Transcript Highlights:

• So there are loans that are supposed to comply with state and federal lending laws like the Truth in
• Lending Act, and just by saying, 'Oh, it's not a loan, it's a charge on your electric bill,' that doesn't

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy

Summary: The committee heard testimony on H. 4144, the Governor’s Energy Affordability, Independence, and Innovation Act, with the administration arguing the bill would lower bills in the short and long term while expanding clean energy supply and innovation. The Governor and Secretary said the bill would reduce or restructure charges on customer bills, reform Mass Save, expand securitization as a financing tool, speed interconnection, create energy-ready zones, strengthen consumer protections in competitive supply, and allow broader state procurement of energy resources. They said the package could save consumers billions over time and would help address high energy costs, especially during extreme heat and winter spikes. Committee members pressed the administration on several provisions, especially securitization, asking whether the bill requires an apples-to-apples comparison of total costs over time, including interest and lost tax revenue, versus paying through rates. Administration witnesses said DPU review and public comment would be required and said they would work to clarify the language if needed. Members also questioned the bill’s solar and procurement provisions, including reduced net metering compensation for some large facilities, the scope of all-resource procurements, and whether hydro, solar, and nuclear would be included; the administration said those resources were contemplated and that procurement would still be reviewed by DPU. Other questions focused on the short-term relief from bill changes, the treatment of low- and moderate-income discounts, and whether the bill’s heat pump and Mass Save reforms would help customers who cannot afford upfront costs. Several witnesses and committee members discussed Mass Save reforms, including securitization of program costs, on-bill financing, pre-approval of rebates, and shifting program administration away from gas utilities. Administration witnesses said the changes were intended to reduce volatility, lower administrative costs, and better align costs with long-term savings. Questions also touched on geothermal permitting, municipal participation in offshore wind procurement, and the proposed repeal of the ballot requirement for nuclear power, which the administration defended as preserving future options under heavy review. No votes were taken during the hearing portion described. Supportive testimony came from labor, environmental, business, planning, and development groups. The AFL-CIO, NECA, and the Environmental League of Massachusetts backed the bill, emphasizing lower bills, job creation, labor standards, just transition protections, and cleaner energy. NAIOP, the Massachusetts Business Roundtable, and MAPC supported provisions on energy-ready zones, interconnection reform, microgrids, extreme-heat shutoff protections, and Mass Save improvements. A HEET representative praised the bill’s use of securitization, geothermal, and utility financing tools but urged guardrails and workforce protections. Overall, testimony was broadly favorable, with most witnesses calling for refinements rather than opposing the bill outright.

Transcript Highlights:

• buy what the company was worth, with interest, and it was really a great deal for us, and it really lends
• buy what the company was worth, with interest, and it was really a great deal for us, and it really lends

Committee: Senate Labor

Transcript Highlights:

• And again, I think that's why that lends itself to the discussion we previously had around a graduated
• And again, I think that's why that lends itself to the discussion we previously had around a graduated

Committee: Senate Business & Commerce

Transcript Highlights:

• I didn't lend her. I didn't lend her; she lent me.

Transcript Highlights:

• Whether it's insurance costs, whether it's the lending costs that they incur.
• Can I lend on this project?

Summary: The committee hearing centered first on AB 1243, the Polluters Pay Climate Superfund Act of 2025, which would direct CalEPA to identify major fossil fuel companies, study California’s climate damages, and assess fees on the largest polluters to fund resilience, recovery, and related projects. The author and supporters argued the bill would make polluters help pay for climate harms, protect taxpayers, create jobs in construction and clean energy, and dedicate at least 40% of funds to disadvantaged communities. Support testimony came from environmental justice groups, labor, youth advocates, health organizations, and many individual witnesses, while opponents from the building trades, chambers of commerce, petroleum, and business groups warned it would raise fuel and consumer costs, threaten refinery jobs, and create legal and economic uncertainty. Committee members debated the bill’s impact on affordability, jobs, refinery closures, and whether cap-and-trade already addresses climate funding needs. The committee ultimately voted to give AB 1243 a due pass recommendation to the Judiciary Committee, with the roll left open. After AB 1243, the committee moved to another bill on wildfire mitigation and related resilience work. The author said the measure addresses a long-running wildfire problem and accepted committee amendments, describing the bill as a response to increasingly severe wildfire seasons and the need to help communities stay safe and rebuild after disasters. The transcript cuts off as that presentation begins, so no final action on the second bill is shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Whether it's insurance costs, whether it's the lending costs that they incur.
• Can I lend on this project?

Committee: House Natural Resources

Summary: The committee heard extensive testimony on AB 1243, the Polluters Pay Climate Superfund Act of 2025, which would direct CalEPA to identify major fossil fuel companies, study California’s climate damages, and assess fees on large polluters to fund resilience, recovery, and related projects. The author and supporters argued the bill would shift costs from taxpayers to the companies most responsible for climate harm, while dedicating funding to disadvantaged communities, home hardening, school resilience, clean energy, and jobs. Supporters included environmental justice groups, health advocates, youth activists, labor-aligned climate groups, and many individual witnesses who described climate impacts in their communities and urged polluters to pay. Opposition came primarily from the building trades, business groups, and petroleum-related organizations, who argued the bill would raise fuel and consumer costs, create uncertainty for business, and accelerate refinery closures and job losses. They said California already has cap-and-trade, which they described as a better tool for funding climate action and reducing emissions, and warned that retroactive liability for past emissions was legally and economically problematic. Committee members questioned both sides on consumer impacts, job effects, and whether cap-and-trade already addresses the problem. After discussion, the committee voted 6-1 to pass AB 1243 to the Judiciary Committee, with Assembly Member Ellis voting no and Assembly Member Muratsuchi not voting. The chair and members noted the bill would continue to be discussed, and the author closed by emphasizing the need to fund climate resilience while holding polluters accountable. The transcript then began a separate presentation on a wildfire mitigation bill, with the author introducing committee amendments and describing wildfire prevention and recovery needs, but that item was not completed in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Do you guys monitor it if they're not moving the money or lending the money and you're still giving them
• Do you guys monitor it if they're not moving the money or lending the money and you're still giving them

Transcript Highlights:

• And I think those skills lend my ear to this. I have a background in agriculture here on Oahu.
• I have strived during my entire adult life to serve, lend a helping hand, and be a productive member
• I have strived during my entire adult life to serve, lend a helping hand, and be a productive member

Committee: Senate Water, Land, Culture and the Arts

Summary: The committee took up several gubernatorial nominations, beginning with GM 640 for Juanita Rio Colón to the Commission on Water Resource Management. Public testimony and the nominee’s remarks strongly emphasized her water-system management background, Native Hawaiian stewardship values, and representation for Molokai. Committee members praised her qualifications and neighbor-island perspective, and also discussed broader concerns about reforming the Water Commission, including a separate bill to create a more independent authority and reduce politics in water decisions. Colón said she supported the restructuring effort and would serve with integrity and attention to constitutional water rights and climate resilience. The committee then heard GM 639 for Moses Haia III to the same commission. DLNR and OHA testified, and Haia described his long legal career, prior work on the Waihole contested case, and experience with Native Hawaiian rights and water law. Members asked about his ability to serve impartially given his advocacy background; Haia acknowledged that some may perceive a conflict from his prior work but said he did not believe it was a reasonable conflict and would follow the law and balance competing interests. The discussion again returned to the proposed Water Commission restructuring, which Haia said he supported as a way to provide independence and balance. Next, the committee considered GM 649 for Gilbert Coloma to the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission. DLNR and other testifiers explained that this was a new interstate commission created under the 2024 act, with Hawaii joining six U.S. states to address fisheries issues across state boundaries. Coloma, a commercial fisher from Hilo, said he brought more than 40 years of industry, cultural, and traditional experience and would represent Hawaii’s fishing communities. Members asked about the commission’s structure, meeting rotation, and funding, and were told the state covers dues through special funds. The committee also briefly took up GM 692 for Riley Smith’s reappointment to the Board of Land and Natural Resources. The Hawaii Cattlemen’s Council supported him, while Sierra Club Hui raised concerns about prior decisions affecting Native Hawaiian rights and public trust resources. Smith said he supported more residential uses in East Kapolei if the necessary planning and environmental review changes were made, and he began responding to questions about prior BLNR litigation before the transcript cut off.

Transcript Highlights:

• So how that works is we participate with local lenders who lend all the money, and then we buy back 45%
• So how that works is we participate with local lenders who lend all the money, and then we buy back 45%
• So how that works is we participate with local lenders who lend all the money, and then we buy back 45%

Committee: House Agriculture Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• would</c><00:43:03.680><c> like</c><00:43:03.839><c> to</c><00:43:04.480><c> um</c><00:43:05.280><c> lend
• </c><00:43:05.599><c> my</c><00:43:05.839><c> support</c> Um I I would like to um lend my support Um
• I I would like to um lend my support uh<00:43:06.720><c> to</c><00:43:06.960><c> the</c><00:43:07.119

Committee: Senate Energy, Utilities, Environment, and Climate

Transcript Highlights:

• Next, we have Brian Lending, Haley Tarvin, Zachary Lending, and Alyssa Story. Yes.
• Zachary Lending registered representing himself against SB 3 and did not testify.

Bills: HB28 , SB3 , SB 3

Committee: House State Affairs

Keywords: hemp regulation, consumable products, cannabinoids, state health, youth protection, licensing fees, criminal offenses, flash flood, flood warning, outdoor warning siren, emergency alert, disaster preparedness, flood mitigation, Hill Country floods, Texas Water Development Board, municipalities, counties, local government mandate, public safety, grant program

Transcript Highlights:

• ><01:15:47.960><c> like</c> because I wouldn't want to be like because I wouldn't want to be like lending
• <c> from</c><01:15:49.719><c> other</c><01:15:50.719><c> departments</c><01:15:51.199><c> who</c> lending
• out from other departments who lending out from other departments who also<01:15:51.639><c> could</c

Committee: Senate State and Local Government

Transcript Highlights:

• And I want to thank my Assembly colleague for lending her time and expertise to today's hearing.

Summary: The hearing focused on the expected health coverage losses tied to H.R. 1, the resulting pressure on California’s county indigent care systems, and what data and policy changes the Legislature may need before the next budget cycle. Chair Hart and Assemblymember Addis framed the issue as a major rollback in coverage that could leave more Californians uninsured and push more people into county safety-net programs. Members repeatedly emphasized the need for baseline, county-by-county data on eligibility, benefits, caseloads, and funding before making larger structural decisions. The Legislative Analyst’s Office explained the history of county indigent care under Welfare and Institutions Code 17000, the shift in funding through 1991 realignment, and the later redirection of funds to CalWORKs. LAO said county programs vary widely in scope and eligibility, that current realignment funding does not automatically rise with demand, and that the Legislature faces tradeoffs if it changes the funding structure. Administration witnesses from Finance and DHCS projected large Medi-Cal and Covered California enrollment losses, with DHCS estimating more than 1 million Medi-Cal members could eventually lose coverage under work requirements and redeterminations, and noting that a new federal rule could make exemptions more restrictive. Officials also said there is no single statewide real-time data system for uninsured or indigent care populations, though some hospital and utilization data exists with significant lags. County representatives from Santa Barbara, San Diego, and Tulare described how their indigent care programs are being rebuilt or strained after years of low demand. They warned that many newly uninsured residents will need only basic, emergency-oriented care under county programs, not the preventive and continuous care available through Medi-Cal, and said that without new state support counties may have to divert funds from public health or reduce other services. Several counties asked for bridge funding, technical statutory changes, and flexibility to adjust realignment methodology. The California Health Care Foundation closed by arguing that the problem is statewide and needs a statewide solution rather than a patchwork county response.

Transcript Highlights:

• I also want to thank my Assembly colleague for lending her time and expertise to today's hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• I completed the LEND fellowship at UMass Chan and worked at the Federation for Children with Special

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Education

Summary: The Joint Committee on Education held a hearing focused primarily on special education-related bills, with testimony centered on two major themes: transition planning for students aging out of school-based services at age 22, and the fiscal strain special education costs place on districts. Committee members explained hearing procedures, noted the House was in formal session, and periodically stepped out for votes while staff recorded testimony. A separate bill on special education due process was also taken up briefly, along with a bill on special education finance and another on equitable access/data reporting. On House Bill 752 and Senate Bill 313, witnesses from the Arc of Massachusetts, the Massachusetts Down Syndrome Congress, the Developmental Disabilities Council, families, self-advocates, and Senator Comerford described the “Turning 22” transition as a crisis point that often leaves families without adult placements, services, or clear communication. Testimony emphasized earlier planning, more accountability, better data collection, and a commission to improve coordination and residential placement. Several parents and advocates shared personal accounts of traumatic transitions, delayed placements, and the need for plans to begin at least a year before age 22. The committee later closed testimony on these bills after hearing from all signed-up speakers. House Bill 4217, on special education due process, drew support from Representative Sullivan-Almeida, parents, and advocates who argued that the burden of proof should shift from families to school districts. Testimony described costly legal battles, delays, and parents having to become experts in reading instruction or hire advocates and attorneys to secure services. Brody Dwyer, a 10-year-old student with dyslexia, and his mother described how evidence-based instruction helped him after years of struggle. The committee also heard testimony on House Bill 546/Senate Bill 317, which would require DESE to publish cross-tabulated data on race, disability, gender, income, and other factors; advocates said this would better expose disparities and help address the school-to-prison pipeline. Finally, on House Bill 691/Senate Bill 430, school leaders, educators, and union representatives testified that special education costs are outpacing district budgets and that increasing circuit breaker reimbursement and creating a commission to study long-term sustainability would help prevent staffing cuts and service reductions. No votes were taken during the hearing; the committee repeatedly closed testimony on individual bills as speakers finished and moved through the agenda.

Transcript Highlights:

• Massachusetts by providing $3 million for first-time homeowner counseling and foreclosure education for best lending

Summary: The House began with routine business, including the Pledge of Allegiance and adoption of three congratulatory resolutions honoring Eagle Scouts Charles Goodman, Jack Goodwin, and Liam LaCrooy. Members also adopted a House-Senate concurrence on House 4359, a Milford alcohol-license bill, after amending it to repeal Chapter 289 of the Acts of 2022 and set an effective date. The chamber then passed Senate 2596, establishing maintenance of private roads in Gloucester, and engrossed House 4887. The House also observed moments of silence for former Lynn City Councilor Richard Rick Ford, Louise M. Pedroso, and Mildred “Millie” Cox, and welcomed several guests, including students, civic visitors, and British Minister of State Stephen Doughty. The bulk of the session focused on budget amendments related to housing and emergency assistance. Amendment 1579, which would have tightened HomeBASE eligibility by requiring citizenship-status inquiries, was debated at length and defeated 26-130. Amendment 1582, which would have barred Housing and Livable Communities from conditioning grants on MBTA Communities Act compliance, was also rejected 27-126. Amendment 1583, which would have limited right-to-shelter eligibility to U.S. citizens with six months’ Massachusetts residency, was defeated 26-122. Supporters argued these changes would reduce costs and prioritize taxpayers; opponents said they would exclude lawful residents and undermine existing housing and shelter reforms. The House then adopted Consolidated Amendment F, covering energy, environmental affairs, and housing, by a vote of 154-0. Speakers highlighted major funding for rental vouchers, emergency shelter, HomeBASE, public housing, clean water, climate and agricultural programs, and food assistance. The chamber also considered and defeated Amendment 1218 on creating a data center commission, Amendment 1234 on eliminating certain energy surcharges, and several education-related amendments from Ms. Sullivan-Almeida: changes to special education reimbursement thresholds and rates, and a proposal to make regional school transportation funding mandatory rather than subject to appropriation. Those education amendments were all rejected after roll-call votes. Amendment 1580 on ending vocational school lottery admissions was withdrawn by its sponsor before a vote. The transcript ends as debate continues on Amendment 1308, which would increase a budget line item, but no final action on that amendment is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• Research shows that closing racial gaps in wages, education, housing, and lending could have added $16

Summary: The Assembly convened, initially lacked a quorum, and then completed the roll call, prayer, and pledge. Members observed a moment of silence for the fatal B-52 crash at Edwards Air Force Base in Assemblymember Lackey’s district. The body then handled a series of procedural motions, including re-referrals of numerous Senate bills to different committees, suspending rules for committee notices, and taking up the budget bill, AB 109, without reference to file for concurrence in Senate amendments. Debate on AB 109, the 2026 budget act, centered on competing views of the state’s fiscal condition and policy priorities. Supporters said the budget balances the current and next year’s budget, reduces the structural deficit, builds reserves, protects health care, schools, housing, food assistance, and other safety-net programs, and responds to federal cuts under H.R. 1. Opponents argued the budget increases taxes and costs, shortchanges schools, underfunds Proposition 36, relies on gimmicks, and does not adequately address public safety, cost of living, or long-term sustainability. Several members also highlighted specific provisions such as hospital support, Medi-Cal and IHSS protections, child care, immigrant legal services, prison closure, and funding for courts and victim services. A motion by Assemblymember DeMaio to return AB 109 to the Senate failed on a roll call vote, 13 ayes to 45 noes. The Assembly then voted on concurrence in the Senate amendments to AB 109; the measure passed, and the Senate amendments were concurred in without objection, with immediate transmittal to the Governor. Afterward, the Assembly moved to the daily file and took up SCR 89, a resolution affirming diversity, equity, and inclusion. Supporters from several caucuses framed DEI as a core California value and a response to federal attacks, while opponents criticized DEI as divisive. The transcript ends during debate on SCR 89, before any final vote is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• Research shows that closing racial gaps in wages, education, housing, and lending could have added $16

Transcript Highlights:

• To date, these loans have been paid back with interest to ensure that the fee payers for the lending

Summary: The subcommittee heard May Revision proposals for higher education, beginning with the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education. Finance proposed a one-time $10 million General Fund backfill to repay a special fund loan used to cover litigation costs, plus provisional language to allow budget flexibility for a remaining legal expense and to repay the loan without interest. The LAO opposed shifting the litigation costs to the General Fund and raised legal concerns about waiving interest on the loan, noting that special fund loans have historically been repaid with interest. Members asked about the litigation amount and the estimated interest savings, which Finance said would be about $245,000. The committee then discussed University of California funding, including the Governor’s proposed compact funding and a $1.5 million one-time increase for the First Star foster youth program at UC campuses. UC said the program has strong outcomes at UCLA, including a 100% college-going rate and high college completion rates, and that the new funding would expand the program to additional campuses and eventually be self-supporting through fundraising. The LAO recommended rejecting the proposal, arguing that UC already has overlapping outreach programs, including the Early Academic Outreach Program, and that the new initiative would duplicate existing services. Several senators questioned whether the state should expand a new program instead of strengthening existing ones, while UC and Finance emphasized the program’s focus on foster youth and its high success rates. For the California Community Colleges, Finance outlined the May Revision’s increase to the Student-Centered Funding Formula COLA from 2.41% to 4.31%, along with enrollment growth funding, categorical COLAs, deferred maintenance, and other ongoing and one-time investments. The Chancellor’s Office supported the flexible “super COLA” approach and asked for more enrollment growth funding, arguing that many districts are already above current targets and that unfunded growth restricts access. The LAO recommended funding at least the statutory COLA, redirecting some ongoing funds to enrollment growth or one-time priorities, and rejecting the $9.7 million Adult Learner Demonstration Project because districts already have incentives to do similar work. Senators pressed Finance and the Chancellor’s Office on the use of COLA funds to cover the new paid pregnancy disability leave requirement, the impact on hold-harmless and basic-aid districts, and whether the state should fund actual enrollment growth rather than a flat COLA. The committee also reviewed California Student Aid Commission proposals, including adjustments to Cal Grant and Middle Class Scholarship funding, continued Golden State Teacher Grant funding, and implementation of the federal Workforce Pell program. Finance said the Middle Class Scholarship changes reflected updated caseload estimates and that the higher 35% unmet-need level had been one-time funding, while CSAC urged continued support and noted the importance of financial aid for student success. The LAO recommended rejecting additional Golden State Teacher Grant funding as not well-targeted and urged caution on Workforce Pell trailer bill language, citing uncertainty about federal rules, ongoing administrative workload, and the need for clearer implementation planning. Members also raised concerns about declining CADAA applications and the need to better promote state aid for undocumented and mixed-status students. No votes were taken during the transcripted portion, and the committee moved through the agenda items with questions and testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• Massachusetts by providing $3 million for first-time homeowner counseling and foreclosure education for best lending