Transcript Highlights:

• the federal payroll.
• the federal payroll.
• the federal payroll.
• the federal payroll.
• Is it the federal government that then? Is it the federal government accountable?

Transcript Highlights:

• Elmer Lazzardi here with the California Federation of Labor Unions.
• In addition, the federal administration has started mass layoffs of federal workers and gutted federal
• The federal administration has started mass layoffs of federal workers and gutted federal agencies tasked
• state and federal laws, scaring workers into remaining silent.
• Yvonne Fernandez, California Labor Federation, proud co-sponsor.

Summary: The Assembly Labor and Employment Committee heard several bills focused on worker rights, workplace technology, pay equity, and retail/self-checkout standards. SB 703 would require ports to collect and report information on trucking companies to help identify worker misclassification in the port trucking industry; supporters, including Teamsters and the California Labor Federation, said better data is needed for enforcement, while trucking and retail groups said they were working with the author and expected to remove opposition after amendments. The bill passed 5-0 and was re-referred to Transportation. The committee also approved a consent calendar of other measures. SB 294, the Workplace Know Your Rights Act, would require the Labor Commissioner to create a template for annual employer notices about workers’ labor and civil rights, including emergency contact notification if a worker is detained or arrested. Supporters said the bill would help workers understand their rights amid federal rollbacks and weak enforcement; the California Restaurant Association opposed it. SB 7 would require notice and human review before employers use automated decision-making systems for discipline or termination, and would bar predictive use of such systems for employment actions. Labor groups supported the bill as a safeguard against biased or opaque algorithmic management, while HR, chamber, retail, and local government groups raised concerns about breadth, notice burdens, and small-business impacts. Both bills passed 5-0 to their next committees. The committee also advanced SB 238, which would require disclosure about workplace surveillance and AI monitoring tools, and SB 442, which sets staffing and operational standards for self-checkout, including at least one staffed lane, one employee dedicated to monitoring self-checkout, item restrictions, and a 15-item limit sign. Supporters argued both bills improve transparency, safety, and worker protections; opponents warned SB 238 could expose security practices and SB 442 could raise costs and create preemption issues. SB 464 would expand state pay-data reporting to better capture public-sector workforce demographics in line with reparations and pay-equity goals, and SB 642 would strengthen the Equal Pay Act by extending recovery periods, clarifying wage definitions, and updating pay-scale language. SB 464 and SB 642 also passed, with some opposition from county and business groups over scope and retroactivity. All measures taken up in the hearing were approved by committee, generally on 5-0 votes, and re-referred to the appropriate policy or fiscal committees.

Transcript Highlights:

• To a federal or state agency ever.
• removed from the federal rules.
• I guess this was a federal mandate.
• I guess this was a federal mandate.
• about we have been paying your bills, federal government. about we have been paying your bills, federal

Summary: The meeting focused heavily on behavioral health and substance use treatment, especially the IMD exclusion and whether North Dakota should pursue a Section 1115 waiver to allow Medicaid reimbursement for services in institutions for mental diseases for adults ages 21 to 64. Turtle Mountain representatives described major local needs, including limited access to care, high syphilis rates, and the importance of timely public health data. They also discussed the tribe’s recovery center, which opened the prior year, now operating five levels of care with 16 beds, and the desire to expand capacity, possibly through an IMD waiver or related policy changes. Committee members also raised related issues such as rural health transformation funding, telehealth, workforce retention, and the need for better coordination between tribal and state public health systems. A central issue was Turtle Mountain Public Health’s long-running effort to secure a data use agreement with the state so it can receive surveillance data and respond directly to infectious disease cases among tribal members. Speakers said the tribe had a successful COVID-era agreement that allowed faster contact tracing and case management, but that agreement ended with the pandemic. They argued that current delays in sharing data, especially for sexually transmitted infections, leave the tribe unable to respond quickly, while the state and county epidemiology workload is too distant and stretched to be effective. Committee members expressed support and said they would look into the issue, noting that other tribes have secured similar agreements. The committee also heard a detailed presentation from the National Health Law Program on the IMD exclusion. The presenter explained that federal Medicaid law generally bars payment for care in facilities with more than 16 beds, but that states can use other tools such as state plan amendments, managed care arrangements, telehealth, and community-based services. He said IMD waivers are administratively complex, time-limited, and have shown mixed results in other states, with some gains in residential treatment access but limited evidence of improved overdose outcomes or stronger community-based care. He urged the committee to consider broader continuum-of-care solutions and cautioned that waivers alone are not a cure-all. No final vote was taken on the bill draft during the portion shown, but the committee discussed the proposal to appropriate $49,000 and one FTE to HHS to pursue an IMD waiver and report back in the next interim. Members also debated the policy rationale for the 16-bed limit, the role of the state versus tribal sovereignty, and whether the bill should move through the Health Care or Human Services committee in the future.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> happens to work for the federal happens to work for the federal government<00:04:49.680><c> can<
• </c><00:13:54.160><c> Again</c> with federal law enforcement. Again with federal law enforcement.
• </c> get to regulate the federal government. get to regulate the federal government.
• </c> 1983, which they have at the federal 1983, which they have at the federal level.<00:31:19.440><c
• They would have the federal agents.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:04:06.319><c> government</c> part funded by the federal government part funded by the federal
• has</c><00:04:42.479><c> recognized</c> federal government itself has recognized federal government
• That's the way that our federal regulations work.
• That's the way that our federal regulations work.
• </c> right, our grant in the federal right, our grant in the federal regulations<00:46:14.720><c> surrounding

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> uh state business taxes federally. uh state business taxes federally.
• </c> in the federal tax code. in the federal tax code.
• </c> maximize federal deductibility. maximize federal deductibility.
• It's federal conformity to the no tax on tips provisions of the federal law.
• </c> federal level. federal level.

Bills: HF3127 , HF3524 , HF3525 , HF3754

Committee: House Taxes

Transcript Highlights:

• That's not the job of the federal government.” She did note a concern.
• That's not the job of the federal government. She did note a concern.
• Federal paperwork, that's federal laws.
• Whether the state has to set up paperwork for aligning with federal laws or the federal government has
• paperwork to align with federal laws, we still have to align with federal laws, and so the cost associated

Committee: House State Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• government efforts to preempt Prop 12, including the 2026 federal farm bill.
• The second is related to the federal hemp program.
• the finalization, as I mentioned, of the federal rules earlier this week.
• language to implement the federal workforce Pell grant program.
• And lastly, related to federal conformity, there are a number of provisions in the federal tax bill,

Summary: The subcommittee heard May Revision proposals from the Department of Food and Agriculture, the Government Operations Agency, the Department of Technology, and the Franchise Tax Board, with public comment to come later and all items held open. CDFA presented funding for the animal care program implementing Proposition 12, including a one-time $5.2 million General Fund transfer to the Ag Fund and $2.8 million ongoing, and the LAO recommended approval while noting the Legislature should revisit the funding once litigation and federal preemption questions are resolved. CDFA also proposed ending state oversight of industrial hemp and moving to the federal USDA program by January 1, 2028, with an $8.3 million General Fund transfer to cover startup and transition costs; the LAO supported the transition. Additional CDFA items included $204,000 ongoing and one position to preserve agricultural statistics reporting after USDA reorganization, and trailer bill changes to clarify the department’s 5% indirect cost cap; both drew no objections from Finance or LAO. The Government Operations Agency and Cradle to Career items focused on implementing the new federal Workforce Pell program. Finance described trailer bill language establishing state eligibility processes, with the California Student Aid Commission as the authorizing entity in consultation with the Workforce Development Board, and proposed $1.3 million one-time General Fund for Cradle to Career to build data linkages. The LAO urged caution because federal rules were just finalized and said more information was needed on workload, costs, and whether existing data systems could support the work. Senators raised policy concerns about limiting the program to public institutions and about aligning the proposal with broader workforce and labor goals. The committee also briefly discussed SB 53/Cal Compute, with GovOps saying no appropriation had been provided for its consortium work, and Finance saying the administration was not proposing funding at this time. The Department of Technology presented a $30 million operational backstop for the Middle Mile Broadband Initiative, intended to cover any shortfall if expected revenues from the Golden State Net third-party administrator do not materialize in time. The LAO initially recommended rejection over broad spending authority, then suggested amendments with stronger reporting and legislative review; committee members questioned the revenue assumptions, oversight, and whether the request could recur. CDT also sought $1 million for Poppy, the state’s GenAI digital assistant, to expand secure statewide use; the LAO had no concerns, and members asked about data security, model bias, training restrictions, and possible local-government use. Finally, FTB proposed realigning CalFile resources after the federal Direct File program was discontinued, retaining three ongoing positions and returning the rest of the funding and positions to the General Fund; the LAO said the reduced scope was reasonable, and members discussed keeping the free filing system user-friendly and ready for future federal changes. The committee also heard the administration’s digital pre-written software tax proposal, which would extend sales tax to electronically delivered software and SaaS beginning January 1, 2027, generating an estimated $450 million General Fund in 2026-27 and $900 million ongoing, plus local revenue. The LAO supported modernizing the tax base but recommended broadening the proposal to include more digital products while considering a business-use exemption or reduced rate, and flagged a newly added video game exemption as a revenue downside. Senators generally supported the goal of raising revenue and aligning California with other states, but questioned the local revenue distribution and equity effects, and one senator said they would not support expanding the tax to books, music streaming, and similar consumer products. All items were left open without votes.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:01:26.720><c> dollars</c> their money comes from federal dollars their money comes from federal
• </c><00:03:56.079><c> level</c> what's happening at the federal level what's happening at the federal
• </c> sense of if we um lose the federal sense of if we um lose the federal funding<00:25:56.080><c> how
• </c><00:30:36.679><c> we're</c> of that those Federal awards that we're of that those Federal awards
• </c> on the state grants and the federal on the state grants and the federal funds<00:31:44.880><c> to

Transcript Highlights:

• standard is only 75%, and they argued federal preemption.
• It is our hope to also bring this federally.
• The federal standard for any state to label as a state is only 75%.
• That is executed per federal law, Title 8, U.S. Code 1227.
• Federal Court and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal...

Committee: House Governmental Organization

Transcript Highlights:

• You mentioned it was federally managed.
• How much have we gotten reimbursed from the federal government?
• It’s actually eight federally declared disasters.
• When do we get money from the federal government?
• When do we not get money from the federal government?

Summary: The committee took up four bills before moving to a broader discussion of the Emergency Preparedness and Response Trust Fund. SB 434, which would prohibit counties from increasing a home’s assessed value because the owner installed wind mitigation measures, was presented as a homeowner protection measure and reported favorably. CS/SB 110, clarifying that certain 98-year-or-longer residential leaseholders remain eligible for the homestead exemption even if the lease ends at death, was also reported favorably without opposition. SB 856, requiring online real estate listing platforms to display estimated ad valorem taxes using prescribed calculation methods and not the current owner’s tax bill, drew supportive testimony from property appraisers, Zillow, and local government groups; members emphasized transparency for buyers, especially first-time homebuyers, and the bill was reported favorably. The committee then spent most of the meeting on SPB 7040, which would recreate and extend the Emergency Preparedness and Response Fund through December 31, 2027. Supporters, including the Division of Emergency Management, argued the fund is needed for hurricanes, flooding, other disasters, and rapid response operations, and said the extension preserves legislative oversight that would otherwise lapse. Opponents from advocacy and policy groups argued the fund has been used too broadly, especially for immigration-related detention and enforcement activities, and criticized the lack of tighter guardrails and transparency. They cited deaths in detention facilities, the use of emergency dollars for non-disaster purposes, and concerns about political favoritism and public accountability. Director Kevin Guthrie testified at length in support of the extension, explaining that the fund is used for natural, man-made, and technological emergencies, that reimbursements from federal and other sources are returned to the fund, and that the state has used it for hurricanes, flooding, civil unrest, international evacuations, and immigration-related operations under Operation Vigilant Sentry. He said the division has sought federal reimbursement for some expenses and that the fund helps the state respond quickly when emergencies arise. Members questioned the size of the fund, the amount spent on immigration-related activities, the status of federal reimbursements, and whether lawmakers should have more oversight or unannounced access to detention facilities. The bill discussion remained ongoing in the portion provided, with no final vote on SPB 7040 shown in the transcript excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• There's the federally, they put it in an organization, they laid it out federally and said it's illegal
• There's the federally, they put it in an organization, they laid it out federally and said it's illegal
• There's the federally, they put it in an organization, they laid it out federally and said it's illegal
• </c><00:18:28.799><c> regulations</c> violates the coda Federal regulations violates the coda Federal
• </c> two weeks fighting this at the federal two weeks fighting this at the federal level<00:20:07.320

Summary: The committee met to hear a bill aimed at regulating paid veterans’ claims consultants and protecting veterans from bad actors. Chair Denine opened by emphasizing transparency, the need to hear concerns, and that the meeting was a hearing only, with no immediate vote expected. Senator David Yates, the sponsor, said the bill is intended to protect veterans by requiring clear written disclosure when a veteran uses a for-profit consultant, including that the consultant is not accredited or affiliated with VA or veterans’ service organizations. He said the proposal was based on best practices from other states, would include guardrails rather than a total ban, and was being slowed to allow further review and possible amendments. Testimony reflected both support for the bill’s intent and disagreement over its scope. A committee member and later witnesses stressed that veterans should be able to make informed choices and that some private consultants and law firms have helped veterans, but they also acknowledged bad actors and the need for rules, accreditation, and fee limits. James Toby of the VFW opposed the bill as written, arguing it conflicts with federal rules by allowing fees on initial claims and urging the committee to reject it in favor of legislation that mirrors federal law and imposes real penalties. Mark Christensen of Veterans Guardian said veterans need more options because Kentucky has too few VSO representatives, supported guardrails and accreditation reform, and suggested the bill could be improved with a dollar-based fee cap, no late fees or interest, and clearer ethical rules. Daryl Casey of JVO said his organization supports the bill’s goal of leveling the playing field, noting that veterans service organizations do not charge fees and that any limits should apply consistently across providers. The chair did not take a final vote during this hearing and instead encouraged the sponsor to circulate committee substitute language and continue discussions with veterans’ organizations and committee members before the next meeting. The sponsor said he was not pushing the bill forward that day and wanted more time to address concerns, especially around accreditation and disclosure.

Transcript Highlights:

• You're on broadband, given what's happening at the federal level.
• Things that you're forecasting as impacts and cuts to federal, from federal programs that are going to
• Recently the Trump administration has threatened to claw back federal funds and try to halt federal grant
• We're in constant communication with our federal program officer.
• When we talk about the federal funding, a few years ago about some funding was swapped out.

Committee: House Communications and Conveyance

Transcript Highlights:

• The asset test elimination, federal success, federal flexibilities.
• On March 3, 2025, the federal government published a note in the Federal Register that it would no longer
• So the federal government and the new federal administration, and even the prior administration, had
• So the federal government and the new federal administration and even the prior administration, tax at
• So the federal government and the new federal administration and even the prior administration had sent

Summary: The committee heard a budget oversight hearing on the Department of Health Care Services, focusing first on the overall Medi-Cal budget and a March General Fund loan to cover a current-year shortfall. DHCS said the 2025-26 budget proposal totals $193.4 billion, with Medi-Cal projected at $188.1 billion total funds and $42.1 billion General Fund, driven by higher enrollment, pharmacy costs, managed care growth, and costs tied to eligibility expansions and the COVID-era redetermination unwinding. The department said the $3.44 billion loan was needed to manage cash flow and ensure timely payments to providers and plans, while the LAO noted Medi-Cal’s cash-basis budgeting creates volatility and that more detailed estimates would come with the May Revision. Members discussed federal Medicaid threats, the need for transparency on cost drivers, and the impact of pharmacy spending, long-term care, and immigration-related coverage expansions. The second major topic was family health programs, including California Children’s Services, the continuous coverage unwinding, and opioid settlement fund spending. DHCS described CCS funding methodology changes, ongoing county stakeholder work, and a delayed rollout of CCS monitoring and oversight until July 1, 2025, while county representatives and advocates argued the program is underfunded and asked for more technical assistance and a delay in implementation. On the unwinding, the department explained that federal redetermination flexibilities helped maintain coverage after the pandemic, but the Governor’s budget proposes ending them at the end of June 2025; advocates urged making the flexibilities permanent to avoid coverage losses. For opioid settlement funds, DHCS and Finance said the budget increases funding for naloxone distribution while reducing other harm-reduction spending based on updated settlement revenues, prompting criticism from members and public commenters who argued the change would weaken effective harm-reduction programs. The hearing also included an update on Proposition 35 implementation. DHCS said the voter-approved measure continuously appropriates MCO tax revenues beginning in 2025, with up to $4.6 billion annually available for specified Medi-Cal and provider investments in 2025 and 2026, but implementation depends on consultation with the required stakeholder advisory committee. The department and LAO noted uncertainty about future federal rules affecting the MCO tax after 2026. Public testimony largely supported maintaining Medi-Cal expansions, protecting immigrant coverage, preserving harm-reduction funding, and increasing support for community health workers, pediatric dental care, and CCS county administration. No votes were taken during the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• But our efforts protect that federal funding have been almost entirely successful.
• And we'll continue doing that in the hopes that the federal and state partners.
• We expect to see further initiatives from federal agencies.
• This happens a lot in federal grant conditions.
• Recent discussions have focused on federal policy development and potential impacts focused on federal

Summary: The Massachusetts Commission on the Status of Persons with Disabilities held its quarterly virtual/in-person meeting and approved the December minutes. The chair announced plans for the next “Meeting the Moment” community forum in Lowell on March 27, in partnership with MassAbility, focused on digital accessibility, education-to-employment transition, workforce supports, long-term services and supports, and health equity, along with a resource fair. The commission also began planning for its October National Disability Employment Awareness Month event and sought volunteers for a small planning group. The meeting featured an update from the Attorney General’s office on federal litigation affecting Massachusetts, including challenges to federal actions on higher education diversity data collection and DEI-related funding conditions, immigration/TPS for Haitians, NIH research grant disruptions, and the nonrenewal of mental health services grants for schools. The presenter said the state has helped protect more than $3 billion in federal funding and noted ongoing or pending appeals in several cases. Commissioners asked about possible impacts on disability-related DEI work and Medicaid; the AG’s office said guidance on DEIA/employment initiatives is available and that the state is closely monitoring federal Medicaid communications and coordinating with the governor’s office. Undersecretary of Labor Josh Cutler and apprenticeship liaison Amara Riemann presented on registered apprenticeship and pre-apprenticeship programs, emphasizing paid, employer-driven pathways with classroom instruction and wage progression. They highlighted growth in nontraditional fields such as human services, IT, early education, biotech, and banking, and described Bridgewater State University’s Excel program for neurodivergent people and people with disabilities as a model that can lead from pre-apprenticeship to apprenticeship. Commissioners discussed expanding similar models through community colleges and disability-focused workforce pipelines. Subcommittee reports covered disability employment, long-term services and supports, and health equity. The employment subcommittee heard from CED on state disability employment initiatives and planned future presentations from the Lawrence Partnership for Transition to Employment and Veterans Affairs. The long-term services and supports subcommittee discussed MassHealth budget pressures, anticipated federal Medicaid changes, the personal care attendant working group, and an upcoming discussion on crisis standards of care. In commissioner announcements, members highlighted recent honors for several commissioners, updates on municipal digital accessibility grants, a June Medicaid summit, and other commission activities. No formal votes were taken beyond approval of the minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> on federal procurement. on federal procurement.
• </c> a requirement in that federal law. a requirement in that federal law.
• </c> has adopted the federal minimum wage. has adopted the federal minimum wage.
• Uh, with this federal change going to the federal law, isn’t the federal law the minimum $2.13 an hour
• </c> federal standards. federal standards.

Committee: House Labor, Industrial and Rehabilitative Services

Summary: The committee opened its labor hearing on SB 655 and outlined the day’s schedule, including a later working session on SB 416 and an executive session planned for 2:30 p.m. Senator Dan Innis introduced SB 655, describing it as a technical bill affecting employee leasing companies/professional employer organizations (PEOs), workers’ compensation coverage, and a Senate-added minimum wage exemption for minor league baseball players covered by a collective bargaining agreement. He said the PEO change would let either the PEO or the client business hold workers’ comp coverage, while still requiring coverage, and argued it would align New Hampshire with most other states and reduce barriers for small businesses and multi-state employers. He also said the baseball provision would clarify wage treatment for minor league players and support the Manchester team. Justin Warell of Insperity testified in support of the PEO portion, explaining that PEOs provide HR, payroll, benefits administration, and workers’ compensation administration through a co-employment model. He said the bill would preserve mandatory coverage while allowing flexibility for the client or PEO to maintain the policy, which could help clients who already have preferred coverage or who face cost or administrative issues in multiple states. He noted that most clients would still remain under the PEO’s policy and said Insperity would submit written comments. Committee members asked about how the arrangement would work, whether the client or PEO would pay, and whether the bill would affect liability insurance packaging; Warell said the employer still bears the cost and that the bill mainly gives larger clients an option. One member asked him to remain available for possible follow-up after hearing from the labor department. Stephen Gonzalez of Major League Baseball testified in support of the minor league baseball exemption. He said MLB and the MLB Players Association negotiated a collective bargaining agreement that already provides players with salary, housing, meals, per diems, health and retirement benefits, disability continuation, tuition assistance, and signing bonuses. He argued that treating players as hourly workers creates impractical time-tracking problems because players do work-related activities on their own time, and said the bill would recognize them as salaried workers and avoid litigation over what counts as hours worked. Committee members questioned why the exemption was needed if players are already salaried and whether MLB could simply amend its CBA; Gonzalez said the bill would help prevent wage-and-hour lawsuits and noted that similar exemptions have been enacted in other states. No vote was taken during the hearing, and the chair indicated the bill would be considered for executive action later that afternoon.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> run things here with the state federal run things here with the state federal and<00:10:28.880><
• We get compensation for helping the federal government with their federal programs.
• </c> this year when you file for federal this year when you file for federal student<04:15:21.439><c>
• </c> are there any Selective Service Federal are there any Selective Service Federal Personnel<04:28:
• utilized by our federal government not utilized by our federal government since<04:35:04.039><c> the

Committee: House State-federal Relations and Veterans Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• This federal mandate gave... ...of Census Day, April 1st.
• That's okay now in federal courts.
• Recent Massachusetts redistricting maps have complied with federal and state law.
• And they provide much broader protections than even the federal law included.
• Federal circuits have permitted coalition districts or crossover districts.

Committee: Senate Senate Committee on the Census

Summary: The Senate Committee on the Census held a hearing on July 7, 2026 focused on how the census defines and tabulates race and ethnicity for redistricting. The sole witness, Professor Jeffrey Weiss, reviewed the history of Public Law 94-171, the Voting Rights Act, and Census Bureau race categories, explaining how block-level census data has been central to one-person, one-vote compliance and to enforcing Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. He described the evolution from separate race and Hispanic-origin tabulations to multiracial reporting, the addition of voting-age and citizen voting-age data, and the increasing complexity created by coalition districts and multiracial populations. A major theme was uncertainty about Census 2030. Weiss said the federal government is considering changes to race and ethnicity questions, possible elimination of the MENA category, reduced multiracial detail, and discontinuation of differential privacy, while also discussing a possible citizenship question and other procedural changes coming through the Commerce Department rather than the Census Bureau. He warned that these shifts, combined with staffing cuts, reduced outreach, and scaled-back testing, could affect the availability and granularity of redistricting data and may trigger litigation. Committee members pressed him on the Biden-era revisions, the Trump administration’s current actions, and whether future data might have to be reported at a higher geographic level if block-level privacy protections are removed. Weiss also summarized Supreme Court redistricting doctrine, describing the move from Baker v. Carr and Reynolds v. Sims to the Gingles framework, then to later decisions limiting race-conscious districting, including Shelby County, Rucho, and the recent Louisiana v. Calais decision. He said Calais significantly narrowed federal Section 2 protections but does not directly preempt state voting rights acts, which he noted are being adopted in several states and may still allow coalition-based protections. The hearing ended after questions from the chair and vice chair, with no votes or formal committee actions taken, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• school property, or a school bus for purposes of civil immigration enforcement, codifying state and federal
• bill requires a judicial warrant to enter private property, um, and uh it is codifying state and federal
• bill requires a judicial warrant to enter private property, um, and uh it is codifying state and federal
• Um to quote a recent federal record.
• You know, the federal government is now.

Transcript Highlights:

• share of the cost of removal the state is entitled to receive in the form of reimbursement from the federal
• utility relocation costs... ...that maximize the amount of federal funding for fish barrier removal
• There's also... ...could receive federal grants, but it's unknown how many they would receive.
• Even our own federal government bonds are 30 years.
• Even our own federal government bonds are 30 years.

Summary: The committee heard testimony on Second Substitute Senate Bill 5690, which would require WSDOT to improve coordination with utilities on fish barrier removal projects and utility relocations, provide advance notice when feasible, and seek to maximize federal funding for relocation costs. Staff described the bill’s background, including the federal culvert injunction and WSDOT’s fish barrier work, and noted fiscal impacts tied to grant monitoring and possible revenue changes. Senator McEwen said the bill was narrowed from a prior version to reduce fiscal concerns and cited a district example where poor coordination allegedly wasted public and ratepayer funds. Utility representatives from PUDs testified in support, emphasizing better communication, advance notice for budgeting, and access to federal funds; no opposition was presented on this bill before the public hearing was closed. The committee also heard Senate Bill 6148, which would extend the maximum term for regional transit authority bonds from 40 years to 75 years and remove eligibility for regional mobility grant funds if an RTA uses bonds longer than 40 years. Staff and committee fiscal discussion focused on how longer terms reduce annual debt service but increase total interest paid over time, with examples comparing 25-, 40-, 50-, and 75-year bonds. Supporters, including Sound Transit board members, local officials, labor, and transit advocates, argued the bill would give Sound Transit flexibility to manage inflation, preserve project schedules, and align financing with long-lived infrastructure and the federal TIFIA loan program. Opponents argued the bill would increase long-term costs, shift burdens to future generations, and is premature because Sound Transit is still revising its plan and already has substantial cash and bonding capacity. The hearing ended after questions about debt safeguards, refinancing, and how the proposed authority would interact with TIFIA loans.