Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:43:18.400><c> would</c> rate is based on, um then the rate would rate is based on, um then the
• One part of this is rate reform.
• The hourly rate on this current flat rate range is between $8.12 an hour to $15.97 per hour.
• </c> inflationary rate? inflationary rate? I<01:14:35.680><c> don't</c><01:14:35.920><c> know.
• So I appreciate it. up up updated the rates. up up updated the rates.

Committee: House Human Services Finance and Policy

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• support rate modifications Wes Bloom and support rate modifications Wes Bloom and Rick<00:24:31.480><
• rates, and administrative costs.
• rates, and administrative costs.
• rates, and administrative costs.
• </c> the components to the cfss rate the components to the cfss rate framework<00:25:46.720><c> to</c

Committee: Senate Human Services

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The corporate income tax rate: we have the second-highest rate of corporate income tax in the United
• The corporate income tax rate: we have the second-highest rate of corporate income tax in the United
• The corporate income tax rate: we have the second-highest rate of corporate income tax in the United
• X could either be the growth rate of the population plus the growth rate of inflation.
• </c><00:54:10.680><c> a</c> rate a a little or the matching rate a rate a a little or the matching rate

Committee: House Ways and Means

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• We are allowed to fully explore these rate cases.
• them whole without having to wait until a new rate case.
• Rate case, negotiated for two and a half months.
• We made it a singular issue in the Tico rate case.
• It's not in the rate case statute.

Summary: The Joint Committee on Public Counsel Oversight met to receive an overview from Public Counsel Walt Trierweiler on the work of his office. He described the office’s role in representing Florida utility customers in rate and service cases, including investor-owned electric, water, and wastewater matters, storm cost recovery, fuel clauses, storm protection plans, and specialized dockets. He emphasized the office’s use of depositions, expert witnesses, customer correspondence, and service-hearing testimony to challenge unsupported utility costs and seek “fair, just, reasonable, and affordable” outcomes for customers. Trierweiler highlighted several current issues, including affordability, data centers, and the growing use of AI in reviewing large utility filings. He said the office has begun using affordability experts and data center witnesses, and that data center-related utility proposals raise concerns about energy demand, water use, and community impacts. He also expressed caution about AI and machine learning because of confidential utility information, while acknowledging that utilities, regulators, and his office are increasingly using such tools. Members asked questions about how customer input is gathered, how profit is evaluated in rate cases, the role of settlement agreements, and whether the office is considering water consumption impacts from data centers. Trierweiler said customer feedback largely comes in through hearings, correspondence, and direct calls rather than office-led canvassing, and that his office seeks to limit imprudent costs while allowing utilities a fair return. He also explained that the office may file motions for reconsideration and appeals after PSC orders, and that it sometimes submits alternative settlement proposals even when approval is unlikely, to present a different option for the commission’s consideration. No votes were taken, and the committee adjourned after concluding its agenda.

Transcript Highlights:

• So from commercial carriers, not to Medicaid, what's the rate? Why is the rate?
• Medicaid, what's the rate? Why is the rate so low?
• The rate is what it is. The last time we had a rate change for inpatient Medicaid was in 2007.
• So where does the rate that we get for our per diem rate come from?
• And we'll look at the per diem rate.

Committee: All ALC-HOSPITAL, MEDICAID, & DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES STUDY SUBCOMMITTEE

Summary: The subcommittee met to review Arkansas DHS hospital spending and reimbursement methods, with Secretary Janet Mann and Deputy Secretary Misty Eubanks explaining Medicaid hospital payments. They described fee-for-service per diem payments, cost settlements, and the upper payment limit (UPL) program, noting that SFY 2025 hospital payments included $688 million in inpatient/outpatient claims, $473 million in UPL payments, $248 million in cost settlements, and about $47 million in other payments such as graduate medical education and disproportionate share hospital funds. Members asked about why per diem rates vary, how cost settlements work, why UPL applies mainly to private hospitals, and how assessment fees are structured and funded. DHS said the hospital assessment fee is broad-based and uniform, used as the state share to draw federal funds, and that supplemental hospital payments after federal match totaled $548 million with no general revenue used. The Arkansas Hospital Association’s Jody Ann Tritt then gave a broader overview of the hospital landscape, explaining the different hospital types in the state, including critical access hospitals, rural emergency hospitals, PPS hospitals, and specialty hospitals. She said Arkansas hospitals face financial strain, citing a negative 5.18% patient service margin statewide and lower reimbursement than surrounding states. She argued that Arkansas hospitals are paid less than hospitals in neighboring states for similar services, that commercial payer rates and administrative burdens are a major problem, and that Medicaid and Medicare rates remain below cost even with UPL support. She also said hospitals are the backbone of community care, provide emergency and public health functions, and are looking for ways to invest in technology and telehealth but often lack the revenue to do so. Members pressed for clearer data on hospital finances, reimbursement adequacy, and the impact of commercial insurers. Tritt said the association had just authorized a statewide survey to gather updated financial information from hospitals, which she said would take about a year to complete. She also explained that Medicaid pays weekly, Medicare and commercial plans can involve delays and denials, and that hospitals often spend significant resources on revenue cycle work. The discussion ended with a brief update on assisted living reimbursement: DHS said one facility, The Pillars of the Community in Crossett, had announced closure, nine Living Choices waiver clients were being transitioned, and the updated rate study would be available after cost reports are collected, likely before the end of the fiscal year. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• And we have increased rates.
• So that data has now all come in, and when we set the rate, the capitation rates for calendar year 2026
• So there was a rate study. We did increase the rates in FY25.
• We do expect the rate study, the final rate study, to be completed by the end of this month.
• The rate study will, through this rate study, will there be identifiers to help with?

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Yes, but local data shows rising exemption rates and dropping vaccine rates.
• High immunization rates in Southborough won't help Northborough families if our school rates are low.
• Religious exemption rates have had no impact on overall vaccination rates, which remain historically
• Massachusetts already has high vaccination rates and a low religious exemption rate.
• rates within the community.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Public Health

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Public Health held a hearing on several vaccination-related bills, including proposals to eliminate non-medical or religious exemptions for school immunizations (notably H. 2554 and S. 1557), a bill to require or improve reporting and administration of immunization data and exemptions (described as the Community Immunity Act, S. 1618), and H. 2431, which would prohibit COVID-19, mRNA, or gene-altering vaccine requirements. The committee also heard testimony on H. 2463, which would classify funeral directors as public health workers for vaccine-priority purposes during emergencies. The chair reviewed testimony rules and repeatedly asked speakers to keep comments orderly and brief so the committee could hear as many people as possible. No votes were taken during the hearing. Testimony on H. 2554 and S. 1557 was sharply divided. Pediatricians, infectious disease specialists, public health advocates, and groups such as the Massachusetts Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, Massachusetts Medical Society, March of Dimes, Massachusetts Families for Vaccines, and several parents supported eliminating religious exemptions, arguing that vaccination protects medically vulnerable children and adults, improves herd immunity, and helps prevent outbreaks of measles, pertussis, and other diseases. They cited local school data showing pockets of lower coverage and incomplete reporting, and several speakers referenced outbreaks in other states and the need for stronger, more consistent reporting and exemption management. Opponents argued the bills would infringe on religious freedom and parental rights, force families to choose between faith and education, and unfairly target a small number of families; some also said Massachusetts already has high vaccination rates and that the real issue is incomplete data or the gap population rather than religious exemptions. H. 2431 drew testimony from supporters who said COVID-era mandates caused job losses, privacy concerns, and harm, and that the bill would prevent future requirements for COVID, mRNA, or gene-altering vaccines in schools, workplaces, and public settings. Supporters described personal experiences with alleged vaccine injury or mandate-related hardship. H. 2463 was supported by the Massachusetts Funeral Directors Association, which argued funeral directors work in infection-facing settings and should be eligible for vaccine priority during public health emergencies. The hearing featured extensive public testimony but no committee action beyond hearing the bills and taking questions from members.

Transcript Highlights:

• of the gas climate credit to further reduce electric rates.
• Most Californians have seen their rates double over the last 10 years.
• It would increase their rate base by 50%.
• The biggest way is our credit rating, correct? Yeah, yeah.
• The biggest way is our credit rating. Correct. Yeah, yeah.

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Utilities and Energy heard two bills focused on electricity affordability and utility costs. AB 745, by Assembly Member Irwin, would restructure the California Climate Credit by shifting it from lump-sum payments to direct reductions in volumetric electricity rates and moving the credit to the summer months when bills are highest. The author and UC Santa Barbara economist Dr. Kyle Meng argued this could significantly lower summer rates and better help households during extreme heat. Supporters, including UCS, NRDC, and some labor representatives, favored the concept, with some urging that the gas climate credit also be redirected. No opposition testimony was presented, and the bill passed 18-0 to the floor. The committee then considered AB 825, also presented as an affordability package aimed at reducing electric bills by addressing wildfire mitigation costs, transmission financing, permitting delays, and a review of ratepayer-funded programs. The bill would authorize securitization for undergrounding expenses, remove the first $15 billion in undergrounding capital investments from the rate base for return purposes, create a public transmission financing program using Proposition 4 funds and IBank support, revive the California Power Authority as a public sponsor, and establish a task force to review energy efficiency and demand response programs. The author and witness Matt Friedman of The Utility Reform Network said the bill could save ratepayers billions over time through lower-cost public financing and securitization. Testimony on AB 825 was mixed. Support came from several consumer and clean-energy groups, while utilities and labor raised concerns about the bill’s impact on utility financial stability, wildfire fund participation, liability, and whether the $15 billion securitization cap could discourage undergrounding. Some witnesses also objected to the task force’s potential effect on energy efficiency and demand response programs. Committee members discussed the need to balance affordability with utility creditworthiness and wildfire safety, and several asked for more analysis of market impacts and liability issues. Despite those concerns, AB 825 passed the committee 13-0 and was sent to the floor.

Transcript Highlights:

• So when I talk about a rate framework and an input to the rate framework, that's kind of the context
• Aligning residential billing rates, so essentially within the rate framework for residential services
• Aligning residential billing rates, so essentially within the rate framework for residential services
• Aligning residential billing rates, so essentially within the rate framework for residential services
• :47:42.119><c> flat</c> rates rates themselves were always flat rates rates themselves were always flat

Committee: Senate Human Services

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Rates are set and what the financial impact will be.
• Public participation in rate-setting is essential.
• is and have more knowledge to be able to go to these tax rate hearings.
• and how much they're willing to go above the rate with the election.
• The purpose of the bill is to reduce the voter approval rate from 3.5% to 2.5%.

Bills: HB17 , HB16 , SB 10 , HB27 , HB23 , SB 15 , SB 18 , HB 17 , HB 16 , SB 10 , HB 27 , HB 23 , SB 15 , SB 18

Keywords: property tax, school funding, enrollment changes, inflation adjustment, tax rate notice, judicial administration, court reform, juvenile diversion, court security, mental health services, drug offenses, constitutional amendments, property tax exemption, ad valorem tax, Texas Tax Code, nonprofit corporation, charitable organization, educational nonprofit, scientific nonprofit, agriculture support

Transcript Highlights:

• So this is just the rate piece, doing the rate increase for those three populations.
• being used for this rate increase, it dropped the orthodontic rates from where we were previously.
• They get 80% of the physician rate. That's just their rate. That's just one example.
• So the bifurcated rate to use Mr.
• They get 80% of the physician rate. That's just their rate. That's just one example.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• WE LOOKED AT THE RESEARCH QUESTION IS THERE A DIFFERENT IN THE FIRST ATTEMPT AND PASS RATES.
• HERE THIS SLIDE IS SHOWING YOU OUR NCLEX PN PASS RATES.
• HOW MANY PASS ON THE SECOND ATTEMPT AND DO OUR RATES RISE BECAUSE IT IS LIKE A SITUATION ETC.?
• THESE INTERVENTIONS, HAVE YOU SEEN A SUCCESSFUL PASS RATE AFTER PROVIDING THESE INTERVENTIONS?
• NUMBER 1 YOU HAD TO BE ON PROBATION AND YOU HAVE TO FINISH WITH A 30% PASSAGE RATE OR LOWER.

Transcript Highlights:

• These rates are updated twice per year.
• make the change after one year to a different rate?
• prevailing wage rates.
• And then so you knew what the rate was for the workers.
• And so when we are freezing that minimum rate for the ...when we are freezing that minimum rate for the

Summary: The committee heard public testimony on several labor-related bills. On Substitute Senate Bill 5874, staff and Senator McEwen described a proposal to let the Employment Security Department waive penalties for minor quarterly reporting errors by employers, especially inadvertent electronic filing issues involving occupational codes and job titles. No one testified in opposition, and the public hearing was closed. The committee then heard extensive testimony on Engrossed Second Substitute Senate Bill 5847, which would expand injured workers’ access to medical providers, allow medically appropriate departures from L&I treatment rules, prohibit employers from requiring treatment from a specific provider, and set timelines for utilization review. Supporters, including workers’ advocates and union representatives, said the bill would improve access to care and reduce delays, while business groups opposed it as weakening the provider network and raised concerns about costs and claim duration. L&I said it could implement the bill with a technical fix and noted that the fiscal note was still being updated. A previously adopted claims-manager staffing amendment was discussed but not included in the version heard. On Engrossed Second Substitute Senate Bill 5061, the committee heard testimony on requiring public works contracts to update prevailing wage rates annually rather than freezing them at bid time. Labor groups supported the bill as protecting workers from wage erosion on long projects, while contractor groups opposed it unless amended to allow change orders for wage increases above 5 percent, citing unpredictable jumps in prevailing wage rates and added risk for small contractors. L&I requested a delayed effective date to July 1, 2028 because of IT changes. The committee also heard testimony on Senate Bill 5944, which would make missed or canceled appointment payments bargained economic compensation for language access providers, and on Substitute Senate Bill 5972, which would extend interest arbitration rights to correctional employees in city and county jails regardless of county population. Labor groups supported both bills; counties and a city representative opposed 5972 over cost concerns and asked for fiscal safeguards. Finally, the committee heard Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill 6302, which would require L&I to investigate possible misclassification when three or more independent contractors are used for the same type of finishing work on a public works project. Labor and contractor groups both supported the amended version, saying it targets misclassification without banning legitimate independent contractors. The hearing ended after testimony, with no votes or final committee actions taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• On the federal funds rate, the interest rate that's really important, and I'll get back to that in a
• So in January, they did not cut rates.
• That dip in the rate... ...that dip in the rate reflects exactly what I said: there was a 150 basis point
• The ERS rate is going up by a little over 1%. ...the ERS rate is going up by a little over 1%.
• For an increase to the PIP rate up to 94, that rate has been at $800.

Keywords: 924, joint, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Even with aggressive efforts made during the rate application review by the department's rate regulation
• By the plan's own testimony, they need an 80% rate increase to have actuarially sound rates.
• So this is kind of the situation: Fair Plan rates are here, not admitted insurer rates are here.
• Fair Plan rates are here, not admitted insurer rates are here.
• First, rate adequacy.

Summary: The Assembly Insurance Committee held its first outcomes review oversight hearing on the residential fair plan clearinghouse program created by AB 3012. Chair and members focused on whether the program is actually helping depopulate the California Fair Plan and move policyholders back to the voluntary market. The Fair Plan and Department of Insurance testified that the program exists as a platform for admitted and, in some cases, non-admitted insurers to review Fair Plan policies and make offers through the broker of record, but they acknowledged limited participation and limited results. CDI said it has received no formal complaints specific to the clearinghouse, but identified obstacles including only 11 participating residential insurers, the broker-of-record requirement, compensation and appointment issues, and the lack of direct consumer contact. CDI said about 730 residential risks have moved to voluntary market coverage through the program from June 2021 through April 30, 2025, and opt-outs are under 1%. Committee members pressed witnesses on the program’s opacity, the lack of data on offers made versus policies actually moved, and whether the clearinghouse is functioning as intended. CDI and the Fair Plan said they do not have data on how many offers have been made, only on cancellations that are self-reported and marked as clearinghouse-related. Members also raised regional growth in Fair Plan enrollment, especially on the Central Coast, and concerns about underinsurance when policyholders move back to the regular market. CDI recommended more mandatory reporting, broader broker education, possible direct offers to policyholders after a period of time, and changes to commission and appointment rules to reduce barriers to insurer participation. The second panel of industry witnesses generally agreed the clearinghouse is not a stand-alone solution and said its effectiveness depends on a healthier admitted market and actuarially sound Fair Plan rates. Independent agents and brokers, admitted-market insurers, and surplus lines representatives said the current system is constrained by low rate adequacy, limited insurer appetite for high-risk properties, operational friction, and misaligned incentives. Several witnesses suggested improvements such as better data sharing, clearer depopulation procedures, stronger broker education, and more flexible appointment or compensation rules. Some supported giving the program more time under the Sustainable Insurance Strategy, while others said the Legislature should consider whether to strengthen, modify, or potentially sunset the program if it continues to produce limited results. A public witness later reported that a new carrier had recently joined the clearinghouse and was working with brokers to bring in additional capacity.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think we're confusing market rate with inflation rate.
• The maximum rate, the authorized maximum rate, is what the voters vote on.
• So my millage rate went from 2.5…” “So my millage rate went from 2.5 to 2.0.
• In 2022, I levied my lower rate, the 2.0 that the legislative auditor lowered my rate to.
• rate.

Summary: The Ways and Means Committee met on March 26 and first reported favorably HB 287, which renews the Louisiana Tax Commission’s authority to levy certain fees used to fund its operations. The author and Tax Commission representatives said the fee supports the commission’s appeals and assessment work and is not a new charge. The committee then adopted a technical amendment and reported HB 553 favorably as amended; that bill expands the Assessor Certification Program Committee from 5 to 11 members and adjusts education and recertification requirements for assessors. The committee then took up HB 412, a constitutional amendment on property assessment and reappraisal. After an amendment in concept was adopted to remove the bill’s proposed 30-year homestead exemption, members questioned the remaining provisions, which would tie annual assessment growth to CPI and move the reassessment cycle from four years to five. The author, assessors, and local government representatives debated whether the proposal would create predictable tax growth or instead leave many properties assessed below market value and shift burdens to businesses and local services. The author ultimately voluntarily deferred HB 412 and its companion HB 340 for further work. Members next heard HB 514 and HB 961, both senior-property-tax measures, but both were voluntarily deferred after brief discussion and technical amendments. HB 514 would have created an optional additional homestead exemption for certain homeowners age 65 and older, phased in over time and tied to income and a surviving-spouse provision; HB 961 would have extended related eligibility to certain trusts. The committee also deferred HB 515, 543, and 540 to future meetings. Finally, the committee favorably reported HB 521 and HB 570, both dealing with millage and reassessment rules. Supporters, including local government and industry groups, argued the bills would give taxing authorities more flexibility to avoid being forced to levy the maximum millage simply to preserve future authority. Assessors and local officials explained current reassessment and roll-forward rules, while the author said the bills would reduce pressure to overtax residents and businesses. HB 521 was reported favorably, and HB 570 was reported favorably as amended after adoption of a six-part amendment set, mostly technical changes.

Transcript Highlights:

• rate, is $1,637 a day.
• Medicaid rates don't reflect today's cost of care.
• Increasing pay for many comes through Medicaid rates.
• There was $450 per day on top of your assessed rate.
• There was $450 up to $450 per day on top of your assessed rate.

Committee: Joint Joint Legislative Executive Committee on Planning for Aging and Disability Issues

Summary: The committee met for what was described as its final meeting, with members and staff reflecting on the work of the Joint Legislative Executive Committee on Aging and Long-Term Care and noting that future work would likely shift to standing health and wellness committees. The meeting began with introductions and then moved into updates on major initiatives that originated from the committee, including Washington Cares, the Dementia Action Collaborative, and Medicaid long-term care programs. Presenters emphasized that these efforts were developed through long-term legislative-executive collaboration and were intended to help Washington prepare for the state’s aging population. On Washington Cares, DSHS described the program’s development from a 2014 research effort to its 2019 enactment, premium collection beginning in 2023, portability improvements in 2024, and 2025 changes including a grandfathered opt-out fix and a framework for supplemental private long-term care insurance. The agency said benefits are expected to go fully live next summer, with a pilot of up to 400 applicants planned for next January. On dementia policy, the Dementia Action Collaborative reported on the state dementia plan, Project ECHO training for providers, and pilot dementia-capable community programs at area agencies on aging, citing preliminary results that about 85% of family caregivers said services helped people remain at home. DSHS also reviewed Medicaid Transformation Project initiatives, including Medicaid Alternative Care, Tailored Supports for Older Adults, presumptive eligibility, and health-related social needs benefits such as rental assistance, nutrition support, and home modifications. The committee then heard an emerging issues panel from ombuds and disability advocates. Patricia Hunter of the long-term care ombuds program raised concerns about staffing shortages, resident rights, surveillance technology, private equity ownership of facilities, and illegal discharges or evictions. Betty Sweeterman of the Developmental Disabilities Ombuds discussed people stuck in hospitals without medical need, gaps in behavioral health services for people with developmental disabilities, and the need for better workforce training. Todd Carlyle of Disability Rights Washington urged expansion and bundling of community supports such as PACT, GOSH, and peer bridgers to reduce repeated institutionalization and support discharge from inpatient psychiatric settings. Provider and labor panels followed, with nursing home, assisted living, supported living, and union representatives all emphasizing workforce shortages, low wages, Medicaid rate inadequacy, case management bottlenecks, behavioral health complexity, and the need for more flexible care models and stronger accountability for rate increases. No formal votes were taken; the meeting ended with public comment on manufactured housing and closing remarks thanking staff and participants for the committee’s work.

Transcript Highlights:

• But the modern bottleneck we see with the finance, finance rates, interest rates, and everything in the
• rates for that project.
• So for Rates for that project. Next slide.
• We are a market-rate housing developer.
• For market-rate infill projects and most market-rate builders, CEQA still remains the single largest

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Housing Finance and Affordability held its first hearing of 2025 to examine California’s housing finance system, with opening remarks emphasizing the state’s severe housing shortage, high costs, and the need for practical recommendations to the Legislature and Governor. Co-chairs described the committee as an educational and problem-solving forum focused on financing housing production, first-time homeownership, mixed-income developments, and affordability across the income spectrum. Witnesses from state agencies and the development sector were invited to explain how housing is financed and where the system is breaking down. Panelists from the California Housing Partnership, the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency, the Tax Credit Allocation Committee/State Treasurer’s Office, CalHFA, and Related outlined the “capital stack” used to finance affordable housing, stressing that projects typically rely on multiple public and private sources, including federal and state low-income housing tax credits, tax-exempt bonds, state subsidies, local funds, and rental income. Speakers noted that affordable housing rents generally cannot support full project costs without public subsidy, and that recent federal changes—especially the expansion of the 4% and 9% tax credit programs and the reduction of the bond financing threshold for 4% credits—should allow California to finance substantially more units. CalHFA also described its homeownership programs, including My Home, Dream For All, and disaster-related mortgage assistance, as well as its multifamily lending and bond issuance programs. Several witnesses and committee members emphasized that the system remains too complex, too slow, and underfunded. They pointed to the need for more state funding, a housing bond, a permanent funding source, and better coordination among agencies, while also citing recent streamlining efforts such as AB 434’s SuperNOFA, AB 519’s one-stop-shop working group, and the planned California Housing and Homeless Agency reorganization. Members raised concerns about equity, access, missing-middle housing, gender and racial disparities, and whether current programs adequately serve extremely low-income households and those at risk of homelessness. No formal votes or actions were taken during the hearing; the discussion ended with committee members and witnesses agreeing that both funding and administrative reform are needed to increase production and improve affordability.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> electricity rates. electricity rates.
• The utilities' role is to get that rate and that rate effectively reflects what the market rate is in
• The utilities' role is to get that rate, and that rate effectively reflects what the market rate is in
• The utilities' role is to get that rate, and that rate effectively reflects what the market rate is in
• The utilities' role is to get that rate, and that rate effectively reflects what the market rate is in

Committee: Senate Energy and Natural Resources

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• rates for your constituents.
• and rates of return.
• and rates of return.
• and rates of return.
• , the rate-case work?

Bills: HF3298

Committee: House Energy Finance and Policy

Keywords: underground storage tanks, petroleum, reimbursement program, environmental regulation, pollution control, 1183, house