Transcript Highlights:

• </c> uh with Havi health and harm reduction uh with Havi health and harm reduction uh<01:15:08.520><c
• Hawaii Health and Harm Reduction. Nicholas Le in support. Linda Beor in support.
• Hawaii Health and Harm Reduction. Nicholas Le in support. Linda Beor in support.
• Hawaii Health and Harm Reduction. Nicholas Le in support. Linda Beor in support.
• reduction reduction support<01:36:34.639><c> Nichol</c><01:36:35.199><c> Nicholas</c> support Nichol

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint hearing covered several bills focused on environmental protection and wastewater management. HB 26 HD 2, relating to environmental protection, drew support from the Department of Health, Reworld, and Energy Justice Network. Supporters said it would preserve existing standards for waste-to-energy facilities, including H-Power, even if federal EPA rules are weakened, while Energy Justice Network urged the state to go further and require stronger pollution controls on older burners at the plant. HB 734 and HB 735, both relating to wastewater systems, received broad support from state agencies, county representatives, realtors, environmental groups, and others. Testimony emphasized reducing the cost of cesspool upgrades, updating rules, and improving coordination between the Department of Health, counties, and the University of Hawaiʻi. Members raised concerns about whether some areas, such as Ewa, should be treated differently if they are not near aquifers or the ocean, but the department said the existing prioritization process already considered statewide conditions and that cesspools generally still affect water resources. On HB 735, the committee discussed the current bedroom-based limits for individual wastewater systems and whether the bill would allow more flexibility for housing configurations, with the department explaining the limits are tied to density and system capacity. HB 879, relating to cesspool conversions, was also supported by the Department of Health, Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, and several advocacy groups. Testimony said the bill would help low- and moderate-income homeowners in priority areas by increasing grant assistance for cesspool upgrades, but the Department of Health noted it would need three full-time positions to administer the program. Members asked for clarification on the grant amount and staffing costs, and the department indicated the grant cap should remain at $20,000 unless changed. HB 918, relating to labeling of non-flushable wipes, drew support from wastewater and industry groups, including the Association of Nonwoven Fabrics Industry, which said similar laws have passed in other states and that the bill reflects cooperation between manufacturers and wastewater officials. The Department of Health and county officials supported the concept but said enforcement and outreach would require additional staff, and senators questioned whether the state could effectively enforce the labeling requirement without a national standard.

Transcript Highlights:

• Local governments also contribute primarily around defensible space and fuel reduction activities.
• It is recognizing that there is a need for fuels reduction, mechanical thinning, prescribed fire, and
• Now, efficacy in fuels reduction.
• Now, efficacy in fuels reduction.
• It is fundamental to wildfire risk reduction. This is not a hopeful sentiment.

Summary: The hearing focused on California wildfire resilience, with the first panel discussing statewide funding, policy, and strategic priorities, and the second panel shifting to home hardening and defensible space. The LAO outlined the state’s wildfire risk, the large increase in resilience spending in recent years, and the fact that most funding has been one-time rather than ongoing. Testimony emphasized that wildfire risk varies greatly by region, that the state must balance response spending with prevention, and that success should be measured more carefully than by acres treated alone. Witnesses also noted the importance of local, federal, utility, and Proposition 4 funding sources, as well as the need for long-term maintenance and strategic prioritization rather than scattered projects. Cal Fire leadership and other witnesses stressed that California’s wildfire problem is not uniform: forested areas, chaparral, and wildland-urban interface communities require different strategies. In Northern California and forested watersheds, speakers emphasized fuels reduction, prescribed and cultural burning, strategic fuel breaks, watershed protection, and maintaining forest health. In Southern California, testimony focused on wind-driven fires, ember intrusion, ignition prevention along roads and power lines, and the limits of large-scale vegetation clearing. Several witnesses argued that the state should invest where it can leverage local and regional partnerships, support capacity-building programs like Regional Forest and Fire Capacity, and improve data systems to track treatment effectiveness and project outcomes. Members repeatedly pressed witnesses on how to prioritize limited funds, asking what should be done more of, less of, and first. The chair argued that protecting homes and communities through hardening and defensible space should be a major priority, especially near structures, while also acknowledging the need for broader landscape work and watershed protection. There was discussion of incentives such as insurance discounts, property tax treatment, and community certification for hardened homes, along with the need for multiple payers rather than relying on the state alone. Cal Fire reported new and expanding data tools, including treatment trackers, defensible space inspection dashboards, and a fuels treatment effectiveness program that evaluates whether nearby treatments affected wildfire behavior. No votes were taken because the hearing was informational only.

Transcript Highlights:

• It simply gives a few special interests some tax breaks and then, oddly enough, a sales tax reduction
• constitutional amendment, you'd look at things that really need, you know, will help people, significant reductions
• in property tax, significant reductions in sales tax, you know, eliminating, if you went to this, you
• It does really, it's really laughable the amount of tax reductions that are contained inside of this
• kind of a dabbling of little things that will help the average person and then significant tax reductions

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: At this Republican media availability, Senate and House GOP leaders focused on affordability, taxes, and government accountability as the session approached cutoff. Senate Republican Leader John Braun criticized the Senate’s income tax bill and a range of other tax proposals, arguing they would raise costs for food, health care, prescription drugs, data centers, startups, grocery bags, and employers of Apple Health/Medicaid users. House Republican leaders Peter Abbarno and April Connors echoed those concerns, saying the latest revenue forecast did not justify new taxes and that Democrats were relying on tax increases rather than relief for families and small businesses. A major topic was the income tax bill that had passed the Senate and was headed to the House. Republicans said they opposed it on constitutional and policy grounds, argued it would eventually expand beyond high earners, and said the bill should be amended to remove the necessity clause so it could be referred to voters. They also said any meaningful tax reform should include broader relief such as property or sales tax reductions, not just narrow carveouts. Braun also said he hoped Governor Inslee would reconsider support for the measure, while House Republicans said they would try to stop it from advancing. The lawmakers also discussed child welfare and public safety bills, especially efforts to force votes on legislation related to DCYF and child deaths. They criticized House Democrats for not hearing or advancing several Republican-backed bills and said process objections were being used to avoid accountability. Braun noted that a bipartisan bill to add fentanyl to the endangerment statute, HB 5071, remained alive in the House. Other bills mentioned as priorities to oppose included an environmental crimes bill, a juvenile release bill, a real estate excise tax measure, and a bottle bill, all of which Republicans said would increase costs or expand state authority.

Transcript Highlights:

• It simply gives a few special interests some tax breaks and then, oddly enough, a sales tax reduction
• help people. ...you'd look at things that really need, you know, will help people, significant reductions
• in property tax, significant reductions in sales tax, you know, eliminating, if you went to this, you
• It does really, it's really laughable the amount of tax reductions that are contained inside of this
• been kind of dabbling in little things that will help the average person and then significant tax reductions

Summary: Washington Senate and House Republican leaders held a media availability focused on affordability, taxes, and government accountability as cutoff day approached. Senator John Braun and Representatives Peter Abbarno and April Connors criticized the Senate-passed income tax bill, arguing it is unconstitutional, would eventually expand beyond high earners, and should be stopped in the House. They also warned about a range of other tax proposals they said would raise costs for groceries, prescription drugs, data centers, startups, and businesses that employ people on Apple Health or Medicaid. The lawmakers also highlighted concerns about energy policy, saying past decisions have driven up utility costs and forced more spending on low-income energy assistance. Abbarno criticized a bill affecting L&I funds and said money was diverted to CCA instead of education or health care. They also objected to several agency-expansion and enforcement bills, including an environmental crimes bill and an Attorney General investigations bill, saying they would centralize power in Olympia and discourage investment. A major portion of the discussion centered on child welfare and DCYF accountability. Republicans said House Democrats blocked motions to bring child welfare bills to the floor, including measures tied to the Keeping Families Together Act and a bill to clarify “imminent harm,” and argued the Legislature should focus on child safety rather than process objections. In closing, Braun noted that a bipartisan fentanyl/endangerment bill, HB 5071, remains alive in the House, while Republicans said they would continue trying to stop tax increases and other bills they view as harmful before the cutoff deadline.

Transcript Highlights:

• Do you have any concerns that the reduction in funding of the waste districts might lead to further problems
• So just so you know, I mean, it's, you know, for my district, they're not thrilled with the reduction
• The numbers that we have come up with is roughly a $1.3 million reduction in the district's revenue.
• But the $1.3 million reduction would translate into a $300,000 reduction in the Kansas City District's
• We do a lot with that money, and a reduction of $300,000 is a significant amount.

Summary: The committee met to hear Senate Bill 1586, sponsored by Senator Ben Brown, which would address abandoned, ownerless landfills in Missouri. Brown described a constituent’s experience with contamination near an old landfill in Franklin County and said the bill was intended to give the Department of Natural Resources clearer authority to investigate and remediate such sites, create a funding stream by redirecting 10% of solid waste tipping fees, establish an interim committee for further study, and tighten seller disclosure requirements for properties with abandoned landfills. He argued the state has 29 such sites, that the issue has been ignored for decades, and that environmental studies are the necessary first step before cleanup and possible grant applications. Support came from University of Missouri engineering dean Marisa Grosoccoe, who said the bill would provide the regulatory framework and stable funding needed to move forward, noting that even about $1 million annually would likely fund only a few studies per year but would reduce uncertainty and help identify cleanup costs and future land use options. She emphasized that studies can unlock additional funding and eventual redevelopment benefits. In opposition, Solid Waste Advisory Board chair Chris Bussin and Mark Solid Waste District program manager Diana Bryant argued the districts already perform important recycling and household hazardous waste work, that the proposed diversion of tipping fees would significantly reduce local program funding, and that DNR already has authority to address landfill issues. They also questioned the accuracy of the abandoned landfill list and warned that cuts could harm existing services. A county commissioner testifying for information purposes echoed concerns about impacts on small communities and local grant-funded recycling programs. No vote was taken, and the hearing was closed after testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• The net change we present this meeting as a reduction in 7.4 million.
• And they are also requesting a local match reduction of. 683,000. This is a 100.
• So we did that to kind of assure the district that they did have a local match reduction and that the
• That the split was still in effect, and so the technical correction was to reflect the local match reduction
• There was a typographical error that needed to be corrected to reflect the local match reduction that

Transcript Highlights:

• New Mexico Environment Department will administer the program and report annually on emissions reductions
• both public and private construction activity to drive market transformation and greenhouse gas reductions
• And then the Environmental Product Declaration helps to determine what the emissions reductions are for
• Reductions are for that particular material, and from there, it's calculated what the rebate is based
• Reductions relative to the baseline based on equivalent conventionally produced material per dollar per

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• commercial construction permit application and requires the use and it establishes a uniform few reduction
• So if they do all the services that you're asking about, a 75% reduction. >> Just just a follow-up on
• But there must be a few reduction. >> Thank you, chair rep so question. >> If the >> building is not
• be 25 to 50%, is there any way that the city could recoup so permitting cost that is lost in this reduction
• I as a as a person who's working in the property tax field that also grateful for your reductions in

Transcript Highlights:

• And so that's why on the fiscal note you see that reduction in general fund dollars is that...
• And so that's why on the fiscal note, you see that reduction in general fund dollars is that collection
• So that's a reduction in general fund dollars of about $340,000.
• The fiscal note on this bill estimates a reduction of $340,000 for the upcoming biennium.
• The fiscal note on the bill estimates a reduction of $310,000 for the upcoming biennium.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee met to review fiscal aspects of House Bills 1417 and 1425, both part of a broader criminal justice reentry package. HB 1417 would eliminate the $35 public defender application fee and end court-ordered reimbursement of indigent defense costs, while also removing the $55 monthly community supervision fee. Testimony from the Commission on Legal Counsel for Indigents and the Department of Corrections said the bill would replace lost revenue with general fund appropriations of about $310,000 for indigent defense and $1.5 million for supervision fees, and that the fees are rarely collected and can hinder reentry. Representative Clemene said the bill is intended to reduce barriers to successful community reintegration and improve data and supervision practices. HB 1425 would create and fund front-end diversion, deflection, and pretrial services programs. Supporters described it as allowing prosecutors and local jurisdictions to divert appropriate low-level offenders from prosecution, establish deflection programs for people with behavioral health needs, and expand pretrial services. The bill includes a pilot program in three counties, a $1 million appropriation to DOCR for one FTE and contracts with local providers, $750,000 to DHS for treatment services, and $55,000 for a study of pretrial services cost savings. Committee members asked several questions about how the pilot counties would be chosen, how the consultant study would be procured, and what services the DHS funds would cover. The committee also heard House Bill 1603, which would provide a $500,000 matching grant for Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act compliance, with $100,000 available to each of North Dakota’s five tribes if matched. Sponsor testimony said the funds would support a Historical Society NAGPRA compliance committee and help catalog and repatriate human remains and cultural items in coordination with tribes. After questions about the federal mandate and the difficulty of identifying artifacts, the committee voted 4-0 to give HB 1603 a do-pass recommendation, with Senator Meyer assigned to carry it forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill has to do with the Legislative Executive Poverty Reduction Oversight Task Force, known as LuPRO
• work coming out of our committee fits under LuPRO and the work that's been happening on poverty reduction
• And as we think about how it is, we create opportunities for generational well. on poverty reduction.
• The Legislative Executive Workforce Poverty Reduction Oversight Task Force, or LUPRO, is a key part of
• And that closes the hearing on the Poverty Reduction Task Force, Senate Bill 625.

Bills: SB5979, SB6308, SB6319

Keywords: opioids, substance abuse, dependent children, child welfare, caregiver substance use, court orders, shelter care, judicial discretion, family law, early childhood, family services, diversion programs, court-ordered assessments, 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We could consider energy reduction in connected buildings.
• That will help, of course, achieve the reduction in emissions and more resiliency and what have you,
• And I'm wondering if you have done the calculation to see how much carbon dioxide emission reduction
• So I don't have the carbon reduction numbers offhand.
• I would say, just as a... ...carbon reduction numbers offhand.

Bills: HB2330, HB2338

Keywords: energy systems, capital funding, state campus, school infrastructure, sustainability, weatherization, energy efficiency, community projects, environment, 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Overall, some reductions that we've seen from a federal government perspective into reemployment, but
• I mentioned earlier that, in terms of our ReConnect system, we have taken a reduction in federal funding
• We did take a reduction in And federal funding for that.
• That's the fact that we received a reduction in our federal funding, and in part to also essentially
• It was the middle of the summer when we started to see that we were going to get reductions in funding

Transcript Highlights:

• In addition to this, the president has also called for a reduction in the number of federal programs.
• equity, and inclusion, or funded by the infrastructure investment and jobs act and the inflation reduction
• While no reductions to federal funding have been implemented to date future funding levels for specific
• Cancellation of federal state contracts or a significant reduction in federal personnel and or funding
• That's up to 15 million Californians and are you aware of any federal reductions that could affect our

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So it's important that we're meeting our match; otherwise, the MOE would result in a reduction of those
• The next slide: these were some of the reductions that happened in our budget in the House that I just
• The next slide: these were some of the reductions that happened in our budget in the House that I just
• Therefore, a back-of-the-budget reduction does not free up funds for use elsewhere.
• </c><01:48:15.840><c> because</c> out with the expected reduction because out with the expected reduction

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Do we do a broad-based GRT reduction, which then gets offset by local governments?
• Do you do targeted economic development-related GRT and other corporate income tax reductions.
• They then go in Utah to spending reductions.
• And I want to, I really want to talk about revenue growth from tax reductions.
• They said 58% increase in reading and 78% reduction in absenteeism. That's huge.

Transcript Highlights:

• The second point I wanted to bring up is that there are also assumed significant reductions in scope
• The second point I wanted to bring up is that there are also assumed significant reductions in scope
• So we have greenhouse gas reduction fund revenues. They're anticipated to come in through 2045.
• So not only is California getting less train under these scope reductions...
• “But that’s assuming that they’re just doing that for reasons of scope reductions only.

Summary: The Senate Transportation Committee held an informational hearing on the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s 2026 draft business plan and next steps for the project. Chair Cortese opened by noting major changes since the 2024 plan, including new leadership, a bottoms-up review, scope changes in the Central Valley, loss of federal funds, and renewed interest in private investment and value capture. The Authority’s CEO, Ian Chaudhary, presented the project as moving into a construction and track-laying phase, citing progress on Central Valley structures, right-of-way acquisition, utility relocations, and a new procurement for track and systems. He said the plan reflects a more disciplined, optimized approach, with the Merced-to-Bakersfield segment targeted for revenue service around 2033 and the broader Phase 1 corridor envisioned as commercially viable through ancillary revenues, public-private partnerships, and future private financing. Committee members questioned the Authority about station relocations, single-tracking, tax increment financing, utility relocation authority, transparency, and the feasibility of private financing. Chaudhary said the Merced and Bakersfield station locations were still under discussion with local governments and that no contracts had been finalized. He defended the reduced scope and single-track approach as a just-in-time strategy to avoid overbuilding, while maintaining high-speed standards. He also said the Authority was exploring land value capture, broadband, energy, and other corridor-based revenue sources, but acknowledged that some tools would require legislative action and that private financing options were still being evaluated. Several senators expressed support for the project but raised concerns about permitting delays, local opposition, constitutional and statutory limits, and the need for stronger accountability. The Legislative Analyst’s Office and the High-Speed Rail Inspector General then gave critical assessments of the draft plan. LAO staff said the plan assumes major statutory changes, understates risk, lacks transparency about scope changes, and may not fully fund even the smaller Merced-to-Bakersfield segment once borrowing costs and other uncertainties are considered. Inspector General Ben Belknap said the draft plan does not comply with newer statutory requirements in SB 198 and AB 377, citing three main deficiencies: unauthorized scope changes to the Merced-to-Bakersfield segment, an inadequate funding plan that omits financing costs, and missing procurement milestone dates. He said the Authority’s presentation obscures the true cost and schedule impacts of the project changes, and that incomplete reporting limits legislative oversight. The Authority responded that it would address the OIG’s findings in the final business plan, and committee members indicated they expected a written response on compliance issues.

Transcript Highlights:

• The second point I wanted to bring up is that there are also assumed significant reductions in scope
• So we have greenhouse gas reduction fund revenues. They’re anticipated to come in through 2045.
• So we have greenhouse gas reduction fund revenues. They’re anticipated to come in through 2045.
• According to the authority's draft business plan, these project scope reductions, often lumped under
• But that's assuming that they're just doing that for reasons of scope reductions only.

Summary: The Senate Transportation Committee held an informational hearing on the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s 2026 draft business plan, with testimony from the authority, the Legislative Analyst’s Office, and the High-Speed Rail Inspector General. Chair Cortese framed the hearing around the project’s recent changes: a new CEO, revised delivery strategy, proposed station and scope changes in the Merced-to-Bakersfield segment, the loss of major federal funds, and the authority’s push for private investment and ancillary revenue. He also raised concerns about financing risks, the proposed changes to the initial operating segment, and the Inspector General’s finding that the draft plan may be missing required statutory elements. Authority CEO Ian Chaudhry said the project is now in a more disciplined phase, citing major construction progress in the Central Valley, near-completion of right-of-way and utility work, and plans to begin track and systems procurement. He said the authority expects the Merced-to-Bakersfield segment to be completed around 2032-33, with broader Phase 1 service later, and argued that design optimization, direct procurement, and public-private partnerships could reduce costs and attract private capital. He also described plans for ancillary revenue from real estate, broadband, energy, and logistics, and said the authority is discussing station locations and value-capture tools with local governments rather than locking them in yet. Several senators questioned the legality and practicality of tax increment financing, utility relocation authority, transparency, and whether the project’s revised scope still meets high-speed rail standards and public expectations. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the draft plan assumes major statutory changes, including changes to station locations and scope, and warned that the plan’s cost and schedule estimates depend on assumptions that may not materialize. LAO said the plan lacks transparency because it does not clearly disclose the assumed station changes, and it questioned whether even the shorter segment can be delivered within existing funding once borrowing costs and other risks are included. The office also noted uncertainty around future greenhouse gas reduction fund revenues and said ancillary revenues are not yet credit-worthy for financing. The Inspector General’s office said the draft business plan does not appear to meet several statutory requirements, including requirements added in AB 377, and reiterated that the final plan must address those omissions. Chaudhry said the authority would respond to the OIG’s findings in the final business plan and committed to resolving the compliance issues before final adoption.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is to help address healthy forests as well as other fuel reduction projects.
• While there has been significant investment by the state, we have not seen a proportional reduction in
• While there has been significant investment by the state, we have not seen a proportional reduction in
• And it's important to think about how we're going to sustain that directionality if we have a reduction
• So now we're grappling with a reduction in the refinery capacity that we have, increased cost for every

Summary: The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee heard opening remarks on the Governor’s 2026-27 budget and presentations from the Department of Finance and the Legislative Analyst’s Office. Chair Laird described the proposal as roughly balanced with $23 billion in reserves, while Vice Chair Niello argued the revenue estimates were overly optimistic and warned of a structural deficit, calling for a deeper review of programs and concern over the state’s $20 billion unemployment insurance debt. Finance said the budget is balanced in the budget year but still leaves a roughly $2.9 billion deficit, with out-year gaps above $20 billion, and characterized the plan as largely a workload budget with limited new spending or cuts. The LAO said its office sees substantial downside risk to the revenue forecast, emphasized the volatility of stock-market-driven revenues, and urged the Legislature to begin addressing the structural deficit now rather than waiting until May. Members focused on the implications of federal policy changes, Medi-Cal, CalFresh, and the MCO tax, as well as the state’s reserve strategy. Senators Menjivar and Richardson raised concerns about health coverage reductions, county costs, hospital finances, and the lack of a broader revenue solution, while Finance said the state cannot fully backfill federal cuts and is still assessing the impacts. The LAO recommended rejecting the proposal to suspend the rainy day fund deposit and setting aside the proposed Proposition 98 settle-up rather than using it for spending. Finance defended both proposals as necessary to balance the budget year and said it plans to begin discussions with legislative leaders before the May Revision. The committee also discussed climate and transportation funding, including cap-and-trade/GGRF allocations for Cal Fire, interest earnings from the fund, zero-emission vehicle incentives, and AB 617 air quality investments. Senator Reyes questioned the focus on light-duty ZEV incentives instead of heavy-duty vehicles, and Finance said the proposal is intended to partially replace the federal consumer tax credit and that some heavy-duty funding remains from prior years. Senator Richardson also raised concerns about Olympics-related infrastructure, courthouse repairs, and displaced workers, while other members stressed homelessness funding and the need for more immediate action on out-year budget problems. No formal votes or actions were taken during the portion provided; the hearing was informational and moved into member questions after the presentations.

Transcript Highlights:

• that federal funding on income support will be due to the reconciliation bill, and much of these reductions
• If you look at Chart 5, you can see what those estimated reductions will look like.
• And so there's just been pretty substantial reductions.
• We were anticipating changes or reductions this year that did not materialize.
• reductions.

Transcript Highlights:

• He said it was a previous appropriation in a prior bill, but the reduction in this bill is $3 million
• He said it was a previous appropriation in a prior bill, but the reduction in this bill is $3 million
• He said it was a previous appropriation in a prior bill, but the reduction in this bill is $3 million
• He said it was a previous appropriation in a prior bill, but the reduction in this bill is $3 million
• Moving down further, he said there is a reduction for the Southern Minnesota Initiative Foundation of

Bills: HF2446, HF2563, HF2444

Keywords: agriculture finance, broadband development, Department of Agriculture, Board of Animal Health, Agricultural Utilization Research Institute, Office of Broadband Development, food safety, food handler license, cottage food, home processed food, livestock dealer, meat packing company, milk marketer, milk marketing license, grain buyer, grain storage, beginning farmer, emerging farmer, farm down payment assistance, livestock investment grant