Transcript Highlights:

• There's zero private sector impact.
• There's zero private sector impact.
• I'm sure you're familiar with the Trevor Project, aren't you?
• When the government invests in a private entity, when the government invests in a private entity, they
• become a private equity investor.

Summary: The House convened with a quorum, offered an invocation, led the pledges, and approved a series of routine motions, including excusing absent members and granting permission for several committees to meet while the House was in session. Members also adopted several memorial and recognition resolutions, including H.R. 1023 honoring Christian Beerbill, H.R. 1033 recognizing International Bereaved Mother’s Day, and H.R. 877 recognizing Urban League Advocates Day. The House also recommitted SB 17 and HB 4211 to committee and postponed SCR 27 and HB 2145 for later consideration. The chamber then took up a long third-reading calendar of bills covering a wide range of topics, including Sunset review measures, health care workforce and pricing, child custody and family law, Medicaid, rural ambulance grants, energy reporting, public information requests, trail development, virtual meeting disruptions, occupational licensing, protective orders, county leave pools, animal cruelty, infrastructure, and higher education. Most bills were explained briefly by their authors and passed with broad support, though several drew notable opposition, including HB 5265, HB 2402, HB 3000, HB 3237, HB 3326, HB 1056, HB 281, HB 3308, HB 1043, HB 1234, HB 1193, HB 294, HB 809, HB 334, HB 2037, HB 285, HB 1353, HB 3960, HB 4044, HB 4264, HB 2807, HB 3349, HB 4406, HB 1593, HB 1899, HB 1201, and others. Several bills prompted extended debate or amendments. HB 3237, extending public energy-use reporting for state and higher-education buildings, passed after questions about its public-sector-only scope and energy savings. HB 3326, addressing public service loan forgiveness credit for adjunct professors, initially failed on a 69-70 vote but later passed after verification and machine corrections. HB 3211, concerning optometrists in managed care plans, adopted a Buckley amendment before passing. HB 2213 on Texas Windstorm Insurance Association board composition adopted a Metcalf amendment requiring certain board members to be Texas residents. HB 412, dealing with harmful materials and sexual performance of a child, generated extensive questioning about its scope, existing legal standards, and effects on educators and medical professionals; the excerpt ends during that debate.

Transcript Highlights:

• doing, we're going to discourage private doing, we're going to discourage private investors<01:48
• , investing in the municipal pro project, investing in the municipal pro project, right?
• have recycling associated with projects. have recycling associated with projects.
• they initially entered into the project. they initially entered into the project.
• project. So thank you. project. So thank you.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• within the setting of between private within the setting of between private parties<00:22:25.880
• complicated but between two private complicated but between two private parties<00:23:56.520>
• <00:40:28.400> in yeah yes we have a a project in yeah yes we have a a project in particular
• <00:46:52.839> land This point, only, I believe, private land—about 136,000 acres of private
• The second change is after these lands go out of the state inventory and go into private lands, private

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The hearing opened with committee procedures and then took up SB 1, relating to vegetation management near utility lines. DLNR opposed the bill, saying it would shift rights, responsibilities, and liability onto the state and private landowners. Hawaiian Electric supported the measure with amendments, describing it as a first step to address wildfire risk and improve public safety and system reliability. The Hawaii Farm Bureau and Command Schools both raised concerns that the bill could impose significant costs, liability, and access burdens on farmers, ranchers, and other landowners, especially where easements are old or unclear. Life of the Land argued the issue belongs before the Public Utilities Commission, and PUC staff explained that the commission is already reviewing Hawaiian Electric’s wildfire mitigation plan and vegetation management in a docket, with a decision expected by September and public meetings scheduled for April 23 and 24. Committee members questioned the need for legislation versus negotiated solutions, and witnesses said private parties could potentially renegotiate easements without statute. The committee then heard HB 1296, relating to disaster recovery. DLNR and OPSD supported the bill, saying it would ease regulatory burdens in post-disaster rebuilding and help speed permit review. Testimony and member questions focused on the bill’s five-year rebuilding timeline, the role of the coastal zone/SMA process, and how long permit reviews typically take; OPSD said SMA major/use permits generally take about six months, while minor permits are faster. Members also discussed whether the bill would apply to existing structures damaged in disasters and whether the amendments from the Attorney General’s office and OPSD were acceptable; no objections were raised. Finally, the committee heard SB 1170, relating to the expeditious redevelopment and development of affordable rental housing. HHFDC supported the bill, and testimony from a Maui affordable housing project said the measure is needed to rebuild the Weinberg Court Apartments, a 63-unit affordable project in Lahaina, using insurance funds rather than government money. Members asked whether the bill would help existing affordable rental projects damaged before the enactment of related coastal rules, and the response was that the bill is aimed at existing structures damaged during events and intended to speed rebuilding of affordable housing.

Transcript Highlights:

• If for some reason we voted on a renewable energy project, or a coal project, we'll take it, you're going
• If for some reason we voted on a renewable energy project, or a coal project, we'll take it, you're going
• GPLET has been essential for our downtown urban revitalization projects.
• But it wasn't when we were bringing these projects forward.
• I'm a big believer in private property rights.

Bills: SB1090, SB1293, SB1414, SB1429, SB1503, SB1536, SB1633, SB1724, SB1764

Keywords: savings and loan, technical correction, Arizona Revised Statutes, financial institutions, prohibitions, GPLET, abatement, tax incentives, local government, property improvement, central business district, insurance, settlement demands, time limits, third-party claims, regulatory compliance, initiative, referendum, ballot measures, petition circulators

Summary: The committee first approved the February 2, 2026 minutes and held Senate Bill 1090. It then heard Senate Bill 1503, which would require pension fiduciaries and proxy advisory firms to act solely in the economic interest of plan participants and beneficiaries, prohibit ESG- or ideology-based voting, require disclosures and economic analyses in certain cases, and authorize attorney general enforcement. The sponsor said the bill was meant to protect investors and align with federal action. Testimony was mixed: a policy witness supported the bill, while representatives of ASRS and PSPRS said they were neutral but raised concerns about added costs, operational burdens, reporting requirements, possible conflicts with existing fiduciary duties, and increased litigation risk. After debate, the committee voted 4-3 to give SB 1503 a do-pass recommendation. The committee then considered Senate Bill 1293, which would prohibit GPLET school-district revenues from being abated during the eight-year abatement period. Supporters argued the bill would protect school funding and reduce state aid backfill costs, and a Goldwater Institute witness said it would also reduce gift-clause concerns by limiting subsidies that shift costs to other taxpayers. City and economic development representatives from Phoenix, Mesa, and the Greater Phoenix Economic Council opposed the bill, saying GPLET is an important redevelopment tool that helps finance projects in urban cores and that the change would reduce its effectiveness and slow revitalization. The committee adopted an amendment and then passed SB 1293 on a 4-3 vote. Next, the committee heard Senate Bill 1414, which gives insurers 30 days to review and respond to third-party settlement demands in bodily injury claims. Insurance representatives supported the bill as a commercially reasonable timeframe, while the Arizona Trial Lawyers Association opposed it, arguing that 30 days would become a minimum and could delay settlements for injured claimants; members discussed a possible 15-day compromise. The committee passed SB 1414 by a 5-2 vote. It also passed Senate Bill 1633, which creates an income tax subtraction for capital gains from the sale of a primary residence after a five-year residency; opponents warned it would mainly benefit wealthy homeowners and cost the state tens of millions annually, while the sponsor said it could help housing turnover. Finally, the committee passed SB 1429, as amended, allowing Senate and House leaders to designate board members for the Arizona Commerce Authority, SB 1536, which lets municipalities consolidate multiple street-light improvement districts, and heard SB 1724, which clarifies when property splits or consolidations trigger a limited property value recalculation to prevent tax-base manipulation.

Transcript Highlights:

• The committee will discuss the Louisville Detention Center project, the Lyon facility project, the Medical
• The project includes a minimum of 64 beds.
• The project includes a minimum of 64 beds.
• incentive uh incentives for private incentive uh incentives for private hospitals<00:31:46.840><
• and who are violent where private and who are violent where private options<00:32:05.080> are

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee heard an overview from Department of Juvenile Justice Commissioner Randy White on the state’s juvenile detention network and several facility projects. He identified the currently operating detention centers as Boyd County for females, Breathitt County for low-risk males, Fayette County for high-risk males, Adair County for high-risk youth from Jefferson and surrounding counties, Warren County for high-risk males, and McCracken County for low-risk males. Members asked about capacity and staffing; White said Boyd County houses 33 and is usually near full, Breathitt County is about half full, Fayette County runs about 80-90% full, Campbell County’s operational limit is about 25 due to staffing, Adair County can hold 60 and has hit capacity several times this year, Warren County holds 43 and usually runs near capacity, and McCracken County holds 43 and is not currently full. He said staffing is generally harder in higher-risk facilities and in metropolitan areas because of wages and housing costs. White then updated the committee on the Louisville Detention Center downtown renovation and the Lyon facility project. For the Louisville downtown facility, he said schematic design and design development are complete, construction documents are expected by late February or early March, bids are anticipated in April, and completion is projected for March 2027. He explained the delay is due to extensive renovation work needed to bring the building up to current building, life-safety, ACA, and PREA standards, including security, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, food service, and roof work. The project is designed for 64 beds for high-risk Jefferson County boys, with the facility currently vacant and those youth being housed in Adair County and Campbell County. For the Lyon project, he said the contract was issued November 21, 2024, demolition is underway, completion is expected June 14, 2026, and the facility will have 34 beds in four pods for low-risk offenders; he said the project appears to be on time and on budget within the $4.5 million authorization. The committee also discussed the medical services contract. DJJ officials said they are reviewing whether to continue with the current state contract provider, Wellpath, or pursue an RFP, while retaining current merit staff and continuing oversight through four nurse program administrators. They said DJJ uses a state master agreement to staff nurses, APRNs, and the chief medical officer, and that the current contract is about $20 million per year. Members asked about Wellpath’s bankruptcy filing; officials said they were aware of it, asked questions, and were told it would not affect Kentucky service delivery or contracting, though they could not recall the bankruptcy type and offered to provide more detail later. They also said DJJ is working with the Cabinet for Health and Family Services to become a Medicaid provider, and any future contractual partner will need to be a Medicaid provider. Finally, White described the proposed high-acuity juvenile mental health treatment facility. He said DJJ must accept court-ordered youth even when they have severe mental illness, but detention centers are not equipped to treat those youth and private psychiatric hospitals often refuse them or discharge them early. He argued that a dedicated secure treatment facility is needed for a small number of highly violent, high-need youth who require intensive psychiatric care and are disruptive in detention. The facility would provide behavioral and psychiatric treatment, reduce delays caused by lack of beds or outside placements, and serve youth determined by clinical assessment to need a secure treatment environment. No votes were taken during the discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, certainly, the Wounded Warrior Project was there for me very early on.
• We don't have that kind of data in terms of the private sector.
• There are shortages in the private sector.
• and the public sector, or two private sectors, or two public sector agencies.
• community care system is challenging for private citizens as well right now.

Transcript Highlights:

• For the mill and elevator, we're getting about half of their projected profits.
• You get into the capital improvement projects with the bank.
• So it's not just private companies.
• So it's not just private companies.
• I guess my question is, seems that this project got hijacked from that part of the state.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee heard House Bill 2014, the budget for the Industrial Commission, with Representative Kempenich walking through the agency’s major components: the administrative office, Bank of North Dakota, housing finance, Department of Mineral Resources, and the State Mill and Elevator. He described mostly special-fund operations, including bond payments, economic development programs, the rail loan program, the Rebuilder’s Loan Program, housing incentive funding, abandoned well reclamation work, lignite research, litigation reserves, and a capacity purchase arrangement for a future natural gas pipeline. He also explained several one-time funding items, such as grid resiliency grants, housing-related transfers from the Strategic Investment Fund, and enhanced oil recovery funding repurposed from a prior salt cavern study. Members asked about the reduction in housing incentive funding from the Senate version, the use of one-time Strategic Investment Fund dollars for ongoing housing programs, and whether a trigger should be added to increase housing funding later. Kempenich said no trigger was discussed and emphasized that housing needs vary widely across the state. Another exchange focused on the enhanced oil recovery grant program, which he said would be driven largely by the Energy and Environmental Research Center and would use repurposed funds. A longer discussion covered the natural gas pipeline capacity purchase, including its purpose, possible routes, and the idea that the state would be buying capacity rather than immediately building a pipeline. The committee adopted Amendment 25.0181.0207 on a 21-1 vote, with one member absent and not voting. The committee then passed HB 2014 as amended on a 21-1 vote, with one member absent and not voting. Representative Kempenich was designated to carry the bill. The chair then noted this was the final budget hearing for the committee, with one bill remaining to be heard later.

Transcript Highlights:

• There's also private services.
• Are they going into private equity?
• We want projects to, I think to what John and Melissa have mentioned, is like we want these projects
• If you look at what we're projecting out to be that projected supply versus that projected demand in
• Projected supply versus that projected demand in order to meet it, that is where you get all the way

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:23:18.240> more and execute more projects more and execute more projects more efficiently
• <00:24:34.679> program capital Improvement project program capital Improvement project program
• "So, um, to answer your question regarding our enrollment projections, we do two types of projections
• "We have further out projections, but I do caution with our further out projections: the margin of error
• <05:01:03.718> doing<05:01:04.718> um private the private sector is doing um private

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Finance received an informational briefing from the Department of Education on its budget request for the upcoming fiscal year. The Superintendent and staff described the department’s mission, enrollment and staffing scale, recent gains in NAEP reading and math, persistent attendance problems since the pandemic, and the need for resources to support student recovery, middle school math, and other strategic priorities. The department said its proposal is intended to be aligned with its 2023–2029 strategic plan, fiscally balanced, and reliable for schools, while also addressing inflation, workforce needs, and uncertainty in federal funding. Assistant Superintendent and CFO Brian Hallet reviewed federal grants, non-general funds, and the budget development process. He said federal funds make up about 11% of the department’s FY25 appropriation and warned that House budget proposals could threaten predictable funding for core programs. He also explained that the department began its biennial budget work in April 2024 and used an internal review group to identify possible reallocations. The department characterized its request as a “flat” budget proposal overall, with a large share devoted to continued funding for existing recurring needs, and noted challenges including a projected state funding decline, inflation, lingering pandemic impacts, recruitment and retention, and uncertainty about future federal support. A major topic was the department’s capital improvement program. DOE officials argued for a risk-based, proactive approach using lump-sum “buckets” to manage facilities and deferred maintenance across more than 21.5 million square feet at 268 sites. They said this would allow more efficient prioritization of projects and better coordination with complex area superintendents, principals, and legislators. Members asked about how legislative priorities would fit into the bucket system, county-versus-state property jurisdiction issues affecting school facilities, enrollment decline and staffing ratios, and how the department plans to adjust facilities and human resources to shifting enrollment patterns. DOE said it is studying enrollment trends, will brief the Board of Education next month, and is willing to provide further briefings to legislators. No votes or formal actions were taken during the informational briefing.

Transcript Highlights:

• It would expand the pre-approved plan model that we use for ADUs for small, single-family projects.
• Cities across California are having to deliver increasingly difficult and expensive capital projects
• That approach can work well for straightforward projects.
• With a certain number of homes projected, we also project the number of people who will be residing there
• I think this is a good opportunity. as community benefits for big projects coming in.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• That's projected to continue through 2028.
• That were adjacent to private properties.
• Are you guys familiar with that project?
• Yes, I'm actually very involved in that project.
• However, how could we encourage private industry?

Transcript Highlights:

• On all offshore federal permitting for new wind projects.
• All project funding must come from private donations, and the monument must comply with board rules governing
• Every project, solar or wind project that's already built, every existing project would have to purchase
• Every solar or wind project that's already built, every existing project, would have to purchase batteries
• Continuing on a sidewalk that crosses a driveway or a private drive.

Summary: The Senate took up and passed Senate Bill 945, which concerns political shareholder proposals by insurers and insurance holding companies. Senator Hughes argued the bill would protect Texas-based insurers from activist shareholder pressure, especially proposals aimed at limiting insurance coverage for oil and gas companies for ESG or political reasons. The motion to suspend the regular order was adopted over objection, and SB 945 passed to engrossment on a 20-10 vote with one present not voting. The chamber also passed Senate Bill 1117, allowing any Texas-licensed dentist to administer botulinum toxin in oral or maxillofacial regions for aesthetic purposes, and House Joint Resolution 98, renewing Texas’s application for an Article 5 Convention of States to propose amendments on fiscal restraints, federal power limits, and term limits. Both measures advanced after debate and roll-call votes; SB 1117 passed unanimously after suspension of the three-day rule, and H.J.R. 98 was adopted on a 17-14 vote. Members then approved several other measures, including the committee substitute for House Bill 142 on HHSC’s Office of Inspector General and Medicaid overpayment recovery, Senate Bill 2373 on AI-enabled financial fraud and deepfake/phishing schemes, Senate Bill 2221 on fraudulent UCC financing statements, and Senate Bill 2681 on the basis for third-party voter-registration challenges. The Senate also adopted a resolution authorizing a Texas Life Monument replica at the Capitol complex, and passed S.J.R. 59 creating funds for Texas State Technical College capital needs. The body debated and passed Senate Bill 946, which would bar credit discrimination against organizations based on social, political, religious, or similar value-based considerations and require credit decisions to rest on creditworthiness. Senators raised concerns that the bill could create a special protected class for non-human entities or conflict with existing state policies, but the bill advanced to engrossment on a 20-11 vote. The Senate also passed Senate Bill 2477 to ease office-to-residential conversions in large cities after adopting an amendment negotiated with municipal stakeholders, and began consideration of Senate Bill 715 on ERCOT reliability requirements for generators, including existing generation, with extensive debate over impacts on renewables, power purchase agreements, and grid reliability.

Transcript Highlights:

• projects?
• measure project in 2002.
• Some projects are better gray projects, and some projects are better as environmental restoration.
• We typically have far fewer resources than the private sector and only pursue gray infrastructure projects
• As we march through this multi-phase project, we want the full-phase project... ...chime in on project

Summary: The committee held an informational hearing on flood risk and flood management in California, with opening remarks emphasizing that flooding is a statewide and growing threat due to climate change, including the possibility of extreme losses in a worst-case event. Members noted recent flooding in places such as San Diego, the Tulare Basin, and Pajaro, and framed the hearing as a way to better understand prevention, response, and how to capture excess water for later use. Jeffrey Mount of PPIC gave the main overview, describing California’s high flood exposure, the different flood types the state faces, and the mix of structural and non-structural tools used to manage them. He stressed that levees, dams, bypasses, land-use planning, flood insurance, and emergency response all matter, but that risk is rising because current standards are based on past hydrology rather than future climate conditions. He also warned that flood management is underfunded, that the National Flood Insurance Program is weak, and that federal support is increasingly uncertain. Members asked about groundwater recharge, permitting, NOAA and federal cuts, and which communities are most at risk; Mount said recharge can help but does not eliminate flood risk, and that small Central Valley communities and heavily developed floodplains are especially concerning. State officials Laura Hollander of the Department of Water Resources and Jane Dolan of the Central Valley Flood Protection Board described the state’s role in forecasting, emergency response, grants, planning, and the Central Valley Flood Protection Plan. They highlighted aging infrastructure, the need for better coordination, and the state’s special liability in the Central Valley after the Paterno decision. Dolan reviewed the history of major floods and said the plan calls for about $1 billion per year over 30 years to meet current needs, while Hollander said the state works with local and federal partners on preparedness, response, and subventions projects. Both emphasized that floodplain planning, regional coordination, and faster permitting are important, but that more consistent funding is needed. A later panel from local flood agencies and districts reinforced those points, arguing that the state’s annual flood funding is below identified needs and that a proposed statewide flood and dam safety bond was reduced substantially in the broader climate bond package. Witnesses urged more routine maintenance funding, support for regional flood planning, and continued federal-state-local partnerships to reduce risk and maintain eligibility for federal assistance. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken during the informational hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• So right now, billions in federal funding and private investment are flowing into nuclear projects across
• So right now, billions in federal funding and private investment are flowing into nuclear projects across
• So right now, billions in federal funding and private investment are flowing into nuclear projects across
• So right now, billions in federal funding and private investment are flowing into nuclear projects across
• So right now, billions in federal funding and private investment are flowing into nuclear projects across

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The Minnesota Senate Energy Committee heard Senate File 426, authored by Senator Icorn, which would remove the 100-megawatt cap on hydropower for purposes of qualifying as an eligible energy technology under Minnesota law. Supporters said hydropower is carbon-free, reliable, flexible baseload power that can help Minnesota meet its 100% carbon-free electricity goal by 2040. Testifiers from Missouri River Energy Services and Minnesota Power described existing hydropower resources, including allocations from federal Missouri River dams, Minnesota hydro stations, and Manitoba Hydro, and argued that the bill would preserve and expand options for clean energy development. Several members raised concerns about the bill’s purpose and potential environmental impacts. Senator McEwen questioned why the size limit should be removed without specific proposed projects or more information about the need for larger dams, citing concerns about fisheries, water resources, and land use. Senator Port and others asked about costs, environmental effects, and where new projects might be built. In response, supporters said the bill is intended to open the door to future projects and allow agencies to review proposals through existing permitting and environmental processes, rather than approving any specific dam. Committee members offered mixed reactions. Senator Frentz said he supported the concept but recommended laying the bill over for further discussion and possibly sending it to the Environment Committee, noting environmental concerns and the need for more conversation. Senator Gruenhagen strongly supported the bill, arguing that it merely lifts a cap while leaving permitting and review requirements in place. Senator Hoffman also supported the bill, saying current policy blocks consideration of new projects and that the change would allow regulators to evaluate proposals on their merits. No vote was taken during the hearing, and the bill was left open for further consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• They’re working out there for a private contractor hired by TxDOT.
• And even going back to 1702 with the private securities, a lot of these private security companies are
• You have to get a 1702 private security. Totally agree. Yeah, no, and I...
• I'll start with slide five: law enforcement is not used on every project.
• They do exit the project, and now we have a huge...

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And again, this grant program is a reimbursement of actual costs throughout the build of the project.
• This is capital projects dollars. It has to be expended by the end of 2026.
• This is capital projects dollars. It has to be expended by the end of 2026.
• state not just with capital private state not just with capital private Capital<00:47:49.160>
• Then if that project, or another project they're working on, goes into July through the fall construction

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Thanks. ...pocketbook, our Texas university system, and private sector thought leaders, private industry
• became a six-month or two-year project.
• And so you've got projection models. Mm-hmm. And so you've got projection models.
• We're projecting, and Undersecretary is 100% right, we're projecting to be able to get some preliminary
• We're projecting, and Under Secretary is 100% right, we're projecting to be able to get some preliminary

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• the project.
• The bigger the project, the more money. Um, the smaller the project, the less money.
• ever required to fund private schools. ever required to fund private schools.
• So, the private extra special ed.
• projected to go up to eight this year. projected to go up to eight this year.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• mechanism for a community to review a project before a building permit is granted.
• This impacts not only housing, but also commercial projects.
• So the other 99% is either already privately owned or held.
• My question, I guess, is on your project file that you're working on now, the Drexel project: did you
• sell that land to a private developer, or are you doing that in-house?

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Housing held a hybrid hearing on zoning, Chapter 40B, and related housing bills. Much of the testimony focused on the “Yes in My Backyard” bill (H. 1572/S. 962), which would expand by-right development of missing middle housing, reduce barriers such as minimum lot sizes and parking mandates, and support duplexes, triplexes, and other small-scale housing. Supporters included housing advocates, developers, local officials, and municipal leaders from places like Cambridge, Salem, and Braintree, who argued that state action is needed because local zoning often blocks needed housing and that the bill would help create more affordable, neighborhood-compatible homes. Several witnesses also backed a companion “Yes in God’s Backyard” bill (H. 2347), which would allow faith-based institutions to build housing on their property by right, with testimony emphasizing the potential for new units, added municipal tax revenue, and partnerships between religious organizations and housing developers. The committee also heard testimony on Senate Bill 1021 to modernize Chapter 40R incentives. Senator Pavel Payano and others said the program’s payments have not kept pace with inflation since 2004 and should be increased to better encourage smart-growth zoning near transit and town centers. Another major topic was H. 2298 on site plan review, which would codify and standardize the process in state law. Rep. Kristin Kassner and witnesses from MAPC and NAIOP said current site plan review practices vary widely across the state, creating confusion, delays, and litigation, while a uniform framework would give municipalities clearer tools to review by-right projects without undermining local oversight. The hearing also included testimony on Chapter 40B reform, including S. 1005 and H. 1537. One witness supported further review of 40B and stronger regional planning, while another backed a proposal to allow certain pre-2010 40B condominium owners to sell at market value under a framework that would recapture some of the subsidy benefits. Committee members asked several questions about local zoning changes, housing goals by county, and how the proposed bills would affect communities. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the chairs indicated that written testimony would be welcomed for technical details and additional comments.

Transcript Highlights:

• we are concerned about the projected we are concerned about the projected population<01:38:20.320
• support people need p3s public private support people need p3s public private part<02:05:51.639>
• 00.239> in P3 this would be the largest project in P3 this would be the largest project in the
• <02:07:10.199> of<02:07:10.400> this a project of this a project of this magnitude<
• start to phase out the use of private start to phase out the use of private prisons<02:24:47.560

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Public Safety Committee held a hearing on House Bill 433, which would appropriate $4 million for Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation re-entry services to connect offenders with community-based services. Director Tommy Johnson said the department supports the bill’s intent but noted the governor’s executive budget already includes $4 million for the same purpose and asked that the measure defer to that budget. Supporters, including the Hawaii Correctional System Oversight Commission, Community Alliance on Prisons, and the ACLU, backed the funding but urged that it be tied to a clear re-entry plan, performance measures, transparency, and regular reporting to the legislature. They emphasized that re-entry should begin at intake and involve community partnerships, housing, treatment, employment, and family reunification services. Committee members questioned the department about current re-entry services, pre-trial detainees, and how the new funds would be used. Johnson said the department’s current statewide re-entry budget is about $1.5 million to $1.7 million, separate from the larger Corrections Program Services Division budget for in-facility programs. He described the proposed $4 million as supporting a mix of services, including a pilot apprenticeship program, substance abuse treatment, navigator or warm-handoff services, and short-term transitional housing. He also said the department already tracks performance outcomes in its annual report and can provide a matrix showing the intake-to-discharge process, program contracts, and volunteer organizations. The discussion also covered pre-trial detainees, electronic monitoring, and mental health services. Johnson said the department has limited jurisdiction over pre-trial detainees but works with courts to seek supervised release when possible; he noted that many requests are denied, though electronic monitoring has improved release rates somewhat. On mental health, he said the jail is not an ideal therapeutic setting for people found unfit to proceed and suggested a secure community-based step-down facility run by the Department of Health for those needing care above what the jail can provide but below forensic-level treatment. No vote or final action on the bill was taken during the hearing.