Transcript Highlights:

• Department of Economic Development, Department of Economic Development, Tourism<00:13:58.959> in
• I put it in economic development.
• from economic [laughter] development. from economic [laughter] development.
• in developing Banyan Drive is foremost. in developing Banyan Drive is foremost.
• development. Chair delay. development. Chair delay.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee first heard SB 2627, which would exempt Hawaii Tourism Authority contracts and agreements for sports projects, events, and related marketing from the state procurement code and other competitive bidding requirements. HTA, DBEDT, and the State Procurement Office testified in support or with comments, while one individual offered general support for sports tourism. Senators focused on narrowing the bill so the exemption would apply more specifically to sports-related projects and marketing, rather than broad marketing activities, and discussed whether the bill should require notice to the State Procurement Office or approval by the chief procurement officer. Procurement officials said a reporting requirement would be the most expeditious option, while still allowing post-event monitoring and public posting of exemptions. Members also discussed whether the exemption should be limited to situations involving sole-source sports entities, such as major leagues or international sports organizations, to better justify bypassing procurement rules. The committee did not take a final vote in the portion provided, but members and testifiers agreed to continue working on the language. The hearing then moved to SB 2074 relating to state facilities and naming rights for the Aloha Stadium and Hawaii Convention Center. The Stadium Authority, HTA, and DBEDT testified in support, while the Outdoor Circle and other organizations opposed the measure. Opponents argued the bill could create fiscal and legal risk, echoing concerns raised in prior legislation and by the attorney general, and warned it would mark a major shift by treating public facilities as commercial branding opportunities. Supporters said naming rights could generate significant revenue to help fund the stadium project and reduce the burden on the state and developers. Senators questioned how signage would be handled, especially whether it would be exterior-facing or limited to inward-facing signage, and the Stadium Authority said it was willing to work with the Outdoor Circle on language that would preserve community aesthetics while allowing revenue generation. A senator cited a prior study estimating naming rights could bring in about $1.5 million per year over 20 years, and asked what that revenue would buy for the public; the Stadium Authority responded that it would help advance the project toward a larger, improved stadium. No final action was taken in the excerpt provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• :17:27.039> overall workforce development fund overall workforce development fund overall impact
• :27.520> onetime development center, a onetime development center, a onetime appropriation<00:
• Workforce Development Inc.
• /c><00:24:00.720> the Community Development 500,000 over the Community Development 500,000 over
• 1 million Development Programming 1 million Equitable<00:25:02.320> Development<00:25:02.919>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• will change the economic development landscape in New Mexico.
• Today, we have very few properties that are ready for development.
• . ...making this non-competitive for development.
• I believe economic development is more than creating jobs and increasing GDP, however.
• We published an infrastructure strategy development in December.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:07:03.360> uh uh permitting uh larger developments uh uh permitting uh larger developments
• <00:08:36.800> would proposed here that the developer would proposed here that the developer
• that back from a willing developer that back from a willing developer consultant.<00:13:07.040><
• <00:21:43.360> to It's incumbent upon the developer to It's incumbent upon the developer to
• . development.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The public hearing focused on Senate Bill 153, a proposal to speed up Department of Transportation driveway/entrance permitting for larger residential developments, generally 20 units or more. Senator Mark McConkey, the prime sponsor, said long permit delays can stall financing and housing construction, and explained that the bill creates a second, expedited permitting lane funded by a per-door fee. He said the original 90-day mandate was replaced with a more workable process developed with DOT and the New Hampshire Homebuilders Association, and noted that the fiscal note had been removed. Committee members asked about the fee structure, timing, whether the bill applied to 20 doors/units, and whether it affected income-restricted housing; McConkey said it does not include income-based incentives and does not change zoning or local planning requirements, only the DOT permit timeline. Industry witnesses strongly supported the bill. Matt Mayberry of the New Hampshire Homebuilders Association said the proposal is a public-private partnership the industry requested, that time delays can jeopardize financing, and that builders are willing to pay for faster review as long as safety remains the top priority. Joshua Reap of Associated Builders and Contractors gave similar support, saying DOT bottlenecks have long slowed projects and that the bill would help move approved developments forward without burdening taxpayers. Questions from members focused on whether the expedited lane would pressure DOT to approve unsafe projects, whether consultants would already be vetted, and how the process would work alongside local approvals; witnesses said DOT would still retain final sign-off and that the process would be transparent and safety-focused. Alan Hanscom of DOT then explained the department’s role in more detail. He said the bill would require DOT to issue permits within 60 business days after approval of the traffic impact study for qualifying residential projects, and would create a $120 per-unit fee to fund a dedicated liaison position and software upgrades. He said the applicant would also pay for third-party consultant engineer review under DOT oversight, with the consultant costs passed through at no DOT markup and any unused funds returned to the applicant. Hanscom said DOT has been working with the sponsor and builders to clarify the process and improve transparency, and estimated the fee would support a position that coordinates between applicants, districts, consultants, and DOT bureaus to reduce dead time in the review process.

Transcript Highlights:

• By publishers and content developers.
• school literacy programs, employ and develop literacy coaches and specialists, and develop and implement
• Engaging in professional development, developing plans, and selecting instruments for their board so
• Aging in professional development, developing plans, and selecting instruments for their board so they
• Department of Finance, welcome. development policy committees to develop something that's more appropriately

Summary: The committee heard a series of budget proposals focused on education finance, with repeated questions about whether the state’s investments are coordinated, targeted to the highest-need students, and likely to produce measurable results. On the first item, the administration proposed $1 million for a study of California’s curriculum framework, standards, and instructional materials process, plus $250,000 for supplemental ELA/ELD guidance. CDE and Finance said the study would examine how other states organize standards, frameworks, and adoptions, while the chair and members questioned why California has gone so long without updating some standards, what the study would actually accomplish, and whether the proposal was too vague to justify the cost. The issue was held open. The committee then took up a proposed $25 million statewide literacy network within the system of support. CCEE and CDE said the network would coordinate multiple existing literacy leads, create a clearinghouse of evidence-based resources, and improve coherence across the state’s many literacy initiatives. Members pressed on how a one-time, five-year allocation could support a long-term system, how the work would reach distressed and rural districts, and whether the proposal would translate into classroom change rather than just another layer of coordination. The issue was also held open. Next, the committee reviewed a $500 million proposal to expand literacy coaches and reading specialists and to create a math coaches program. CDE described the existing literacy coach cohorts as producing positive reports from participating LEAs, while the LAO recommended modifications, especially for the math coach portion, including limiting eligibility to elementary schools, setting minimum grant amounts, directing funds to eligible school sites, and making eligibility automatic rather than application-based. Members focused on whether coaches were actually being placed at the schools with the greatest need and whether the state has a coherent long-term strategy for literacy and math investments. The committee also heard a $40 million proposal for training and implementation of K-2 reading difficulty screeners, which the LAO said was reasonable but could be reduced because $25 million had already been provided for training; CDE said the new funds were needed for full implementation, procurement, and sustainability. Finally, the committee heard a $10 million proposal for a developmentally appropriate TK multilingual learner screener, with CDE explaining why the preschool language-identification process is different from K-12 EL assessment and the chair asking staff to explore whether a single, more consistent approach could be developed. The meeting concluded with a presentation on universal school meals and kitchen infrastructure, including a $31.5 million backfill, an $84.1 million increase for projected meal growth, a COLA adjustment, and $150 million for kitchen upgrades and training to support freshly prepared meals.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's only 25 years, and it's complicated to get new supply to develop.
• Water Development Board.
• All that's lacking is the funding to develop the resource.
• Programs offered by the Texas Water Development Board.
• Develop supply. Ms. Kirkl. Marie Camino. Good morning, Madam Chairman and committee.

Bills: HB3077, HJR2, HJR7, HJR7

Keywords: alcohol, taxation, reporting requirements, sales, distribution, death tax, inheritance tax, estate tax, property transfer, constitutional amendment, water fund, Texas water supply, state revenue, infrastructure, HJR 7, Texas Legislature, quorum, majority quorum, two-thirds quorum, legislative procedure

Transcript Highlights:

• Do you see a lot of those types of developments, Mr. Foster? Mr.
• <00:36:58.960> remodelers are the building developers remodelers are the building developers
• So what I would ask is for members to Etc developers will long be gone with Etc developers will long
• But the problem is this type of development and affordable developments aren't happening today.
• But the problem is this type of development, and affordable developments aren't happening today.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• <01:04:07.480> developing<01:04:07.880> an requires developers developing an requires
• ; we ask of every developer.
• ; we ask of every developer.
• ; we ask of every developer.
• ; we ask of every developer.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several housing, land use, and preservation bills. HB 1008 HD2 would require the Department of Land and Natural Resources to complete historic preservation determinations for state affordable housing projects within 90 days and create sensitivity-based review pathways. HHFDC, DLNR’s State Historic Preservation Division, and written testimony from DBEDT supported the bill as an expedited process for projects unlikely to affect significant historic resources. Members asked how the bill would define significant versus non-significant historic properties, how it would interact with Kapakai analysis, and whether burial councils had been consulted; SHPD said the bill would not replace Kapakai review and that burial councils had not been included. Written support also came from OHA, Hawaii Realtors, and the Maui Chamber of Commerce. HB 1093 would clarify the Hawaii Public Housing Authority’s powers relating to housing projects. HPHA supported the measure, saying it would align definitions with prior law and help deconcentrate poverty by allowing mixed-income rebuilding. The director also said the bill was increasingly urgent because of reported federal HUD priorities that could affect public housing and Section 8 funding. HB 1096 HD1 would repeal state low-income housing preferences for disabled veterans and spouses of deceased veterans, with HPHA saying federal veteran programs such as VASH are a better mechanism and that the state preference has not been used in years. HB 1411 would allow HHFDC projects to give sale or lease preferences to applicants who live or work within five miles of a project; HHFDC and the Hawaii Chapter of NAIOP supported it as a way to keep residents connected to their communities, while members raised constitutional concerns about broader local-preference policies. The committee also heard HB 367 HD1, which would create county permit exemptions for certain agricultural and maintenance activities. Written testimony included opposition from the Department of Planning and Permitting and support from the Hawaii Farm Bureau, Grassroot Institute, and others. A public testifier opposed the bill, arguing that permit exemptions could worsen safety and compliance problems. Finally, HB 826 HD1 would allow county planning commissions, by special permit, to authorize residential housing in agricultural districts for agricultural workforce housing, long-term rental, or fee simple ownership under certain conditions. HHFDC supported it as a faster alternative to lengthy state land-use redistricting, but the Department of Agriculture, Land Use Commission, and Office of Planning and Sustainable Development raised concerns about food production impacts, due process, service provision, jurisdictional conflicts, and the use of special permits for what could amount to district boundary changes. Public testimony was mixed, with some support and some opposition. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Housing developments.
• It is not a rush of new development that is coming in.
• or the infill development.
• The new residential subdivisions are being developed, or the infill development.
• My intent is that there are places that we could continue to develop that just have not been developed

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and considered a series of bills, many focused on local government authority, land use, housing, and public notice requirements. Several measures were reported favorably, including SB 984 on firefighter cancer benefits and prevention, SB 1612 requiring local governments to accept electronic payments, SB 936 on temporary door locking devices, SB 962 on affordable housing protections for farms, SB 218 on land use regulations in hurricane-affected counties, SB 1020 on regulation of chickee huts, and SB 1434 on infill redevelopment of environmentally challenged properties. SB 1180 on community development district recall elections was amended to narrow and clarify the recall process and to add provisions on synthetic turf and compact urban mixed-use districts before being reported favorably. SB 380 on legal notices was also amended and reported favorably despite significant opposition from the Florida Press Association, Common Cause, and others who argued it would further fragment public notice access; supporters said it would modernize publication options and save money. Testimony on the bills was mixed. Supporters of the housing and redevelopment measures argued they would increase attainable housing, streamline approvals, and make better use of underutilized or contaminated land, while local government groups and advocacy organizations warned about overdevelopment, reduced public input, infrastructure strain, and conflicts with comprehensive planning. On SB 1444, which combined preemptions related to religious gatherings, private clubs, and certain permitting requirements, supporters framed it as protecting religious freedom and limiting local micromanagement, while the League of Cities and the Florida Association of Counties opposed it as overly broad and unclear; the bill nevertheless passed favorably after debate. SB 218 was presented as restoring normal land-use authority in counties unaffected by hurricanes while preserving protections in damaged areas, and SB 984 was described as clarifying firefighter cancer benefits and health coverage rules; both passed without controversy. The committee also heard extensive testimony on SB 948, a strike-all on local government land development regulations and orders that would create a statewide framework for starter homes and lot-split rules within urban growth areas. Supporters said it would expand housing supply and reduce regulatory delays, while opponents said it would override local zoning, weaken infrastructure and environmental protections, and apply too broadly. The bill drew support from housing advocates and some local officials, but opposition from the Florida League of Cities, Florida Association of Counties, and others. The transcript ends with SB 948 still under consideration, with testimony continuing and no final vote shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• housing developments in the pipeline. housing developments in the pipeline.
• Um I think part of development. Right.
• But the big picture was the large developers. Hiko, Gentry, right? They are heartened, right?
• You got to have the developer build the infrastructure. Because I can give you land.
• I can go have all these developers give the DOE land.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Joint Senate Committee on Education, Hawaiian Affairs, and Housing heard House Bill 1088 HD1, which would exempt housing developed by the Department of Hawaiian Homelands (DHHL) from school impact fees. The Department of Education said it was open to working with DHHL and the Legislature, including possibly eliminating the construction-cost portion of the fee for DHHL and other government affordable housing projects, but it wanted to retain the land-dedication requirement for future school sites where growth would exceed existing school capacity. The School Facilities Authority supported the bill, and DHHL strongly supported it, noting that its testimony referenced an earlier emergency proclamation but that the exemption remains in the current proclamation. DHHL also said it had no objection to a proposed amendment from the Wahiawa Hawaiian Homestead Association. The Tax Foundation of Hawaii testified in opposition to the broader school impact fee program, arguing that the fund has accumulated about $29 million that has not been spent and citing concerns raised in State Auditor Report 19-13, including administrative and constitutional issues. Committee discussion focused heavily on whether the fee system is being applied fairly, especially to smaller projects and homeowners, and whether the districts and calculations used to assess fees have been updated. Members questioned the DOE and SFA about the distinction between land and construction costs, the use of fees in areas like Kīhei, Kalihi, Ala Moana, and Ewa, and whether the department had revisited district calculations as recommended in the audit. DOE said it had collected about $500,000 in construction money and $2.8 million in land contributions for Kalihi-related areas, and said it would follow up on questions about land conveyances and district updates. After discussion, the chair called for a vote. The Education committee recommended passing HB 1088 HD1 as is, with Senator San Buenaventura voting with reservation and Senators Ihara and Kole voting aye. The recommendation was adopted. The Housing committee then also deferred the measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:04:55.160> follow units that could developers follow units that could developers follow
• on their development through on their development commitments.<00:04:56.920> Thank<00:04:57.080
• I I I I don't to develop housing.
• developing housing. developing housing.
• for development. for development.

Bills: HB1700

Keywords: housing, expedited permits, disabilities, access, functional needs, local government, affordable housing, reporting requirements, 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint committees heard several housing, land use, and infrastructure bills. HB 6019 HD2 on electric vehicle infrastructure and HB 1728 HD1 on rainwater catchment systems both drew limited testimony and were advanced. For HB 1728, the chairs said they would designate the Department of Health as the regulator and incorporate suggested technical amendments from plumbing and rainwater industry groups. Both measures were reported out with recommendations to pass, with HB 6019 passed unamended and HB 1728 passed with amendments. HB 1844, which would have required the Land Use Commission to reclassify lands designated for urban growth, drew significant opposition from the Hawaii Farm Bureau and Sierra Club, who argued it would bypass land-use review and threaten agricultural land, water planning, and long-term resilience. Grassroot Institute supported the bill, and the Land Use Commission said the bill raised concerns. After discussion, the chairs deferred the measure in one committee and later the recommendation to pass it with amendments was not adopted in the other committee. HB 1990 on penalties and liens for unresolved residential zoning violations was advanced with amendments. The chairs adopted Grassroot Institute’s suggested changes requiring any county sale of such property to be at no less than fair market value and requiring excess proceeds to be returned to the owner. HB 2424, which would allow county planning agencies to petition for temporary reclassification of certain agricultural lands to rural, also drew mixed testimony; the Land Use Commission raised due process concerns, and agriculture interests opposed it. One committee advanced it with amendments, but in the other committee the recommendation failed after members cited lack of county support. The later portion of the hearing began on HB 1738 and HB 1739. HB 1738 would expand county authority to amend district boundaries for housing on parcels over 15 acres; OHA, Sierra Club, and the Hawaii Farm Bureau opposed it, while Grassroot Institute supported it. HB 1739 would require transit-supportive densities in county TOD areas and limit local restrictions; DPP raised concerns about timing, permitting, and conflicts with existing TOD frameworks, while OPSD and Grassroot supported it. The transcript cuts off before final action on these later bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:40:57.480> the allow us to uh help develop the allow us to uh help develop the currently
• <00:42:53.760> and home funds Economic Development and home funds Economic Development and
• year communities and developers year communities and developers requested<00:54:48.400> over<
• <01:10:51.159> of would also fund development of would also fund development of Supportive
• <01:11:02.560> work developing work developing work skills<01:11:04.520> Minnesota<01:11

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Development.
• Deposit may only be used for development and construction purposes.
• Developer that's been developing condos around the United States and Canada for years.
• And that's where condominium development comes in, and that's why we develop condos, because it's a different
• And so that means as a developer, we need to be creative.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The developer and home builder.
• Development projects were being confronted, usually at the last minute of a development project, being
• asked to pay for or develop these off-site costs.
• That's a benefit beyond just the new development.
• And bankroll the actual cost of development.

Transcript Highlights:

• Did you develop this? I did not develop this. Where did this come from?
• is this your did you develop this I did is this your did you develop this I did not<00:13:48.120>
• I think it should be adopt, develop and adopt, just like we said here: develop and adopt policy.
• that they develop.
• It shall develop, adopt, and implement? No. Just develop and adopt.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee work session of the Education Policy and Administration Committee focused on House Bill 131 and House Bill 781, which were described as nearly identical bills addressing student cell phone use in schools. Members noted that HB 781 is an early bill and therefore needed committee action by Wednesday, while HB 131 did not face that deadline. The chair and members discussed the bills’ shared goal of requiring school boards to develop and adopt policies on student personal device use, with debate over whether the state should set minimum standards or leave more to local control. A major topic was funding. One member urged the committee to avoid creating an unfunded mandate and asked for some funding support, while others argued it was too early to commit money and that the committee should first establish the policy framework. The governor’s proposed funding was discussed, including a $1 million figure in the budget and a separate $250,000 amount referenced in the bill, but several members said the money would likely be insufficient to cover all students or pouch systems statewide. The committee also reviewed a handout reflecting proposed budget language that would require school boards to adopt policies on personal device use during the school day, with schoolwide implementation and exceptions for medical disability or language proficiency needs, and a DOE-administered grant program. Members spent considerable time on drafting details, especially deadlines and exceptions. They debated whether the bills should require school boards to “develop,” “adopt,” or also “implement” policies, and whether the effective date of the act should also serve as the deadline for school boards. They also discussed whether exceptions for classroom instructional use should be mandatory or merely encouraged, and whether the bills should explicitly include or exclude charter schools. Additional proposed exceptions included IEPs, 504 plans, English learners, and medical needs such as glucose sensors or insulin pumps, with some members suggesting medical issues be certified by a physician. No final vote or formal action was taken in the work session.

Transcript Highlights:

• And, you know, quite frankly, we had one developed. We had...
• At Florida Commerce, we have three main divisions: economic development, community development, and workforce
• services, and so I represent economic development.
• Together, the divisions of community development, economic development, and workforce services work to
• They worked with him to develop a personalized career plan.

Summary: The committee met to receive a base budget overview for agencies under its jurisdiction, which include the Division of Emergency Management, Department of Commerce, Department of State, Department of Transportation, Department of Military Affairs, and Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles. Staff explained the budget format and noted that the Legislature appropriated more than $20.2 billion to these agencies in the current fiscal year, a 66.7% increase over 10 years. The Department of Transportation then presented on the Moving Florida Forward initiative, describing it as a $7 billion effort to advance 20 major congestion-relief projects statewide. Secretary Jared Perdue said the department is ahead of schedule, with 14 of 20 projects expected to be underway by the end of the calendar year. He highlighted major projects including I-4 in Polk and Osceola counties, I-75 improvements, Southwest 10th Street in Broward County, Fruitville Road, Capital Circle in Tallahassee, and I-275, and discussed innovations such as aggregate supply grants, modified phase design-build, workforce hiring events, and voluntary acceleration. Senators asked about business impacts from construction, tourism-related transit funding, aggregate sourcing, and labor shortages; the secretary said FDOT works with local businesses and that additional revenue sources for transit would require legislative action. The Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles reviewed motorist services, revenue collection, licensing, vehicle titling, specialty plates, insurance compliance, driver safety, and commercial driver licensing. Officials said the department collected about $2.9 billion in revenue in fiscal year 2023-24 and described modernization efforts, including electronic verification systems, Real ID compliance, mobile licensing units, and a planned digital driver license. Members asked about the driver license backlog in Miami-Dade and Broward, and the department said service delays were driven by growth and staffing constraints but should improve with $7.5 million in recent funding and the eventual transition of services to county tax collectors. Questions also addressed temporary paper licenses and birth certificate fraud prevention. The Department of Commerce presented on the Job Growth Grant Fund and Visit Florida. Commerce said the grant fund, created in 2017, has awarded $257 million to 70 projects in 37 counties since 2019, with demand exceeding supply about four to one. Officials emphasized that the program supports targeted industries and workforce and infrastructure projects, and they highlighted examples in CDL training, semiconductors, advanced manufacturing, and health care. Senators raised concerns about small businesses affected by transportation construction, and Commerce said it has an Office of Small Business Innovation and other tools, though the grant fund is limited by statute to targeted industries. Visit Florida then described its public-private tourism marketing role, saying the state’s $80 million appropriation is matched by private investment and that the latest EDR review found a $3.30 return in tax revenue for every state dollar spent. Visit Florida reported record visitation and tourism spending, along with hurricane recovery marketing and rural promotion efforts.

Transcript Highlights:

• I am the Director of Small Business Development at the Executive Office of Economic Development.
• So how do small businesses find mass development?
• But mass development fellows are already on the ground.
• Development Corporations.
• And lastly, the Vail Development Fund.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Community Development and Small Business held an informational hearing focused on the conditions facing small and micro businesses in Massachusetts and the state programs intended to support them. Chairs Andy Vargas and Adam Gomez opened by emphasizing equitable economic development, the importance of CDFIs, and the need to help underserved entrepreneurs, especially women, minorities, veterans, immigrants, and other groups facing barriers. Committee members noted the hearing would not take up bills, and testimony was limited to 10 minutes per organization. State and quasi-public agency witnesses described current programs and funding. Dico Gibral of the Executive Office of Economic Development highlighted the Business Front Door, multilingual access, small business office hours in Gateway Cities, and funding in the Mass Leads Act, including support for CDFIs, small business technology, and capital grants. Tom Hooper of Commonwealth Corporation described workforce training programs such as the Workforce Training Fund, Workforce Competitiveness Trust Fund, and Career Technical Initiative, saying they help small businesses train workers, fill labor shortages, and support returning citizens and people with disabilities. Committee members asked about federal funding uncertainty, workforce migration, training schedules, and program uptake. Business and advocacy groups focused on cost pressures and regulatory burdens. The Massachusetts Restaurant Association urged continuation of outdoor dining and takeout alcohol sales, and pressed for relief from high credit card swipe fees, support for surcharging, and streamlining municipal licensing. The Retailers Association of Massachusetts cited survey results showing inflation, utility costs, payroll taxes, health insurance, and interchange fees as major concerns, and said many members might sell or close within five years; it also backed ending the state prohibition on surcharging and creating an Office of Main Streets Massachusetts. MACDC, BECKMA, and the Coalition for an Equitable Economy emphasized the need for more technical assistance, CDFI and small business funding, and protections against rising costs, tariffs, supply chain disruptions, and immigration enforcement impacts on immigrant-heavy business districts. No votes were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:35:33.920> in highdensity residential development in highdensity residential development
• That’s very, extremely dense development, especially in zones previously regulated and developed only
• and developed only for previously regul and developed only for commercial<00:40:08.160> use<00
• So they restrain the developers. The developers obviously want to build a building.
• :09.160> the it's to allow the developers the it's to allow the developers the builders<00:57:

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• financing, add costs to development. financing, add costs to development.
• ,<00:02:06.800> now If you add costs to development, now If you add costs to development,
• And now they're seeing this as a source of revenue and adding it to the cost of the development. development
• <00:03:44.120> But natural part of lot development. But natural part of lot development.
• fees that we see having been developed fees that we see having been developed in<00:04:51.360>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:03:26.400> a wetland delineations, we developed a wetland delineations, we developed a
• areas that you are developing? areas that you are developing?
• development. at the development of residential lots at the development of residential lots and<00:55
• within the programs that they develop. within the programs that they develop.
• , and based on where that development, and based on where that development<01:02:45.600> is, development

Keywords: 1187, senate, all