Transcript Highlights:

• Um, there are regulations related to management practices, uh, when biosolids are applied and regulations
• There are regulations.
• , and if you are, you're out of regulation.
• And how is it regulated? That, that...
• the federal regulations.

Committee: House Agriculture

Summary: The meeting focused on the use of biosolids on farm and ranch land, with testimony from Oklahoma State University experts, a conservation official, and an engineering representative about the benefits, risks, and regulatory implications. Dr. Lusk described OSU’s long history of soil fertility research and said biosolids can provide nutrients and organic matter, but also may carry contaminants such as PFAS, heavy metals, pharmaceuticals, microplastics, and pathogens. He emphasized that many questions remain unanswered, especially about contaminant uptake into soil, crops, livestock, and humans, and said existing EPA and Oklahoma DEQ regulations address some treatment and application standards but may not fully cover PFAS. Dr. Arnell expanded on nutrient management, explaining that biosolids can function similarly to manure as a fertilizer source, especially for nitrogen and phosphorus, but should be tested, incorporated into soil, and applied under permit conditions to reduce runoff and other losses. He said PFAS testing methods are not yet standardized and that more research is needed to determine sampling protocols, movement in soil, and long-term effects. Committee members asked whether farmers and ranchers should be notified of risks, whether PFAS is currently tested, how many counties use biosolids, and what research would be needed for a dissertation-level study. The witnesses generally agreed that landowners should be informed of known risks and uncertainties, but said the science is still developing. Dr. Arnell said a unified testing method is needed before reliable PFAS monitoring can be done, and suggested that a multi-year study would be required to understand soil movement, crop uptake, and livestock impacts. Greg Scott of the Oklahoma Conservation Commission framed the issue as a waste-management problem, noting that human waste streams contain contaminants and that soil type affects how pollutants move; he said sandy soils pose greater movement risks than clay soils and that current best practice is incorporation, careful timing, and avoiding steep or sensitive sites. He also said PFAS are widespread and not naturally occurring in the way some other compounds are, and that liability and cleanup costs are major concerns. Mary Elizabeth Mock of Garver Engineering focused on the practical and financial consequences of a possible moratorium on land application, saying most of Oklahoma’s biosolids are currently land applied and would otherwise have to go to landfills. She warned that many landfills are nearing capacity, tipping fees could rise sharply, and cities such as Tulsa and Norman could face large increases in disposal costs, which would ultimately be borne by ratepayers and taxpayers. She also said septic system maintenance costs could rise if land application options shrink, potentially leading to deferred maintenance and system failures. Mock urged a tiered, data-driven approach to PFAS regulation and said advanced treatment technologies may help in the future, but they are still emerging and expensive. No votes were taken; the session consisted of presentations and member questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Refer to the Committee on Environmental Regulation.
• HB 1835 by Guhan relating to the regulation of.
• HB 1848 by Collier relating to the regulation of coin operating machines.
• , HB 2232 by Basu relating to regulation by counties build of rent communities and regulation by certain
• HB 149 by Caprion relating to the regulation of the artificial intelligence system in the state.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have several clauses in our regulations that mirror these macro regulations, or the CFRs, I should
• We regulate hard rock mining and exploration in the state.
• We do not regulate coal under the Mining Act Reclamation Program, nor do we regulate geothermal resources
• Senator Charley, in my estimation, the regulations are what they are, and if you meet the regulations
• It's in our regulations that we are required to meet.

Committee: House Radioactive & Hazardous Materials Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• , and Office of Financial Regulation.
• and the Office of Financial Regulation.
• And in your materials, you will also see slot machine regulation.
• And in your materials, you will also see slot machine regulation.
• regulation.

Summary: The State Administration Budget Subcommittee met for an introductory overview of the agencies under its jurisdiction and their current-year budgets. Chair Vicki Lopez welcomed members and staff, and each member briefly introduced themselves and identified areas of interest, with recurring themes including fiscal restraint, insurance regulation, revenue administration, condominium issues, and government efficiency. The chair then outlined the subcommittee’s overall budget, about $3.1 billion, and noted major recent policy areas affecting the budget such as condominium legislation and emergency communications funding. Agency heads then presented high-level summaries of their missions and budgets. The Department of Revenue described property tax oversight, tax administration, and child support enforcement; the Department of Management Services reviewed state purchasing, telecommunications, fleet, state insurance, retirement, and digital services; DBPR highlighted licensing, enforcement, condominiums, and building code work; DFS covered insurance consumer services, risk management, unclaimed property, fire marshal functions, and criminal investigations; the Gaming Control Commission discussed pari-mutuel and tribal gaming oversight and enforcement; OIR explained insurer solvency and rate review; the Lottery emphasized education funding and record sales; OFR described regulation of banking, securities, lending, and money services; DOAH outlined administrative and workers’ compensation adjudication; PSC covered utility rate regulation and consumer complaints; PERC described labor relations and career service appeals; and FCHR summarized discrimination complaint investigations and outreach. Several members asked questions about utility returns, insurance regulation staffing, DMS’s state employee health plan deficit and prescription drug formulary management, agency recommendations for reducing regulatory burden, and state facilities usage. Responses generally emphasized that utility rates and insurer filings are determined through evidentiary and actuarial processes, that OIR has reduced vacancies but still seeks specialized staff and a Tampa office expansion, and that DMS acknowledged rising health plan costs and said the issue likely requires broader budget-level discussion. The chair also pressed multiple presenters to stay focused on agency operations and budgets rather than broader policy issues. No votes or formal actions were taken in the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• So inaction or loosening of these regulations, including our regulations around light-duty and heavy-duty
• We address that through the at-berth regulation, and the goal of that regulation is to reduce emissions
• California regulations established...
• What would you like to see certainty in regulation?
• Is it just in permitting or is it also in regulation?

Summary: The joint informational hearing focused on California’s transportation fuels sector, especially the risk of refinery closures, fuel supply stability, and how the state should manage a long transition to cleaner transportation. Committee chairs and agency leaders said California’s fuel market is becoming more fragile as demand declines, refinery capacity shrinks faster than demand, and the state relies more on imports and a smaller number of critical pipelines. Professor Emily Grubert framed the issue as a managed transition problem in which the public already bears much of the risk and should also capture benefits from any state intervention. CARB Chair Leanne Randolph reviewed California’s climate and air-quality framework, including AB 32, the low-carbon fuel standard, clean vehicle rules, and the state’s at-berth regulation for port vessels. She said these programs are intended to reduce fossil fuel demand while protecting public health, and she noted that California remains in litigation over federal attempts to block some waivers. CEC Vice Chair Sivagunda described the administration’s market-stabilization work, saying the state is trying to preserve fuel supply and investor confidence during a “mid-transition” period. He said the CEC’s recommendations fall into three broad areas: stabilizing the existing fuel system, aligning regulatory tools such as a possible pause on the CEC’s margin cap, and planning for worker and community impacts. Department of Conservation Director Jennifer Lucasey outlined the administration’s petroleum market stabilization proposal, centered on returning California crude production to a 125 million-barrel annual stabilization target to support pipeline throughput and domestic supply. The proposal would codify the ban on hydraulic fracturing, validate Kern County’s oil and gas permitting ordinance, create a temporary CEQA exemption for new wells in existing fields paired with a two-for-one plug-and-abandon requirement, and strengthen spill prevention and pipeline safety rules. Several members questioned the CEQA exemption, tribal consultation, environmental review, and whether the proposal would adequately protect communities and workers. Mayor Steve Young of Benicia testified that a Valero refinery closure would sharply reduce city revenue and jobs, while also creating redevelopment and remediation challenges; he said the city wants a cleaner future but needs time and support to manage the economic loss. No formal vote was taken at the hearing, though CEC officials said a vote on a margin-cap pause was expected at an upcoming business meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• We've experienced misguided attempts to regulate our markets.
• This year to establish the essential foundation for market regulation.
• One is regulation of centralized intermediaries. including exchanges.
• I've been involved in market regulation most of my career.
• There are very common components to how you regulate centralized. markets.

Committee: Senate Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Subcommittee on Digital Assets

Keywords: Digital Assets, Bitcoin, Stablecoins, Legislation, Bipartisan, Consumer Protection, Regulatory Framework, Financial Innovation, Testimony

Summary: The inaugural meeting of the Digital Assets Subcommittee brought a wave of excitement and anticipation regarding the future of digital assets, including Bitcoin and stablecoins. Chair Lummis expressed gratitude towards Senator Scott for establishing the subcommittee, indicating a commitment to promote responsible innovation while safeguarding consumers. Members discussed the necessity for a bipartisan legislative framework to regulate digital asset markets effectively while outlining the potential benefits such legislation could have on enhancing financial inclusion and streamlining payments. The meeting featured expert testimonies from key figures in the digital asset industry, highlighting the importance of creating clear regulatory guidance for digital assets to foster innovation without compromising consumer protections.

Transcript Highlights:

• What they're discharging meets regulations.
• They're required to be permitted under current DNR regulations.
• You know, I think it's good to be regulated on that side of it because, you know, if you don't get regulation
• Good to be regulated on that side of it because, you know, if you don't get regulation, some people will
• This is deregulating or getting rid of a regulation that Missouri does not need.

Committee: House Special Committee on Rural Issues

Summary: The Special Committee on Rural Issues met with a quorum and first went into executive session, where House Bill 2686 was voted do pass on a 10-0 roll call. The committee then moved to public testimony on House Bill 3076, sponsored by Representative Doyle Justice, which would remove the words “water contaminant” from a Clean Water Law provision. Justice and supporters said the change is intended to clarify that routine agricultural practices and non-point sources, such as runoff, sediment, manure, fertilizer, grazing, and field drainage, are not subject to DNR permitting, while point sources like wastewater plants and CAFOs would still remain regulated. Committee members focused heavily on the distinction between point sources and non-point sources and on whether the bill would exempt harmful pollution. Justice and witnesses explained that the bill would not remove DNR authority over point sources or egregious conduct, but would prevent permits for diffuse, routine runoff that cannot realistically be permitted event-by-event. Several members used examples like deer, dogs, cattle, and rain runoff to probe the issue, and witnesses repeatedly said the bill is meant to eliminate uncertainty and avoid absurd permitting requirements. Support came from the Missouri Corn Growers Association, Missouri Agribusiness Association, Missouri Farm Bureau, Missouri Soybean Association, Missouri Dairy, and Missouri Wine and Grape Board/Missouri Grape Growers Association. They argued the bill aligns state law with existing federal and state practice, preserves voluntary soil and water conservation programs, and provides regulatory certainty. No opposition testimony was offered, and the hearing on HB 3076 concluded with no further business before the committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• We support the continued licensing and regulation by the board.
• Iridologists are not licensed by nor regulated under the board.
• We do not seek regulation under this board.
• We do not seek regulation under this board.
• They are not authorized to regulate traditional naturopathy.

Summary: The joint sunset oversight hearing reviewed five California regulatory entities: the Respiratory Care Board, the California Council for Interior Design Certification, the Speech-Language Pathology, Audiology, and Hearing Aid Dispensers Board, the Board of Occupational Therapy, and the Board of Naturopathic Medicine. Each agency described its mission, recent modernization or enforcement work, and requested continuation of its authority. Committee members focused on access to care, workforce impacts, fee structures, transparency, and whether proposed changes would improve public protection without creating unnecessary barriers. For the Respiratory Care Board, the main issues were a possible move from an associate to a bachelor’s degree for entry-level licensure, fee cleanup changes, and ongoing work on the role of LVNs in respiratory tasks. Board representatives said the degree change would better align with national trends and could support future reimbursement and professional advancement, while public commenters and some legislators warned it could worsen shortages, especially in rural and underserved areas. Much of the public testimony centered on families and facilities relying on LVNs for trach and ventilator care in congregate living health facilities, with requests to preserve or expand exemptions. The board also discussed its reserve cap and efforts to modernize licensing and enforcement systems. The interior design item drew the most debate. CCIDC leaders argued the current voluntary certification/title-act model works, that complaints have not shown public harm, and that licensure would disrupt the workforce and create barriers for experienced designers. Committee members questioned the lack of enforcement authority, transparency, and whether the model provides enough accountability or consistent plan acceptance by local jurisdictions. Public testimony was split between supporters who said the current system is flexible and effective, and critics who said the private structure lacks accountability and creates confusion, especially for commercial work and plan check acceptance. The Speech-Language Pathology, Audiology, and Hearing Aid Dispensers Board reported major modernization gains, including online licensure processing, faster application times, new continuing education audits, and updated supervision and advertising rules. Members and stakeholders discussed a proposed audiology assistant license, which the board and the California Academy of Audiology supported as a way to improve access to care and reduce workload pressures. The Occupational Therapy Board described strong enforcement and licensing performance, a new strategic plan, and a request for additional fee authority to address rising costs and reserve concerns; public testimony largely supported the board and a proposed reduction in advanced practice hand therapy training hours. The Naturopathic Medicine Board emphasized consumer protection, unlicensed practice enforcement, and consumer confusion over titles, saying most of its enforcement workload involves unlicensed activity and that stronger title protection and clearer statutory authority are needed.

Transcript Highlights:

• The question to me is, as far as does this basically preempt local regulation?
• In the area I live in, we got regulations. And we just say, hey, come on over.
• In the area I live in, we got regulations. And we just say, hey, come on over.
• But, you know, we have robust regulations in the Kansas City region.
• This bill does not remove regulation; it standardizes it.

Committee: House Joint Committee on Rural Economic Development

Summary: The Committee on Economic Development met with 13 members present and first went into executive session. It voted House Bill 3095 and House Bill 3249 do pass, both by 12-1 votes, and also adopted a House committee substitute for House Bill 2142 that rolled in House Bill 2058 before voting the combined measure do pass by 12-1. The transcript does not describe the substance of those bills in detail, but records the committee’s favorable action on each. The committee then held a public hearing on House Bill 3262, Representative Peters’ proposal to create an interstate massage compact. Supporters, including the sponsor, a massage business operator, a former state massage board regulator, and the Federation of State Massage Therapy Boards, said the compact would improve workforce mobility, reduce duplicate licensing and background checks, and preserve state authority over standards and discipline. An opponent argued interstate compacts are unconstitutional, could supersede state law, and raise concerns about gifts and closed meetings. No vote was taken on HB 3262 during the hearing. The final hearing was on House Bill 3157, which would create a single statewide permit for mobile food vendors. The sponsor and supporters from the Institute for Justice and the food truck industry said the bill would reduce duplicative local permits and inspections, lower costs, and help food trucks operate across jurisdictions while keeping health and safety standards. Opponents, including Kansas City and Springfield-Greene County health officials, argued the bill would preempt local control, shift regulatory authority to the state, and create enforcement and fiscal concerns. Committee members raised questions about local inspection authority, fees, and a possible committee substitute, but no final action was taken in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• on the state's ability to regulate.
• And importantly, not all OGVs are regulated by the at-berth regulation, and we'll discuss that more in
• And importantly, not all OGVs are regulated by the at-birth regulation, and we'll discuss that more in
• California at-berth regulation.
• As you see here on the screen, this is the State Patrol's regulations, and all of these regulations have

Committee: Joint Joint Transportation Committee

Summary: The committee first heard a presentation from WSDOT on balancing uncertainty in capital program estimates and cash flow management. WSDOT explained the differences between design-bid-build and design-build delivery, its tiered risk-assessment process by project size, and how it uses base estimates, inflation, and risk modeling to set budgets. Staff said design-bid-build estimates are generally accurate within about 1% across the program, while design-build projects carry much wider uncertainty and are better communicated as ranges; they cited a P85 budget approach and noted that large, complex projects can be affected by market competition and long procurement timelines. Members asked about the Columbia River Bridge cost growth and about value engineering, and WSDOT said it uses value engineering but has limited scope to cut costs because of project requirements and policy mandates. Troy Swing also discussed cash flow, noting that a few large projects can significantly affect biennial funding needs, and said a risk pool would not reduce overall program risk but could help manage timing if paired with appropriation and cash-flow controls. The committee then received the final presentation in the WSDOT Project Delivery and Innovative Practices study from HKA Global. The consultant said WSDOT’s estimating practices are generally robust and recommended improving transparency by presenting budget authorizations as ranges or estimate classes, better tracking estimate growth over time, and adjusting advertisement timing to avoid competing lettings. The report also discussed surety bonding, suggesting the legislature consider restoring authority for reduced bonding on select large design-build projects or using phased bonding and alternative securities. On indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contracting, the consultant said current job order contract rules are restrictive and recommended legislative changes to make such tools more usable, especially for smaller tasks and to help use unspent funds more flexibly. The committee also heard a follow-up presentation on transit-oriented development policy recommendations tied to HB 1491. The Urban Institute’s Yona Freemark said Washington has been a national leader on TOD but that housing construction, especially in the Puget Sound, has slowed sharply since 2022. He said rising construction costs, high financing costs, and local tax and rent conditions are making many TOD projects infeasible, and recommended that the state fill infrastructure funding gaps around stations, revisit MFTE affordability requirements, consider minimum rather than average density requirements near transit, and create a statewide system to track TOD outcomes such as affordability, gentrification, and transit access. Members questioned the study’s developer interviews, the role of rent control and crime, property tax assumptions, and parking needs; the presenter said the study included five private developers, that rent control was not part of the study scope, and that parking was included in the model assumptions. Finally, the committee began a presentation on regulating emissions from ocean-going vessels at berth. Staff and consultants described California-style at-berth rules, which require shore power or equivalent emissions controls so ships can shut off diesel auxiliary engines while docked. The study is examining vessel traffic, emissions reductions, implementation costs, labor and operational needs, and possible effects on port competitiveness and cargo diversion. No votes or formal actions were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• DTSC's regulations to implement the directives in SB 673 is really such a moment.
• The protections are the regulations.
• Stakeholders, both community and regulated, consistently, I don't know.
• We are proposing regulations as mandated by Senate We are proposing regulations as mandated by Senate
• And represents a first step towards possible regulation of these products.

Summary: The joint oversight hearing focused on the Board of Environmental Safety (BES), created by SB 158 in 2021, and on broader DTSC reform efforts, including permitting, community engagement, fee setting, and the hazardous waste management plan. Chair Connolly opened by noting the board’s original goals of improving transparency, accountability, and fiscal stability, and raised concerns about a recent board appointee later becoming a lobbyist with DTSC-regulated clients. Witnesses and members also discussed the long-delayed SB 673 regulations on facility permitting and community vulnerability protections, as well as the board’s role in approving the hazardous waste management plan and reviewing permit appeals. Community and environmental justice witnesses argued that the board has improved access by creating a public forum, ombudsperson, and appeal process, but said it remains too passive and lacks authority over budgets, staffing, and implementation. They urged more statutory direction, stronger community participation, better transparency on how comments are used, and more meaningful authority in permit and plan decisions. One witness suggested the Legislature consider a separate oversight body or stronger legislative engagement, while another called for youth representation and paid fellowships on advisory bodies. Business and regulated-community testimony was more supportive of the board’s structure, emphasizing that SB 158 was a negotiated compromise that improved transparency and accountability while avoiding politicization, and calling for faster fee analysis and clearer budget information. Board Chair Andrew Rakestra and DTSC Director Barbara Butler reported that reform has produced measurable gains: more public engagement, stronger enforcement, fewer continued permits, improved compliance, increased revenues from the generation-and-handling fee, and progress on Exide cleanup, safer consumer products, and community revitalization grants. They acknowledged, however, that the board’s authority is limited, permit appeals can be slow, SB 673 regulations remain unfinished, and public trust still needs work. Both said the board is most effective when involved early and when DTSC shares information proactively. Members asked about fee stability, the hazardous waste management plan, and whether the Legislature should give the board a more formal role in budget change proposals, regulatory processes, and implementation oversight. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational and ended with public comment.

Transcript Highlights:

• We know what happens when industry is left to regulate itself.
• Can you tell me, like, how many agencies regulate you now? I think it's six.
• Oh, DTSC regulates us. Absolutely. Absolutely. They already regulate.
• But they don't have the authority to regulate the entire facility.
• I don't know what they're referring to in terms of what is not regulated.

Summary: The committee heard SB 404 on metal shredding facilities, SB 601 on water quality protections after the U.S. Supreme Court’s Sackett decision, SB 682 on phasing out PFOS in certain consumer products, and later SB 646 on prenatal vitamins and toxic metal contamination. SB 561 had been pulled from the hearing. In each of the measures, the authors and supporters emphasized environmental and public health protections, while opponents raised concerns about overregulation, implementation, and unintended economic impacts. The committee also spent time on the policy details of each bill, including how smaller operators would be treated under SB 404, how “nexus waters” would be defined under SB 601, and whether alternatives and testing standards were adequate under SB 682 and SB 646. For SB 404, Senator Caballero said the bill would create a permitting and enforcement framework for metal shredding facilities, with operational standards for fire prevention, stormwater, and releases of shredder residue, while supporters argued it would bring needed certainty to a critical recycling industry. Opponents, including small recyclers and community/environmental advocates, said the bill was either too broad or not strong enough, with some warning it would burden smaller facilities and others arguing it would fail to protect overburdened communities. The committee approved SB 404 on a due-pass-as-amended motion to Appropriations, with recorded support from the chair and some members and opposition from others. SB 601 sought to restore state-level protections for waters that lost federal Clean Water Act coverage after Sackett, using a “nexus waters” framework and revised enforcement provisions after amendments removed the private right of action. Supporters said California needed to preserve protections for seasonal streams and wetlands and avoid backsliding, while opponents from business, agriculture, water districts, and local governments argued the definition remained too broad and could create uncertainty, costs, and unintended consequences. The committee also approved SB 601 on a due-pass motion to Appropriations, again with split votes. SB 682, which the committee also advanced, would phase out intentionally added PFOS in six product categories, including cleaning products, cookware, dental floss, ski wax, food packaging, and juvenile products, with an amendment delaying cookware implementation until 2030. Supporters framed it as a source-control measure to reduce PFAS contamination and lower long-term water treatment costs, while manufacturers and cookware interests argued the bill was overbroad, lacked workable testing standards, and could push consumers and businesses toward uncertain alternatives. The committee chair recommended an aye vote, and the measure passed to Appropriations. SB 646 was then introduced on prenatal vitamins, with supporters saying it would require testing and disclosure of heavy metals like lead, arsenic, cadmium, and mercury, while the opposition said disclosure must be handled carefully so as not to confuse consumers or undermine confidence in prenatal supplements.

Transcript Highlights:

• Unlike other regulated care settings, Unlike other regulated care settings, the proposed ALR regulations
• The proposed regulations would fundamentally change how rest homes operate day to day.
• The current regulation The current regulation requires rest homes to adapt a staffing and structure model
• Payroll costs would greatly increase under these regulations.
• Their very population, these regulations aim to protect older adults seeking These regulations aim to

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Aging and Independence

Summary: The Joint Committee on Aging and Independence heard testimony on Senate 3057/House 5376, a bill to create an Assisted Living Residence Trust Fund and implement recommendations from the Assisted Living Residence Commission. Supporters, including AARP and the state long-term care ombudsman, backed the trust fund for certification staffing, compliance reviews, investigations, ombudsman services, public reporting, and appeals. The assisted living industry, represented by MassALA, supported the affordability task force and certified medication aides, but asked for amendments to expand career paths and to remove or limit fines as a funding source, arguing fines should be capped and tied to health or safety risks. The ombudsman emphasized the need for more staffing and resources, noting the current caseload and travel burden across the state. The committee also took testimony on Senate 3056/House 5243 concerning medication administration in rest homes. Rest home operators, MARCH, and LeadingAge Massachusetts opposed proposed Department of Public Health changes that would replace the long-standing responsible person model with a MAP-based framework or require more licensed nursing staff. They argued the current model has been used for decades, is safe and affordable, and is better suited to rest homes than MAP, which they said was designed for different settings. They urged the committee to preserve responsible person medication administration while improving training and oversight, and several witnesses asked for a task force or substitute language to study best practices rather than impose immediate regulatory changes. Committee members asked questions about the history of the responsible person model, how medication administration works in practice, and whether other states use similar systems. Chair Stanley said the committee was still reviewing building code-related recommendations for assisted living and noted that those issues may require more time. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the committee adjourned after testimony concluded.

Transcript Highlights:

• Sometimes, often, regulations and the impacts of those regulations aren't apparent until very later on
• And it's regulation, it's layer upon layer upon layer.
• And it's regulation, it's layer upon layer upon layer.
• And of course, those are also often regulated at the local level.
• We are layering regulation on top of regulation. We're driving up costs.

Committee: Senate Environmental Quality

Summary: The committee first heard SB 872 by Senator McNerney, which would dedicate $150 million annually each for Central Valley subsidence repairs and Delta levee improvements. The author and supporters, including Restore the Delta and State Water Contractors, described the bill as an urgent, bipartisan effort to protect State Water Project conveyance serving 27 million people, prevent levee failure, and safeguard billions in state assets. Support came from a broad coalition of water agencies, labor, environmental groups, and local governments; there was no opposition testimony. Because the committee was operating without a quorum at the time, the bill was heard as a subcommittee item and no final vote was taken then. The committee then took up SB 981 by Senator Niello, which would require CARB to include cost-of-living impacts in its existing economic analysis for major regulations. The author argued the bill would improve transparency by showing effects on gasoline, electricity, food, housing, and business costs, while supporters from agriculture, manufacturing, business, propane, and restaurant interests said it would help lawmakers understand affordability impacts. Opponents, including the Coalition for Clean Air and the Union of Concerned Scientists, argued it would add red tape, delay rulemaking, and require CARB to make speculative predictions. The chair and other members expressed concern that the bill was redundant, burdensome, and too narrow because it singled out CARB rather than addressing affordability across state government; no vote was taken in the excerpt. SB 887 by Senator Padilla would require large data center projects to undergo CEQA review, but offer streamlined treatment for projects meeting strong environmental, labor, and community-benefit standards. Supporters, including TURN, IBEW Local 569, and several environmental and local-government groups, said the bill would protect communities from high energy and water use, cost shifting, and pollution while still allowing responsible development. Opponents from the Data Center Coalition, Silicon Valley Leadership Group, Bay Area Council, and others argued the standards were overly prescriptive, potentially unattainable, and would drive investment out of California. After a quorum was established, the committee voted 3-1 to pass SB 887 as amended to the Senate Energy, Utilities and Communications Committee, with the bill kept on call. Finally, SB 1008 by Senator Ochoa Bog would renew the CEQA exemption for California Public Utilities Commission-ordered closure of at-grade rail crossings, which had expired at the start of 2025. Union Pacific and other supporters said the measure would restore a long-standing safety tool and help eliminate redundant crossings more quickly. With no opposition testimony, the committee approved the bill unanimously, 4-0, and kept it on call.

Transcript Highlights:

• . regulation. regulation.
• </c> to to accomplish the regulation piece. to to accomplish the regulation piece.
• </c> do a regulation rather than a ban. do a regulation rather than a ban.
• Um, I support this regulation. We should have regulations around this.
• The regulations are fine. The regulations are good.

Bills: SF0071 , SF0088 , SF0056

Committee: House Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:

• Under the Biden EPA, American energy producers were subject to a barrage of legally suspect regulations
• The 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Oil and Natural Gas Methane Regulations.
• entities comply with the federal government's thousands of regulations and policies.
• States know how to regulate their entities the best, and it's important to allow them to do that.
• That was very clear that EPA is not a grid-wide energy regulator.

Committee: Senate Environment and Public Works Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• , outlining concerns with state-by-state AI regulation.
• Regulating state government use of AI.
• This very light-touch approach to regulation.
• They are not regulated utilities.
• There are gaps in our regulations and so forth.

Committee: Joint Artificial Intelligence and Data Center Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> all energy regulation all energy regulation the<00:46:28.319><c> next</c><00:46:28.599><c> change
• </c> customer regulated customer regulated energy<00:52:28.599><c> and</c><00:52:28.760><c> the</c><00
• c> and</c> regulation not Federal Regulation and regulation not Federal Regulation and not<01:00:09.799
• :00:11.720><c> it's</c> not all state regulation though it's not all state regulation though it's just
• ><c> to</c><01:00:13.799><c> a</c> just the regulation pertaining to a just the regulation pertaining

Committee: House Science, Technology and Energy

Transcript Highlights:

• It says that no occupation can be regulated in the state unless its regulation is required for the health
• Moving on to regulation of health facilities and providers, health facility regulation includes licensing
• </c> establishments moving on to regulation establishments moving on to regulation of<00:39:24.960><c
• </c><00:39:29.400><c> includes</c> health facility regulation includes health facility regulation includes
• </c> maltreatment laws in mdh regulated maltreatment laws in mdh regulated facilities The health department

Transcript Highlights:

• Texas restaurants operate under a complicated and costly patchwork of regulations. regulations.
• We are regulated by the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation already, and Texas.
• These mini-boilers are heavily regulated by the FDA.
• already rigorously regulated by US FDA.
• So, I'm in favor of... reducing a duplicative regulation.

Bills: SB264 , SB542 , SB924 , SB1008 , SB1029 , SB1036 , SB1057 , SB1058 , SB1185 , SB1202 , SB1358 , SB1364 , SB1376 , SB1569 , SB1664 , SB1697 , SJR50

Committee: Senate Business & Commerce