which has historically
• So there's certain areas around the state that this will still have a negative impact on, so there's

Bills: HB602, HB1322, HB1930, HB2225, HB2304, HB2494, HB3275, HB3810, HB3919

Keywords: affordable housing, land use, zoning, urban planning, community development, housing crisis, mixed-use development, sustainability, municipal utility district, board of directors, qualifications, land ownership, Texas, taxation, residency, municipal approval, subdivision plans, local governance, plats, local government

Transcript Highlights:

• Impact fees can have an impact on the lack of affordable housing in Texas.
• It is important to point out with impact fees.
• That document, those four binders... is a single impact fee study for transportation impact fees for
• This bill, which proposes to limit a city's impact fee, increases and regulates impact fee advisory board
• I think we all agree that impact fees are necessary and we need a fair set of impact fees. of barn cost

Bills: HB602, HB1322, HB1930, HB2225, HB2304, HB2494, HB3275, HB3810, HB3919

Keywords: affordable housing, land use, zoning, urban planning, community development, housing crisis, mixed-use development, sustainability, municipal utility district, board of directors, qualifications, land ownership, Texas, taxation, residency, municipal approval, subdivision plans, local governance, plats, local government

Bills: HB 35, HB 138, HB 754, HB 1314, HB 1612, HB 2254, HB 2510, HB 2789, HB 3560, HB 3597, HB 4224, HB 4273, HB 4643, HB 4783

Keywords: peer support, first responders, mental health, confidentiality, emergency services, health impact analysis, cost analysis, coverage mandates, health insurance, legislative analysis, health care data, healthcare, price estimates, billing requirements, consumer protection, nonemergency services, assisted living, licensing, criminal offense, personal assistance

Bills: HB 1193, HB 2495, HB 2733, HB 3104, HB 3395, HB 4325, SB 3009

Keywords: child enrollment, parent rights, managing conservator, education, family law, civil liability, barratry, penalties, legal actions, damages, judgment enforcement, court fees, child support enforcement, dormant judgments, legal proceedings

Transcript Highlights:

• In fact, during that same session, fees went up even higher, so there's a lot of excess money that we
• I paid the filing fee, the excess fees that you want to give away.
• I paid the excess fees for a guardian for my father.
• I paid the excess fees for a guardian for my father because he was being abused.
• or changing a fee.

Bills: SB1015, SB2933

Keywords: statutory probate courts, probate court fees, judicial fund, county reimbursement, comptroller, Texas Government Code, Local Government Code, court fees, fee allocation, excess contributions, judicial education and support fund, presiding judge salary, county finance, court administration, Texas judiciary, revenue distribution, SB 2933, elder abuse, neglect, judicial training

Summary: The Committee on Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence heard testimony on Senate Bill 1015, which would clarify that the comptroller is responsible for distributing excess judicial fund payments back to statutory probate courts. Judge Guy Herman testified in support, saying the bill would help ensure probate courts receive funding they are entitled to, while Ed Heimlich testified against the bill with broad criticism of probate courts and judicial practices. The committee then heard Senate Bill 2933, which would add elder abuse training to required judicial education for several categories of judges and judicial officers; Dr. Bruce Hargrave supported the bill, citing the prevalence and underreporting of elder abuse and the need for judges to recognize warning signs. No votes were taken on either of those bills, and SB 2933 was left pending. The committee then reconsidered Senate Bill 38, an eviction-related bill, and Vice Chair Hayes described two agreed floor amendments: one limiting the summary disposition procedure to forcible entry and detainer cases involving squatters, and another requiring a notice to pay rent or vacate for tenants who had been timely payers but missed a payment. After discussion, the committee voted 6-4 to report SB 38 without amendments. The committee also adopted or advanced a series of other bills and resolutions, including SB 293, SB 1141, SB 1448, SB 1536, SB 1558, SB 1838, SB 1940, SB 2127, SB 53, SB 251, SB 311, SB 387, SB 441 (with a substitute), SB 1164, SB 1335, SB 1574 (with a substitute), SB 1719, SB 1760, SB 1839, SB 1923 (with a substitute), SB 2807, and SJR 27 (with a substitute). Most measures were reported favorably on largely party-line or near-unanimous votes, with a few close votes on SB 942, SB 311, SB 2807, and SJR 27. SB 942, relating to retroactive child support beginning at conception, initially failed 5-5 but was reconsidered and then passed 6-5. The committee adjourned after completing its agenda.

Transcript Highlights:

• In fact, during that same session, fees went up even higher, so there's a lot of excess money that we
• I paid the filing fee, the excess fees that you want to give away.
• I paid the excess fees for a guardian for my father.
• I paid the excess fees for a guardian for my father because he was being abused.
• or changing a fee.

Bills: SB1015, SB2933

Keywords: statutory probate courts, probate court fees, judicial fund, county reimbursement, comptroller, Texas Government Code, Local Government Code, court fees, fee allocation, excess contributions, judicial education and support fund, presiding judge salary, county finance, court administration, Texas judiciary, revenue distribution, SB 2933, elder abuse, neglect, judicial training

Bills: SB 1169, SB 1285, SB 1583, SB 1611, SB 1898, SB 1976, SB 2160, SB 2161, SB 2658, SB 2661, SB 2662, SB 2692, SB 1055, SB 1359, SB 2660

Keywords: water service, sewer service, public utility, joint operation, infrastructure, municipality, compliance, groundwater management, water conservation, district planning, environmental regulation, sustainability, groundwater, conservation, fees, agricultural uses, water regulation, wastewater treatment, environmental testing, pollutants

Transcript Highlights:

• bring in an intact animal is a $100 fee bring in an intact animal is a $100 fee and<00:25:13.920
• <00:35:28.880> I and everything else that will impact I and everything else that will impact
• the fees and importation. the fees and importation. Go<00:37:16.440> ahead. Go ahead.
• If it would impact by adding generation.
• Chair, we're not expanding the impact to the consumers.

Bills: HB1736, HB1620, HB1695

Keywords: animal control, spay and neuter, pet overpopulation, sterilization, counties funding, tax designation, veterinary care, electric vehicles, charging infrastructure, energy policy, rebate program, environmental impact, renewable fuels, sustainable aviation fuel, tax credit, greenhouse gas emissions, local production, energy resilience, agricultural innovation, job creation

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 1737, which clarifies allowable uses in agricultural districts for farm dwellings and farm employee housing, and HB 1604 HD2, which creates an agricultural workforce housing working group within the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity. Testimony on HB 1737 was overwhelmingly supportive, with county agriculture officials, the Hawaii Farm Bureau, and Hawaii Farmers Union backing the measure; one witness asked for a definition of “affordable” to guard against misuse of farm housing. For HB 1604, the Department of Agriculture, Hawaii Farm Bureau, Housing Hawaii’s Future, Hawaii Farmers Union, and the Office of Hawaiian Affairs supported the bill, with OHA requesting disaggregated data and a seat on the working group. Committee discussion focused on housing shortages, possible misuse, affordability, and whether innovative housing models such as modular, tiny, and container homes should be considered. The committee then took action on both measures. HB 1737 HD3 was recommended to pass with amendments that would limit farm employee housing to agricultural employees and their immediate family members actively engaged in the farm operation, add a grandfathering provision for existing permitted housing, preserve county zoning authority, clarify that ag tourism must be secondary and not occur in employee housing, delete a square-footage-per-acre ratio, and defer the effective date to July 1, 2050. HB 1604 HD2 was also recommended to pass with amendments adding OHA and a housing-shortage organization to the working group, expanding its scope to include modular, tiny, and container homes and permitting/zoning streamlining, and deferring the effective date to July 1, 2050. Both motions were adopted unanimously by the members present. The joint hearing then moved to HB 1736, which would establish a spay and neuter special fund and require sterilization and declaration provisions for cats, with some discussion of dogs. DLNR and the Hawaiian Humane Society supported the bill, while Pacific Pet Alliance objected to the broader requirements and the inclusion of dogs; the Hawaiian Humane Society and American Bird Conservancy supported cat-focused sterilization and the special fund, while some testifiers opposed mandatory sterilization as too costly or intrusive. Members raised questions about toxoplasmosis, trap-neuter-release, enforcement, neighbor-island access, and funding needs, and DLNR indicated additional funding and third-party contracting would likely be needed. The transcript then began HB 1620 HD2 on energy, which would increase the environmental response energy and food security tax and shift funds from the hydrogen fueling subaccount to EV charging infrastructure; state agencies generally stood on written testimony in support, while the Tax Foundation objected to special fund earmarks and noted the bill raises only one part of the barrel tax structure.

Transcript Highlights:

• franchise fee.
• Similarly, telecom customers pay a fee per access line, and the fee per line is set by the municipality
• Despite the fees already paid by residents to be in the right-of-way, they have to pay again.
• Going forward, we do not set the fees that we... elect; the Public Utilities Commission sets those fees
• Give me a sense of what the range of impacts are on that roadway.

Bills: HB3713, HB3953, HB4055, HB4272

Keywords: telecommunications, local exchange companies, universal service fund, rate maintenance, business expansion, broadband access, internet service, multiunit residential properties, urban areas, affordability programs, fiber-optic cables, public land, construction permits, environmental impact, notification requirements, municipal projects, infrastructure, facility relocation, public right-of-way, 1184

Transcript Highlights:

• hinder oil and gas production in Texas by imposing... ...permissibly stringent standards and unlawful fees
• The task force will meet quarterly to assess these impacts, improve coordination between law enforcement
• That is one of thousands of operators that have been impacted by this type of criminal activity and that
• That can impact so many lives require careful consideration. My community trusts our.

Bills: SB766, SB290, SB494, SB1145

Keywords: Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, water regulation, environmental protection, pesticide management, natural resources, LP-gas, property owner notice, gas installations, safety notification, petroleum theft, task force, oil and gas, law enforcement, economic impact, environmental regulation, water permits, water quality, land application, 1185, senate

Transcript Highlights:

• Can they look at that as well, like the impact of the raising the threshold for making a fully refunded
• <00:04:21.680> of<00:04:21.919> the the the uh impact of the the the uh impact of the
• Is there any equity issue there in terms of what do you think the impacts of that?
• So we know that there's big impacts, and we're very supportive of free.
• <01:00:39.359> Um, impacts of that might be. Um, impacts of that might be.

Bills: HB2241, HB2316, HB1566, HB1926, HB1673, HB1948, HB2602, HB1598, HB2334, HB2451, HB2243

Keywords: renewable energy, income tax credit, solar energy, wind energy, low-income households, energy policy, lead materials, drinking water, public health, water infrastructure, safety regulations, HB1566, energy efficiency, LED lighting, light-emitting diodes, fluorescent bulbs, fluorescent fixtures, compact fluorescent lamps, CFL ban, mercury-free lighting

Summary: The committee heard testimony on a bill to expand the solar energy tax credit for single-family residential properties by removing certain cap amounts and raising the adjusted gross income limits for taxpayers to elect a refund of excess credits. The Hawaii State Energy Office and Department of Taxation both said they were standing on written testimony, while industry and advocacy groups largely supported the measure. Members questioned whether the income thresholds were set appropriately, how many taxpayers would be affected at different income levels, and how many would qualify for refundable treatment; Taxation said it did not yet have the requested numbers but was preparing a fiscal estimate. A major issue raised was drafting and administration: witnesses said the bill appears to apply differently to owner-purchased systems versus third-party leased systems, and Taxation said it likely could not easily verify household income for leased systems or cross-reference different taxpayers. Discussion also covered whether the credit should remain refundable, whether credits should be limited to amounts actually expended, and whether the bill should instead be structured to keep the credit with the system owner or lessor, with concerns about equity, market effects, and possible incentives to lease rather than buy. The committee then moved to HB 2316, which would align state restrictions on lead materials in drinking water infrastructure with federal Safe Drinking Water Act requirements. The Department of Health and other supporters testified in favor, and there were no questions from the chair. Next, HB 1566 on energy efficiency would require state agencies to use energy-efficient lighting, with the Hawaii State Energy Office providing technical assistance and a compliance survey prioritized for first responder facilities; testimony from state agencies and advocates was in support, and again there were no questions. For HB 1926 on Red Hill, the Department of Land and Natural Resources, the Board of Water Supply, and multiple organizations and individuals supported funding for remediation studies, environmental monitoring, groundwater research, independent testing, and a public dashboard, with DLNR emphasizing that decades of work remain necessary even after defueling and that the bill supports ongoing university and community partnerships. The committee then heard HB 1673 on landfill units. The Department of Health initially said it was in support but later corrected the record and stated it strongly opposes the measure, saying the bill would undo protections enacted last session that keep landfills out of areas over aquifers; the Board of Water Supply also opposed repeal of those protections, while the City and County of Honolulu supported the HD1 version that leaves siting decisions to the counties. Sierra Club of Hawaiʻi and the Energy Justice Network opposed the bill, arguing the original protections should remain and that the amended version had confused commenters; supporters of the original version urged restoring it and considering additional language on ash.