Transcript Highlights:

• <00:02:43.440> that one of the um uh model programs that one of the um uh model programs that
• This is not a mandatory program.
• The purpose is as this program out.
• great great program. Um just wanted a great great program.
• "Look, we know the economic incentives. "Look, we know the economic incentives.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:03 Roll Call 00:00:08 Discussion of Indiana Residential Infrastructure Fund 00:01:27 Discussion of Affordable Housing Trust Fund 00:33:30 Discussion of Urban Infill 01:12:37 Approval of Minutes from July Meeting 01:39:00 Adjournment 01:39:42, 958, all

Summary: The Housing Task Force heard a presentation from Anita Sanford of the Homebuilders Association of Kentucky and Sheri Cybert of Indiana’s Residential Infrastructure Fund about Indiana’s low-interest loan program for local housing infrastructure. They described the program as a voluntary, locally driven model that helps communities finance roads, sewers, sidewalks, traffic lights, turning lanes, and other infrastructure needed for new housing development. Sanford emphasized that infrastructure and regulation are major drivers of housing costs, citing estimates that infrastructure can account for up to 30% of a home’s cost and regulations another 25%, and said the association is studying Kentucky-specific regulatory costs. She also noted that every $1,000 added to new home construction can price out about 2,000 Kentucky households. Cybert explained that Indiana’s program, administered through the Indiana Finance Authority, began in 2023 with $75 million appropriated over two years and has since closed 17 loans totaling $60.7 million, with more than 2,700 projected housing units. The program reserves 70% of funds for rural communities and 30% for urban communities, requires applications from local governments rather than developers, and asks communities to show need through a market study, describe the infrastructure and housing to be built, and provide preliminary engineering plans and a repayment source. She said the loans currently carry an interest rate around 3.5%, reset quarterly, and that the program has generated about $25 million in savings to communities compared with private borrowing. She also described recent Indiana legislative changes that encourage higher density and other zoning reforms, and said a majority of those local ordinance changes must be adopted for an application to be fundable. Members asked about the ordinance requirements, the funding split between rural and urban areas, repayment mechanisms, and whether there were caps on project size. Cybert said repayment is worked out case by case, often through existing or project-specific TIFs, temporary tax agreements, or letters of credit, and that the program has no cap on request size or income/affordability restrictions. She said the largest request funded was $19 million for a 700-unit project. Co-chair Mills and others discussed whether Kentucky could adopt a similar model and what it would cost, while Sanford and Cybert said they were still refining budget estimates. Later, Scott Welch, president of the Homebuilders Association of Kentucky, testified that upfront infrastructure costs are a major barrier in his projects, citing a $1 million pump station and road-widening and utility relocation costs as examples, and said an infrastructure fund would help get projects off the ground.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we stood up this program.
• :50.479> state The enlistment incentives provide state The enlistment incentives provide state
• Incentives. Uh like I said, uh please. Incentives.
• this this program, we actually shut this program<00:10:24.160> off<00:10:24.399> the<00
• . program. program.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Item 1, SB 739, Arreguín, related to the California Clean Mile Standard and Incentive Program.
• This bill will update the Clean Miles Standard and Incentive Program to ensure that the program is meeting
• offering a $4,000 incentive for drivers who switch to EVs.
• offering a $4,000 incentive for drivers who switch to EVs.
• We feel like this program should have accelerating targets.

Summary: The Assembly Communications and Conveyance Committee met with several bills on the agenda, beginning with SB 739 (Arreguín) on the Clean Miles Standard and Incentive Program for transportation network companies. The author and supporters from Lyft, Uber, and TechNet said the bill would update EV miles traveled and greenhouse gas targets to reflect current market conditions, add flexibility for CARB and the CPUC, and protect drivers from losing platform access while also creating a path for future electrification. Opponents including the American Lung Association, Sierra Club California, and NRDC argued the bill would weaken a program meant to accelerate EV adoption and should retain stronger targets. Members discussed affordability, charging infrastructure, and the need to balance climate goals with feasibility. The committee approved SB 739 as amended and re-referred it to Appropriations, later recording a 9-0 vote when the roll was completed. The committee then heard SB 1190 (Grove), the “Safe Passage for Youth Act,” which would regulate private youth transport services used for out-of-state residential placements. The author and sponsor testimony described abusive practices such as nighttime pickups, blindfolds, restraints, and emotional trauma, and said the bill would require CPUC permitting, TrustLine background checks, training, parental consent, and bans on certain practices. Support came from youth and disability advocates, with no opposition testimony. The bill was moved on a due pass as amended recommendation and later passed 9-0. SB 1191 (Ochoa Bogh) would extend the sunset for California High Cost Fund A and B universal service programs that help provide affordable telephone service in rural and high-cost areas. Supporters from rural telecom companies and industry groups said the funds are essential for maintaining service, 911 access, and emergency communications in remote communities. There was no opposition, and the committee advanced the bill on a due pass recommendation; it later passed 9-0. The consent item, SB 985 (Strickland) on the 911 emergency system, was also approved. Finally, the committee heard SB 1246 (Cortese) on autonomous vehicles and emergency response. The author and supporters from SEIU California and the California Professional Firefighters said the bill would require AV companies to provide incident response, notify local jurisdictions during system failures, ensure U.S.-based remote drivers, and prevent public safety workers from having to manage AV breakdowns. Industry opponents argued the bill intrudes on federal vehicle standards, gives local governments enforcement authority they should not have, and could create overly broad notification and response requirements. Members raised questions about local control, response times, and whether the bill was premature given existing DMV regulations. Despite those concerns, the committee passed SB 1246 on a due pass as amended recommendation, later recording a 7-1 vote. The committee then recessed and returned to complete roll calls before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• And much like our other incentive programs that are administered at the cabinet, you know, as governed
• programs.
• So uh the reimbursement program.
• . program. program.
• are more attracted to the cash program. are more attracted to the cash program.

Keywords: Cabinet for Economic Development – Bluegrass State Skills Corporation Overview 02:35 ----Discussion of BR 868, 2026 Regular Session 24:08, 958, all

Summary: The meeting began with a quorum call and approval of the August 21 minutes. The main presentation was from the Kentucky Cabinet for Economic Development on the Bluegrass State Skills Corporation (BSSC), which was created in 1984 and is administratively tied to the cabinet. Staff explained that BSSC supports workforce training for companies in Kentucky through two main programs: the grant-in-aid reimbursement program and the skills training investment tax credit. They also described the board’s structure, quarterly meetings, annual audit, and the metropolitan tax credit tied to UPS in Louisville, along with public-private training consortia supported by the program. The cabinet outlined eligibility and funding rules: applicants must be qualified companies, trainees must be full-time Kentucky residents meeting wage requirements, and eligible training includes in-house company-specific training, train-the-trainer efforts, safety/OSHA training, and outside training through KCTCS or other providers. Grant-in-aid is a 50% reimbursement program capped at $75,000 per company per fiscal year and $2,000 per trainee, while the tax credit is capped annually and is awarded on a first-come, first-served basis. Applications are scored based on county tier, wages, workforce development activity, veteran hiring, participation in consortia, and job growth. Members asked for data on trainees and industries served, and staff said they could provide it. They also discussed coordination with other workforce programs, especially KCTCS and the state’s TRAIN program, to avoid overlap and double dipping. Several members asked about program usage and differences between fiscal years. Staff said the tax credit is less popular because it is not refundable and requires tax liability, while grant-in-aid is more attractive because it is cash reimbursement. They said lower or delayed spending in some years can reflect one-year training windows, reimbursement lag, new facilities ramping up, consortia activity, and special allocations such as those tied to Ford facilities. Questions also covered support for new businesses, which staff said can receive favorable scoring for new jobs and may have funds set aside for new location projects. On veterans, staff said they connect companies to Kentucky Valor and other resources, but the program does not track veteran retention outcomes. The final discussion was on a draft bill related to the Kentucky Horse Park and the U.S. Center for SafeSport. Representative Vanessa Gracel and Kentucky Horse Park President Lee Carter explained that the proposal is intended to help the park maintain integrity and protect athletes, volunteers, coaches, trainers, and guests from abuse and misconduct. They described SafeSport’s federal role in Olympic and Paralympic sports and said they hope to move the draft forward as legislation in 2026. No votes were taken on the BSSC presentation or the horse park discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• One is excess money left over from tuition annuity contracts that people bought into on that program
• We have one of the biggest 529 plans in America because we started that program.
• It was basically to give an incentive to people to report tax fraud when they see it.
• And so what this bill would do would be to build on that and to give Virginians the incentive to blow
• Because right now, Virginians have zero incentive to do that.

Keywords: House Committee Room 1200, General Assembly Building, 976, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• programs.
• <00:14:01.279> uh section three is the tax incentive uh section three is the tax incentive
• <00:14:33.920> programs.
• <00:14:34.959> So<00:14:35.279> that development incentive programs.
• So that development incentive programs.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00 Attendance Roll Call 03:09 SB 57 Discussion 04:03 SB 57 Roll Call Vote 38:37 SB 172 Discussion 41:27 SB 172 Roll Call Vote 50:23, 958, all

Summary: The committee first handled routine business, including a prayer, the pledge, recognition of an Energy and Environment Cabinet leadership academy group, a roll call establishing quorum, and approval of the previous meeting’s minutes. The main item was Senator Danny Carroll’s presentation of legislation to create a nuclear-ready site readiness pilot program in Kentucky. He said the bill is intended to help build a nuclear ecosystem in the Commonwealth by supporting early site permits, construction permits, or combined licenses, with the state contributing up to $25 million per project and a total of $75 million for up to three projects. He emphasized safeguards such as refundable funding if conditions are not met, legislative rather than authority-only selection of projects, and oversight by the Kentucky Nuclear Energy Development Authority (NIDTA). He also described related provisions on cost recovery through the Public Service Commission, tax incentive eligibility for nuclear ecosystem projects, training and consultant support for the authority, and eligibility for fusion projects. Carroll and Rodney Andrews said the proposal is meant to attract utilities, developers, and large industrial users such as data centers, and to spread projects geographically, with particular attention to Eastern Kentucky and other rural areas. They said selection criteria would include site suitability, prior site use, regional economic need and impact, geographic diversity, additional investment, federal funding status, and whether a community has applied to be designated nuclear-ready. They stressed that communities would not be forced to host reactors and could choose which parts of the nuclear ecosystem to participate in. Carroll also said the bill could help Kentucky compete with states like Texas and Tennessee, and Andrews said industry contacts viewed the proposal as a signal that Kentucky is open to investment. Members generally expressed support for the bill and its goals, while asking about taxpayer exposure, site size, permitting, grid needs, national security, and reactor technology. Carroll said the state’s direct commitment would be capped at $75 million, with any additional cost recovery depending on PSC approval and project specifics. He said small modular reactor sites would be much smaller than traditional plants, and described a model in which a utility partners with a developer and a data center, with power contracts helping offset costs over decades. On security and technology, Carroll and Andrews said newer reactors would still be subject to the same standards as larger units, and Andrews explained that next-generation designs may use different fuels and materials such as TRISO and high-assay low-enriched uranium. No vote on the bill was taken in the portion provided, and the chair noted time limits and that additional members still had questions, including one witness expected to speak against the measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• DENREC's Brownfield Development Program DENREC's Brownfield Development Program allows certified brownfield
• Eleven states offer statewide property tax incentives to data centers.
• Moreover, states are still utilizing incentives. They are setting suns.
• Moreover, states are still utilizing incentives.
• Eleven states offer statewide property tax incentives to data centers.

Summary: The committee heard several bills focused on energy, public safety, and environmental cleanup. House Bill 455 would create a historic preservation license plate to raise funds and awareness for Delaware preservation efforts, and House Bill 471 would tighten rules and penalties for off-highway vehicles on shared private roads, with golf carts excluded. House Substitute No. 1 for House Bill 439, the Truth in E-Bike Marketing Act, would require clearer disclosures when selling electric mopeds and electric motorcycles so consumers understand classification, power, and licensing/insurance requirements. House Substitute No. 1 for House Bill 407, related to the Hazardous Substance Cleanup Act and brownfields, would shift funding for brownfield cleanup from the original realty transfer tax approach to a dedicated share of the hazardous substance cleanup fund and raise civil penalties for fraudulent acts. The committee also approved the June 18, 2026 minutes once quorum was reached. Most of the meeting centered on House Substitute No. 1 for House Bill 233, as amended, a large-load/data center bill intended to protect ratepayers from costs tied to massive new electricity users. The sponsor and Public Advocate said PJM’s warnings about a coming reliability backstop auction made it urgent to establish a Delaware framework now, requiring large energy users to sign utility agreements, cover their share of transmission, distribution, and capacity costs, and comply with curtailment and other protections. Supporters from environmental groups and some labor and business voices said the bill was needed to prevent cost shifts to households and small businesses, while opponents argued it was being rushed, could deter investment, and might unintentionally affect other industries; several asked for more time and clearer definitions. No vote was taken in the portion provided. The committee also took up House Bill 470, which would authorize Delmarva Power, with PSC approval, to build and operate utility-owned battery storage and spread costs across the customer base. The sponsor and Delmarva said the bill would improve reliability quickly and help avoid outages, while the chair expressed concern that the state had not yet fully studied whether utility-owned or competitively procured storage is the best model, noting a recent SEU storage study and broader policy questions. Supporters said utility storage could be deployed faster and help with peak shaving, while others urged a competitive process; the transcript cuts off before any final action on HB 470.

Transcript Highlights:

• I love our efficiency programs. I love...
• I love our efficiency programs. I love I love Mass Save. I love our efficiency programs.
• , they have still saved money through the program.
• You've got to have a retraining program.
• Mass Save is a great program.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee hearing focused on a broad set of energy efficiency, building decarbonization, school modernization, and lighting bills. Testimony generally came from municipal leaders, labor unions, environmental groups, and advocates who supported measures such as H. 3529/S. 2294 on building energy and decarbonization, H. 3577/S. 2286 on a zero-carbon renovation fund, H. 3476/S. 2275 on healthy and sustainable schools, H. 3565 on Mass Save zero-carbon assessments, H. 3477 on clean lighting and appliance efficiency standards, and the Dark Sky bills on outdoor lighting. Supporters argued these bills would cut emissions, lower utility bills, improve indoor air quality and school conditions, and direct resources to environmental justice, gateway, and low-income communities. Witnesses emphasized that Massachusetts’ older building stock and school facilities need major upgrades, and that state funding and financing tools are needed to close gaps left by declining federal support. Mayors, labor leaders, and environmental advocates said the proposals would create local jobs, expand apprenticeships, and help municipalities and schools undertake retrofits, ventilation improvements, heat pump installations, and other decarbonization work. Several speakers also defended Mass Save as highly cost-effective while urging new funding sources beyond ratepayer bills for larger-scale building upgrades. One representative asked about the difference between current Mass Save audits and proposed zero-carbon assessments, and the sponsor explained the new assessments would include heat pumps, solar, storage, wiring upgrades, and rate-structure guidance. There was also testimony on the Dark Sky bill, with astronomers and museum representatives arguing that better-shielded, downward-facing lighting would reduce energy waste, protect wildlife and human health, and preserve night skies without compromising safety. Committee members raised concerns about pedestrian safety and whether education might be enough instead of legislation; supporters responded that the bill follows established lighting standards and targets only unnecessary glare and skyward light. On the school bill, an open-shop contractor group opposed the measure, arguing its PLA and apprenticeship requirements would restrict bidding and reduce competition, while labor organizations strongly supported the workforce standards and prevailing wage provisions. No votes were taken during the hearing. The committee heard extensive testimony and several members asked clarifying questions, but the transcript does not show any final action or disposition on the bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• and nearly $5.5 billion when combined with the ASIS and other programs.
• The ASIS and other programs.
• After-school programs are essential for working families.
• Programs that provide mentorship, purpose, and real opportunities to grow.
• In particular, secondly, program quality depends on funding that reflects real costs.

Summary: The Assembly Education Committee heard a lengthy agenda of education-related bills, with quorum established at the start and several measures taken up on consent or special order. The committee also announced that AB 1644, AB 2362, and later AB 2197 were pulled from the hearing. Members reminded the public of hearing rules and limited testimony to two witnesses each in support and opposition. AB 2651, by Assemblymember Bonta, would require schools to notify parents when school vaccination rates fall below herd-immunity thresholds. Supporters, including physicians, the California State PTA, public health groups, and school employee organizations, argued that families need timely, school-specific information to protect children and vulnerable community members. Opponents raised concerns about privacy, stigma, and whether school-level snapshots could be misleading. The bill passed the committee 5-1 and later 7-1 on the roll call. AB 2509, by Assemblymember Schultz, would allow districts to use a five-year rolling average for ADA funding calculations; supporters said it would stabilize funding amid attendance declines, while one member noted concerns about masking long-term enrollment problems. It passed 5-1 and later 7-2. The committee also approved AB 2430, which would expand after-school access, especially for high school students, improve funding and transparency, and create a work group on program quality. Testimony emphasized the value of expanded learning for youth development and working families, and members discussed the need to address middle school access as well. AB 2526, focused on special education funding, would expand the low-incidence fund to include students qualifying for the California alternate assessment; supporters said it would better align funding with student need, while some concerns remained about over-identification. AB 2325, the Pathways to Bilingual Teaching Act, would create a grant program to build bilingual teacher pipelines through partnerships among schools, community colleges, and universities; it received strong support and passed unanimously. AB 2460, presented by Assemblymember Pellerin for Assemblymember Celeste Rodriguez, would update school mental-health referral protocols to address trauma related to immigration enforcement; it also passed unanimously. AB 2404, which sought to require Central Valley representation on several governor-appointed bodies, drew debate over geographic representation and board composition and ultimately failed on a 2-5 vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• This program is a Homeownership Center.
• , it's a it's such a perverse incentive, it's a it's such a perverse incentive, and<00:26:41.280>
• Um, but it's a perverse incentive.
• Um so the perverse incentive, comments.
• University of Minnesota CURA program University of Minnesota CURA program actually<01:12:47.320>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:16:48.240> good government's role is to incent good government's role is to incent good
• Those with agricultural lands who are enrolled in an agricultural tax incentive program face compounded
• <00:51:39.520> program<00:51:40.119> face<00:51:40.440> compounded incentive program
• face compounded incentive program face compounded Financial<00:51:41.520> uncertainty<00:51:42.119
• <00:52:28.040> including help conservation programs including help conservation programs including

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It’s the small farmers, because one of the challenges or concerns was the incentives, the housing incentives
• the incentives was the housing<00:45:09.599> incentives<00:45:10.280> uh<00:45:10.400>
• <00:45:45.440> were passed in 2003 the incentives were passed in 2003 the incentives were
• We strongly believe incentives should be there.
• establishes the farm to families program establishes the farm to families program to<00:55:41.799

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So the PIMS uh the performance incentive So the PIMS uh the performance incentive mechanisms,<00
• the pimps the performance incentive the pimps the performance incentive mechanisms<00:26:54.559>
• They attempt to address this through performance incentive mechanisms and other incentive mechanisms
• , got under PBR $4 million in incentives, got under PBR $4 million in incentives, correct?
• So no incentive to change that from the utility, no financial incentive.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Commerce and Consumer Protection Committee held an informational briefing on the Public Utilities Commission’s performance-based regulation (PBR) framework and the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs’ whistleblower complaint process. Chair Jared Kohole opened the meeting, noted it was informational only with no public testimony, and explained that members would hear presentations and then have an opportunity for questions. The committee heard first from Ulupono Initiative, which provided background on why utilities are regulated, how Hawaii’s cost-of-service model and rate cases work, and why PBR was adopted to shift utility incentives away from a capital-investment bias and toward performance, efficiency, cost control, and policy goals such as renewable energy and reliability. Ulupono described Hawaii’s PBR structure as a five-year multi-year rate plan with annual revenue adjustments, a customer dividend, a Z factor for extraordinary exogenous events, and an exceptional project recovery mechanism for large projects. It also outlined performance incentive mechanisms tied to renewable portfolio standard progress, interconnection speed, reliability, and shared savings. The presentation said the current docket is evaluating a possible hybrid approach that would combine forward-looking forecasting with historical results, and Ulupono advocated for stronger incentives, arguing the current rewards are too small relative to utility revenues and should be more meaningful to better align utility behavior with legislative intent. The PUC then presented its own overview, emphasizing that the PBR docket is open and active and that the briefing was limited to the record to avoid ex parte concerns. The commission described the development of PBR in Hawaii through multiple phases beginning in 2018: an initial collaborative phase to set goals, a formal contested-case phase that produced the initial framework, later phases adding scorecards, reported metrics, and additional performance incentive mechanisms, and subsequent refinements including sunset of some mechanisms and adjustments after the August 2023 Maui wildfires. The PUC said the framework is intended to be customer-centric, administratively efficient, and protective of utility financial integrity, and that current work includes evaluating how to balance forward-looking and historical test-year approaches within the rebasing process. No votes or formal actions were taken at the briefing.

Transcript Highlights:

• First, why is a state program important?
• Some of the things that we have suggested, as I mentioned, are converting the program into a loan program
• So a session ago, we were looking to pass a low-to-no-interest loan program just to encourage new programs
• program on something that is approved and workable.
• I believe the current number is 203, over 38 different programs. 38 different programs, 203 license types

Bills: HB132, HB 11, HB14, HB132, HB1584, HB1606, HB5061, HB 1041, HB2286

Keywords: nuclear energy, Texas Advanced Nuclear Energy Office, energy policy, regulation repeal, state energy strategy, licensing, reciprocity, regulation, Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation, interstate agreements, advanced reactors, energy security, grant programs, HB 132, Texas Government Code Chapter 418, Public Information Act, confidential records, homeland security, foreign adversary, terrorism

Summary: The committee first took up pending business and quickly reported several measures favorably, including HB 12, SB 1361, SB 1705, SB 1749, SB 1897, SB 2344, SB 2566, HB 3809, and HB 4215, with most sent to the Local and Uncontested Calendar. HB 12’s substitute clarified a limited midterm review of regulatory agencies tied to Sunset Commission recommendations. SB 2696’s substitute changed med spa regulation from a license to a certificate, with training instead of an exam, plus background checks, continuing education, and two-year renewals. HB 3809 dealt with battery energy storage decommissioning and recycling, and HB 4215 was reported without a substitute. SB 1978, concerning interconnection of electric facilities in ERCOT and federal jurisdiction concerns, was reported out on a 5-3 vote after debate, but then the chair later announced the bill was withdrawn and left pending subject to the call of the chair. HB 1899 was also reported favorably, with one nay. A major portion of the meeting focused on HB 14, the advanced nuclear energy bill. Senator Schwertner described it as creating a Texas Advanced Nuclear Energy Office, a nuclear permitting coordinator, a development fund, a completion grant program, and a workforce development program. Testimony was sharply divided. Supporters, including representatives from Fermi America, Dow/X-energy, CPS Energy, Paragon Energy Solutions, Bridge to Nuclear, Aalo Atomics, and the Texas Association of Business, argued that Texas should lead in advanced nuclear, citing future baseload demand, data centers, industrial power needs, supply-chain development, and long-term energy diversification. Opponents, including Public Citizen, Texas Nuclear Watchdogs, Sierra Club, and individual citizens, argued the bill would subsidize unproven, expensive technology, create grants rather than loans, and expose taxpayers to major risk while doing little to meet near-term energy needs. Several members questioned whether the state should fund projects that may not produce grid power for years, and whether the bill’s grant structure and new office were justified. The committee also heard HB 5061, which Senator Schwertner said would prohibit unethical surveillance and misuse of confidential information by state contractors, create a confidential reporting system through the State Auditor’s Office, authorize Texas Rangers investigations, protect whistleblowers, and impose penalties including contract termination, fines, and contracting bans. No public testimony was offered, and the bill was left pending. HB 132, sponsored by Senator Hughes, would extend confidentiality protections for sensitive information to hostile acts by foreign adversaries; it was also left pending after no testimony. HB 1584 was then laid out, with Senator Schwertner explaining it would require utilities to maintain and update priority restoration lists for critical facilities after Hurricane Beryl exposed communication failures, but the transcript cuts off before any action on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• I would like to highlight two programs I would like to highlight two programs in<00:26:26.480>
• A companion program they don't have to work together, but they can work together, is the READY program
• A companion program they don't have to work together, but they can work together, is the READY program
• :31:52.880> incentives.
• incentives to build infrastructure. incentives to build infrastructure.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:15 Roll Call 00:00:45 Discussion of Pro-Growth Housing Policies 00:02:33 Adjournment 01:17:15, 958, all

Summary: The Housing Task Force 2.0 reconvened with several new members and heard a presentation from Kentucky Housing Corporation Executive Director Winston Miller and Deputy Executive Director Wendy Smith. They framed the task force’s work as a practical effort to address Kentucky’s housing shortage, update members on the current housing landscape, summarize existing state and federal resources, and suggest areas for the task force to focus on over the coming year. KHC said its 2024 housing supply gap analysis found Kentucky is short about 206,000 housing units, split roughly evenly between rental and homeownership, and projected the gap could grow to 287,000 units by 2029 if current trends continue. They emphasized that every county in Kentucky needs more housing, that the 2008 housing crisis and loss of construction capacity remain major causes of the shortage, and that current pressures include high interest rates, rising insurance and tax costs, construction cost inflation, and housing prices and rents growing faster than incomes. KHC also said homelessness has risen in Kentucky, with point-in-time counts showing double-digit increases in recent years. The presenters reviewed existing resources, including federal programs, the Kentucky Affordable Housing Trust Fund, the rural housing trust fund, KHC mortgage and down payment assistance programs, and the state mortgage interest deduction. They said these resources are important but insufficient to close the gap, and noted that a proposed federal FY2026 budget would cut HUD programs by 44%, potentially removing about $286 million from Kentucky housing resources, though no action has been taken yet. They urged the task force to consider stronger, more flexible tools such as a revolving loan fund, a state affordable housing tax credit, and economic development and employer-assisted housing incentives, and pointed to Indiana’s housing infrastructure and regional development funds as examples. No votes or formal actions were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• and ways to address uh good behavior and reward such behavior um with incentives.
• So yes to have some incentives, some of the carrots involved to help farmers and ranchers.
• So yes to have some incentives, some of the carrots involved to help farmers and ranchers.
• So yes to have some incentives, some of the carrots involved to help farmers and ranchers.
• <01:15:44.480> to of the carrots some of the incentives to of the carrots some of the incentives

Bills: HB1979

Keywords: environmental review, affordable housing, clean energy, judicial proceedings, public participation, Hawaii Revised Statutes, 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 1979 HD3, which would shorten the time to file certain judicial challenges to environmental assessments and environmental impact statements for affordable housing and clean energy projects, and would also affect transfer of some environmental court appeals to the Supreme Court. The Office of Planning and Sustainable Development supported the amended bill, saying the changes were improved from earlier versions and that the shorter filing period was reasonable for these priority projects. Hawaii Gas asked that the bill’s clean energy definition be broadened to align with existing renewable energy law so emerging technologies like renewable hydrogen and renewable gas would be included. Kauai Island Utility Co-op and Greenpeace Hawaii testified in support and opposition, respectively, with supporters arguing the bill would reduce litigation uncertainty and opponents saying the shorter deadline would limit public participation and not solve the real causes of project delays. Opposition testimony came from the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Earthjustice, Sierra Club, 350 Hawaii, and others, who argued the bill could chill legitimate public-interest claims, especially where there is limited public notice, and that environmental review was being unfairly blamed for delays caused by permitting, financing, or infrastructure problems. Several speakers said the measure would reduce transparency and make it harder for communities to respond in time. One testifier from Earthjustice said the environmental review process itself is not the problem and should not be weakened for projects that still need public disclosure and community engagement. The committee then moved to decision-making and, citing the volume of opposition and concerns about public participation, transparency, and whether the bill would actually improve timelines, the chair deferred HB 1979 HD3 indefinitely. The hearing was adjourned after the vote decision was announced. The transcript then shifted to HB 2585, relating to tourism and statewide standards for agritourism. Testimony was mixed: farmers and agricultural groups described agritourism as essential to keeping small farms and ranches viable, while also urging safeguards so it would not be abused or displace real agricultural production. Some speakers warned the bill’s revenue-based limits could unintentionally shut down existing farm stays and related operations, especially in Maui County. The Hawaii Farm Bureau said it supported the intent but wanted clearer protections for bona fide agriculture and more flexibility around revenue requirements and force majeure situations. The discussion was still underway when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• Just because somebody's, you know, issuing an incentive or whatever so that they use it more, in the
• end... ...you know, issue an incentive or whatever so that they use it more.
• I consider it—you call it incentive; I call it a, you know, a subsidy.
• I consider it—you call it incentive; I call it a, you know, a subsidy. Either way.
• So what this does is it creates an ...it creates an incentive and a mechanism for those donors to come

Summary: The committee reconvened and took up several amendments and bills. Senate Bill 15 was amended to transfer Keep Arkansas Beautiful functions to ARDOT and replace the current commissioners with an advisory council; the amendment was adopted without objection. An amendment to Senate Bill 7 lowering the claims-data threshold for group health insurance from 50 employees to 25, to help smaller employers and municipalities shop for coverage, was also adopted. An amendment to Senate Bill 41 that would have restricted University of Arkansas at Fayetteville athletic funding from academic funds was rejected after members questioned its scope and fiscal basis. The committee then considered an amendment to House Bill 1051 that would cap online sports-betting free play at 5% of gross receipts. Senator Hester argued the current unlimited promotions were predatory and effectively subsidized casinos, while other members questioned the tax and accounting assumptions and whether the proposal belonged in a fiscal committee. The amendment failed, and a separate agriculture-related amendment from Representatives Vaught and Painter to exempt certain tractor parts tied to diesel exhaust fluid systems was also not adopted, with members citing drafting and enforcement problems and suggesting it should go through the revenue committees. After suspending the rules to add items, the committee adopted a technical correction to Senate Bill 4 clarifying physician licensure language so the rural workforce pathway would apply to underserved and primary care shortage areas, rather than the narrower federal term originally used. The committee also adopted an amendment to Senate Bill 77 deleting a fund-transfer section and instead increasing appropriation authority and creating a matching-fund mechanism to help Arkansas TV pay PBS dues, with supporters saying it would leverage private donations and preserve PBS access while allowing the commission to decide programming. The bill passed as amended, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• I've just got a quick question on the economic development incentives.
• I've just got a quick question on the economic development incentives.
• Are you talking about the economic development incentive fund here?
• Are you talking about the economic development incentive fund here?
• But look up the program. So that's my report. I move for adoption of the report at the proper time.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Very impressive program that focuses on service.
• Instead, what we're doing is removing the incentive of in-state tuition.
• What is their incentive?
• The incentive was not because Florida had in-state tuition.
• The incentive was the American dream that so many of our families thrived for.

Summary: The House convened with prayer, a moment of silence for the Parkland shooting victims, quorum call, and the Pledge of Allegiance. The Rules and Ethics Committee special order report for February 13, 2025 was adopted, setting the day’s special order calendar and debate times. The chamber then took up immigration-related special order items, beginning with Senate Memorial 6C, which urged the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to provide guidance and training for 287(g) agreements. Members debated federal immigration policy and state cooperation with DHS, and the memorial passed 85-27. The House next considered Senate Bill 4C, an immigration bill creating new state offenses related to unlawful entry and reentry into Florida and requiring a mandatory death sentence for an unauthorized alien convicted of a capital felony. Members questioned the bill’s constitutionality, including Supremacy Clause, due process, and Eighth Amendment concerns, and several speakers argued it would create separate classes of people and invite litigation. Multiple amendments were offered to narrow or expand exemptions, including protections for Venezuelans on TPS, certain Haitian TPS and humanitarian parole recipients, undocumented people brought to Florida as children working in critical professions, and a proposal to delay action pending court rulings; all of those amendments were rejected. The bill passed 85-29. The chamber then took up Senate Bill 2C, which would create a State Board of Immigration Enforcement led by the Governor and Cabinet, establish a local law enforcement immigration grant program and advisory council, repeal the undocumented-student fee waiver, and appropriate more than $300 million for immigration enforcement. The sponsor described it as supporting cooperation with federal immigration agencies and ending the in-state tuition incentive for undocumented students. Early questioning focused on the impact on “dreamers” and whether the bill would effectively raise their tuition costs; the sponsor said it removed the incentive of in-state tuition but did not bar attendance. The transcript cuts off during that exchange, before final action on SB 2C is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• If you look at under that subsection A, the aggregate rebate, discount, or other financial incentive
• B, where it refers to all trial data, including negative results and effects for any program drug.
• , federally qualified health care centers, 340B program contract pharmacies, and health insurers.
• , federally qualified health care centers, 340B program contract, program, federally qualified health
• care centers, 340B program, contract pharmacies, health insurers.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and took up the final bill on its agenda, Senate Bill 2370, which had been converted into a 340B drug transparency measure tied to insulin and broader prescription drug pricing issues. Representative Hendrix outlined the latest bill draft, explaining that it would require reporting by covered entities, contract pharmacies, federally qualified health centers, drug manufacturers, pharmacy benefit managers, and health insurers, with confidentiality protections, civil penalties, and staggered effective dates. He also noted unresolved questions about the scope of required reporting, possible overlap with federal reporting, and whether the Insurance Department would need a consultant to analyze the data. Representative Dobervich then proposed an alternative amendment that would replace the bill language with a Legislative Management study on 340B transparency reporting during the 2025-26 interim. Her proposal would remove the detailed reporting mandates and instead direct a study of what information should be collected, how it should be used, who should receive it, staffing or contracted support needs, and stakeholder input from hospitals, pharmacies, FQHCs, rural health, state agencies, insurers, and manufacturers. Members discussed germaneness, the late-stage nature of the changes, and whether the issue had been adequately heard, while the Insurance Department testified that it had not previously studied 340B-specific data but supported transparency and could see value in either a study or reporting approach. The committee first adopted the Hendrix amendment by a vote of 8-5, then voted on a do not pass motion on the amended bill, which passed 7-6. Representative Frelich was selected to carry the bill. The chair then adjourned the committee for the last time and reminded members about the committee dinner.