Transcript Highlights:

• We will now segue into building permits in New Mexico.
• What is the time permitted between the request of the permit and the approval of the permit?
• I'll leave out permitting right at the moment.
• expedited permit review for particular projects.
• They were able to get all of those permit fees.

Transcript Highlights:

• What House Bill 2427 does is amend the list of roads eligible for oversize or overweight vehicle permits
• cargo tanks under federal regulation, allows the Hidalgo County RMA to raise the maximum per-trip permit
• No, you just told me to rename some roads and change some permits, but what's the motivation behind all
• The RMA to issue permits for the movement of oversized or overweight policies carrying cargo in Hidalgo
• No, you just told me to rename some roads and changes some permits, but what's, what's the motivation

Summary: The Senate Transportation Committee heard a series of mostly local transportation and memorial designation bills. Several measures would rename highway segments in honor of fallen service members or public servants, including HB 2026 (Gary C. Johnston memorial highways in Archer County), HB 4429 (McIlroy Family Memorial Highway in Blanco and Burnet counties), SB 3062 (Hamby-Webb Memorial Highway in Panola County), HB 3510 (Sergeant Mark Butler Memorial Highway in Brazos County), and HB 3986 (Corporal Speedy Espiriueta Memorial Highway in Mission). The committee also heard HB 2560, which would create an optional county-road “adopt-a-road” style program allowing donations for county road repair and maintenance. Two bills drew more substantive policy discussion. HB 2427 and HB 2455 concerned oversized/overweight freight corridors and permit authority in Hidalgo County tied to cross-border trade near the FARR International Bridge. Supporters, including the bridge director, said the measures would correct prior road descriptions, put existing TxDOT actions into statute, improve truck routing, and support trade and bridge expansion. The committee substitute for HB 2427 also removed Roma permit language, barred certain hazardous-material permits, raised permit fees, required local cost responsibility for road maintenance, and made the bill contingent on SB 2949. HB 5436 would allow licensed automotive recyclers to buy certain older, long-unregistered vehicles for dismantling or scrap without a title, with reporting, lienholder notice, and anti-theft safeguards; recyclers and dealers supported it as a way to curb illegal untitled-vehicle sales and VIN cloning. HB 3966, authored by Sen. Alvarado, was the most contested bill. It would require commercial passenger bus companies to mail advance notice to residents within one mile before opening a new stop or terminal. Alvarado said the bill responded to the relocation of a Greyhound terminal into a Houston neighborhood without notice and to resulting crime and nuisance concerns. Greyhound opposed the bill, arguing the notice requirement would be burdensome and could delay emergency relocations during hurricanes, flooding, or lease changes. After testimony, the committee voted to report most bills favorably, with HB 3966 passing on a 5-2 vote; the other reported bills passed unanimously. Several bills were also placed on the local and uncontested calendar, and the committee recessed to the call of the chair.

Transcript Highlights:

• As a starting point, the bill exempts certain activities from the need for a permit at all.
• And you may remember that that has a series of general permits and exemptions and things to take a lot
• of things out of the individual permit process.
• , or an individual permit will be required.
• SB 9 represents a critical first step in establishing a state non-tidal wetlands permitting program.

Bills: SB9

Keywords: wetlands protection, nontidal wetlands, Delaware, environmental sustainability, climate change, carbon sink, permitting process

Summary: The House Natural Resources and Energy Committee met and first considered SB 321 with Senate Amendment 1, the community solar utility billing bill. The sponsor explained that it would consolidate the two-bill system for community solar subscribers into one utility bill, with the utility forwarding the subscriber fee to the solar facility through an escrow mechanism so costs are not shifted to other ratepayers. Testimony from the solar industry, the Public Advocate, and environmental advocates supported the measure, emphasizing easier enrollment, fewer barriers for low-income customers, and guaranteed savings. The committee initially lacked enough members present to release the bill, but after a roll call vote it was released from committee. The committee then heard SB 9 with Senate Amendment 1, a wetlands protection bill creating a state non-tidal freshwater wetlands permitting program. The sponsor and DNREC described a framework of exemptions, general permits, and individual permits based on wetland type and value, with an advisory committee to develop regulations. Witnesses explained that “exceptional value” wetlands would include unique wetland communities and high-functioning wetlands, and that the bill was intended to preserve important habitat while allowing farming, drainage, and other exempt activities to continue. Some members raised concerns about flooding, land classification, and the balance of the advisory committee, while supporters said the bill was the product of broad stakeholder consensus and would protect wetlands without unduly harming agriculture or development. Public comment on SB 9 was strongly supportive from environmental groups, the Delaware Native Species Commission, the Home Builders Association, the Farm Bureau, The Nature Conservancy, and affordable housing advocates, who said the bill balanced conservation with practical land use concerns. After remote testimony, the committee took a roll call vote and SB 9 was released from committee. The meeting concluded with remarks thanking the chair for her service and instructions for members to sign the backers before adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• on the permites.
• over to the permit restriction section. over to the permit restriction section.
• Um the uh as far as enforcement, it's written on the permit uh that the permit signs.
• um it must always not be permitted. um it must always not be permitted.
• uh that the it's written on the permit uh that the permit<00:55:10.000> signs.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee opened with routine business, including the Pledge of Allegiance, seating alternates, and approval of the minutes and consent calendar. Both were approved without opposition. The committee then moved to the regular calendar, beginning with Department of Environmental Services drinking water rules (2532). Staff noted that the final proposal deleted requirements that had been in the initial proposal, making the published notice technically inaccurate because it said there were no substantive changes. The agency responded that the requirements still exist in other rules, that regulated entities and the Water Council were notified, and that the public had notice through related hearings. After discussion about whether a new noticed hearing was needed, the committee approved the rule. The next item was Department of Administrative Services personnel rule 2510 on seniority and employee performance evaluation. Staff raised informational comments and one unclear comment about language that appeared to require a checkbox even though no form exists, and about evaluation categories that could overlap. The agency said the checkbox language should be removed, but defended the overlapping categories as part of a long-standing template used by agencies for the past 10 years. Members discussed whether the language was too ambiguous or could lead to inconsistent application, but the committee ultimately approved the rule with a condition striking the checkbox language in the affected sections. The committee then considered personnel rule 25109 on investigations, discipline, non-disciplinary communications, and non-disciplinary removal. Staff recommended clarifying language distinguishing license suspension from termination for cause, and questioned whether the sexual-harassment discipline language was too broad because the same conduct could fit multiple discipline levels. The agency agreed to add the suggested clarification for the license-suspension provision, but argued the sexual-harassment language should remain because another rule already provides the factors for determining the appropriate discipline and the agency needs discretion for fact-specific cases. The discussion included concerns about how non-verbal conduct might be treated, but the committee moved toward conditional approval with the agreed clarification and approval of the rest of the rule as written.

Transcript Highlights:

• mechanism for a community to review a project before a building permit is granted.
• , sure, we’re going to give you the permit on this, and what was your name again?
• It's made impossible by the need to have to get a special permit.
• by removing the need to get a special permit to build housing on this land.
• Last year, we permitted just 14,338 new housing units, one of the lowest per capita rates of permitting

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Housing held a hybrid hearing on zoning, Chapter 40B, and related housing bills. Much of the testimony focused on the “Yes in My Backyard” bill (H. 1572/S. 962), which would expand by-right development of missing middle housing, reduce barriers such as minimum lot sizes and parking mandates, and support duplexes, triplexes, and other small-scale housing. Supporters included housing advocates, developers, local officials, and municipal leaders from places like Cambridge, Salem, and Braintree, who argued that state action is needed because local zoning often blocks needed housing and that the bill would help create more affordable, neighborhood-compatible homes. Several witnesses also backed a companion “Yes in God’s Backyard” bill (H. 2347), which would allow faith-based institutions to build housing on their property by right, with testimony emphasizing the potential for new units, added municipal tax revenue, and partnerships between religious organizations and housing developers. The committee also heard testimony on Senate Bill 1021 to modernize Chapter 40R incentives. Senator Pavel Payano and others said the program’s payments have not kept pace with inflation since 2004 and should be increased to better encourage smart-growth zoning near transit and town centers. Another major topic was H. 2298 on site plan review, which would codify and standardize the process in state law. Rep. Kristin Kassner and witnesses from MAPC and NAIOP said current site plan review practices vary widely across the state, creating confusion, delays, and litigation, while a uniform framework would give municipalities clearer tools to review by-right projects without undermining local oversight. The hearing also included testimony on Chapter 40B reform, including S. 1005 and H. 1537. One witness supported further review of 40B and stronger regional planning, while another backed a proposal to allow certain pre-2010 40B condominium owners to sell at market value under a framework that would recapture some of the subsidy benefits. Committee members asked several questions about local zoning changes, housing goals by county, and how the proposed bills would affect communities. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the chairs indicated that written testimony would be welcomed for technical details and additional comments.

Transcript Highlights:

• We need to accelerate the siting and permitting of those facilities.
• You have conditional use permits in the six counties that we cross.
• So locally is where the permitting authority begins in North Dakota.
• It's five miles and we've been waiting for a permit for 1,250 days.
• Five miles, and we've been waiting for a permit for 1,250 days.

Summary: The Joint Committee on Energy Supply, Energy Conservation, and Energy Resilience opened by electing Senator Shoemake as chair and Representative Alex Ibarra as vice chair. Members then moved into a series of work sessions focused on data centers, transmission, and workforce needs tied to Washington’s clean energy and grid planning challenges. Kate Bruns and Glenn Blackman presented preliminary findings from the governor’s Data Center work group, created under Executive Order 25-05. They said the group met for six months, received more than 1,000 public comments, and included representatives from agencies, industry, tribes, labor, utilities, environmental groups, and research institutions. The presenters emphasized that data centers are expected to be the largest source of load growth over the next five to ten years, creating concerns about grid capacity, ratepayer impacts, forecasting, water use, backup generation, and compatibility with Washington’s energy and climate laws. They described nine recommendations, including protecting existing energy and climate policy, improving forecasting, seeking more clean power and transmission, and encouraging flexible data center operations. A proposed tax incentive change that would have expanded eligibility while tying the exemption to new clean electricity sources narrowly failed in the work group. Members asked about tribal consultation, cooling technologies, and local benefits from data centers; the presenters said tribal consultation was ongoing and a final report would follow. Keegan Moyer of West Tech then outlined a regional transmission study showing major strain on the Western grid from load growth, electrification, resiliency needs, and limited transmission capacity. He said the 10-year study identified about 12,000 line miles of needed projects across the West, with roughly $56 billion in estimated costs, including planned projects, reliability upgrades, and new interregional transfer projects. He stressed that many projects are upgrades within existing rights-of-way, but new corridors are still needed, and he previewed recommendations on permitting, equipment procurement, cost allocation, and project sponsorship. In response to questions, he discussed the difficulty of crossing jurisdictional “seams,” the role of federal coordination, landowner compensation, eminent domain as a last resort, and the limited role of public financing beyond a federal GRIP grant. Stephanie Scott of Commerce presented the transmission workforce study, which focuses on substation technicians, line workers, and line clearance tree trimmers. She said current workforce levels are far below what will be needed under a clean energy expansion scenario, and that active projects are essential because apprenticeship training depends on thousands of hours of hands-on work. She highlighted barriers such as high upfront CDL and pre-apprenticeship costs, the need for wraparound supports, and the importance of expanding access for women, people of color, and tribal communities. Members asked about tribal utility apprenticeship programs, utility-run training pipelines, and whether the study included funding sources; Scott said the report would include an inventory of apprenticeship programs and tribal considerations, but revenue ideas were outside the study scope. Finally, Brant Johnson of Grid United described the North Plains Connector as a case study in large transmission development. He said the project, a 420-mile, 3,000-megawatt HVDC line connecting Montana and North Dakota, has relied on early stakeholder engagement, route changes, tribal consultation, and coordinated federal and state permitting to reduce risk and shorten timelines. He said the project aims for permits by the end of 2026 and construction beginning in 2028, with an earliest commercial operation date of 2032. In response to questions, he discussed the challenges of crossing regional seams, interconnection queues, land acquisition and compensation, eminent domain, and financing, noting that the project is primarily privately financed with a $700 million federal grant covering a portion of costs.

Transcript Highlights:

• They went down to get permits almost all at the same time from the state of Texas.
• Export permits, production and export permits, okay. So production permits...
• Would that be a permit associated with potentially production and export together?
• That was included in our permit. Upstream from us. That's right. We would be...
• We can set permits. And we can set fees. And we can do all those types of things.

Bills: HB24, HB27, HB24, HB27

Keywords: groundwater, conservation, water permits, sustainability, resource management, 997, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We need pipelines, plants, permits, and a purpose.
• And if our companies can't get permits to produce, permits to build transmission, we will be behind in
• That's a fully permitted project.
• I'm very strongly in favor of permitting reform, but a step which withdraws an already issued permit,
• It relates to finding ways to streamline the permitting processes.

Transcript Highlights:

• CEWCD or a permitted groundwater savings facility, a GSF, on state lands or private lands.
• So all three of those would not be permitted under this proposed bill. There are others as well.
• It requires permits.
• roadmap, alignment of agency geothermal permitting rules, and innovative resource development.
• Support the development of a geothermal permitting roadmap, alignment of agency geothermal permitting

Bills: HB2099, HB2263, HB2264, HB2330, HB2341, HB2492, HB2757, HB2782, HB2843, HB2889, HB2912, HB2915, HB2918, HB4025, HB4100, HCR2020, HCR2057

Keywords: water storage, long-term storage credits, groundwater management, drought contingency, Arizona water regulations, Colorado River, replenishment, groundwater savings facility, groundwater storage, underground water storage, active management area, irrigation non-expansion area, Arizona water law, water rights, water replenishment, recharge, water conservation district, multi-county water conservation district, CAP water, Central Arizona Project

Summary: The committee heard a series of water, energy, housing, and environmental bills, with several measures amended before passage. House Bill 2099, as amended, would limit long-term storage credits and related CAP water storage during declared Colorado River shortages; water utilities, CAP, Phoenix, and other water interests raised concerns about flexibility, contracts, and the law of the river, while the sponsor said the bill was intended to address shortage conditions. The committee adopted the Griffin amendment and passed the bill 6-3. House Bill 2263, also amended, would restrict where Colorado River water diverted for replenishment in an AMA may be stored; CAP, tribal counsel, and AMWA opposed it as too restrictive and potentially excluding existing facilities, but the bill passed 6-3 after amendment. House Bill 2264, requiring the University of Arizona to promote Arizona history and the five Cs through the mining museum, passed unanimously. House Bill 2330 and House Bill 2341, both concerning certificates of environmental compatibility for energy projects, passed 6-3 after amendments expanding siting factors to include character of an area and known off-takers, respectively. House Bill 2918, which would end certain tax benefits for renewable energy and storage equipment after 2026, also passed 6-3. House Bill 2889, appropriating $1 million for uranium contamination monitoring and a statewide registry with tribal epidemiology partnerships, passed unanimously after discussion about moving the program to ADEQ and adjusting the reporting date. House Bill 2492, which would bar state and local urban growth boundaries that prevent new development, passed narrowly 4-3 with one present and two absent. House Bill 2782, focused on utility rate transparency and regulatory assets, passed 5-3 after a late amendment and a motion to suspend committee rules for amendment distribution. House Bill 4025, creating a study committee on gasoline and petroleum refineries, passed 6-3, and HCR 2057 supporting a geothermal permitting roadmap passed unanimously. HCR 2020, supporting housing developments outside designated service areas under certain groundwater conditions, passed 6-2. House Bill 4100, requiring notice to customers about potential water-rate increases if CAP water is lost, drew concerns about public confusion and negotiation impacts; testimony from municipal water users opposed the bill as too speculative and difficult to implement, and the transcript ends while that bill is still under discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• And studies and planning, but it doesn't allow TCEQ to actually affect a Class 5 injection well permit
• Well, this works well for residents who reside within the permitting district.
• storm sewer system or a general permit for stormwater and associated non-stormwater discharges.
• wells that produce water used for purposes permitted by TCEQ.
• And I was going to ask you the question, is what TCQ permit, is that pretty much, as you just did?

Summary: The committee met with limited attendance at first, then took up a series of water, agriculture, and rural affairs measures. HB 3898 would allow the Texas Water Development Board to provide financial assistance for brackish water desalination projects in certain border counties and related nonprofit suppliers even if the projects are not in the state water plan. Supporters said it is needed to address severe water shortages in places like Webb County and to support future planning; opponents, including the Texas Alliance of Groundwater Districts, argued it bypasses the regional and state water planning process. The bill was left pending after testimony. The committee also heard HB 5339, which would create a higher-education grant program for regenerative agriculture research. A rancher testified that regenerative methods improved soil health, water retention, and farm viability, while a senator noted existing university research but said better coordination could help. Public testimony was closed and the bill was left pending. Members then heard HB 1523, a temporary prohibition on TCEQ issuing Austin a Class 5 injection well permit for an aquifer storage and recovery project in Bastrop and Lee counties until December 2027. Local officials from Bastrop supported the pause, citing unanswered questions about water treatment, recovery rates, and impacts on the aquifer, while Austin Water opposed the substitute, saying the project is central to its long-term water plan and that stakeholder talks were already underway. TCEQ explained its ASR permitting process and said public participation is possible but not always used in the current authorization process. The bill was left pending. HB 5659, concerning the Northeast Texas Municipal Water District and requiring majority city-council approval before certain water sales or interbasin transfers, drew testimony from district officials who said the change could interfere with existing contracts and district authority, but the chair emphasized the need for local buy-in and said the stakeholders had reached a workable compromise; testimony was closed and the bill was left pending. The committee also heard HB 1690, which would expand notice requirements for groundwater export permits so neighboring landowners and potentially affected aquifer areas are informed by certified mail and publication. The sponsor tied the bill to impacts from the Vista Ridge project, and no one testified against it; it was left pending. HB 3333 would prohibit TCEQ from issuing new wastewater discharge permits directly into the Devils River in Val Verde County. The sponsor and a conservation witness said the bill protects one of Texas’s most pristine rivers and reflects a local stakeholder agreement, while TCEQ said it can ensure water quality but acknowledged the river’s unique sensitivity; the bill was left pending. The committee also heard HCR 108 urging continuation of the U.S.-Mexico tomato suspension agreement, with supporters warning of major Texas job and consumer-price impacts if it ends, and HCR 76 urging federal action on imported shrimp, citing public health and industry concerns; both were left pending. Additional measures heard and left pending included HB 4158 on compensation for Texana Groundwater Conservation District directors, HB 654 creating a dismissal path for certain first-time deer hunting violations after self-reporting and hunter education, HB 4530 requiring Texas Water Development Board review of groundwater rights placed in the Texas Water Trust, HB 2128 directing a study of rural versus urban firefighting and rescue disparities, and HB 278 requiring groundwater districts and management areas to track progress toward desired future conditions over shorter intervals. On HB 278, witnesses split over whether the bill’s interim tracking would improve accountability or create new triggers that could be used against local districts, but no final vote was taken and the bill was left pending.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:02:56.720> that's conforming with the air permit that's conforming with the air permit
• <00:10:42.279> will CN as we believe the site permit will CN as we believe the site permit
• <00:28:03.159> demand strict regulations for permits demand strict regulations for permits
• air permits.
• year's clean energy permitting year's clean energy permitting efficiency<00:45:57.240> bill

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• The buildout is, the permit is going out soon.
• And then Fargo, we're in the midst of issuing a permit for that as well.
• permits.
• When we measure our water when we talk about permitting water resources.
• We would never issue a permit for a new facility if it's going to impact someone who already has a permit

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The building permit is a local permit, right?
• The building permit is a local permit, right?
• The building permit is a local permit, right?
• we about one permit the one permit that we about one permit the one permit that we need<05:33:11.040
• building permit. building permit.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• the number of landowner permits the number of landowner permits available<00:08:06.560> in
• Senate File 25, the landowner permit Senate File 25, the landowner permit bill?
• going to issue any landowner permits. going to issue any landowner permits.
• includes a shoot-from-vehicle permit in addition to a season extension permit.
• in addition to a season vehicle permit in addition to a season extension<01:19:25.040> permit.

Bills: SF0025, SF0027, SF0043, SF0066

Keywords: landowner licenses, hunting, wildlife management, quota hunt areas, game and fish commission, game management, hunting regulations, black bear, tracking dogs, wildlife conservation, conservation, contracting, supervisor, funding, districts, hunting licenses, donated licenses, life-threatening illness, vision impairment, nonprofit organizations

Transcript Highlights:

• There are 56 well permits in Texas alone currently under review at the EPA.
• House Bill 3158 addresses this gap by establishing application fees for permits and permit amendments
• These non-refundable fees range from $500 to $3000 depending on the permit time.
• permitting processes and protects public health and the environment.
• permits, and we thank the chairman for carrying this bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• , procurement of early site permits, procurement of early site permits, construction<00:08:02.960
• permits or combined license construction permits or combined license from<00:08:05.919> the<00
• <00:08:57.920> uh or permits that I just mentioned. uh or permits that I just mentioned. uh
• And it doesn't say that they shall be permitted. It says that they may be permitted.
• It says that they may be permitted.

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

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

Transcript Highlights:

• The injection storage permits unit is.
• It's currently staffed to issue permits and to perform monitoring and compliance of existing permits.
• And has really helped improve the permitting processes, the quality of the permits that we receive.
• And our ability to take permits to the commission and issue permits that mean.
• excess of their permits.

Bills: SB1, SB 1

Keywords: appropriations, budget, state funding, education, healthcare, infrastructure, campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• permit land. Thank you. permit land. Thank you. >> And and<00:05:11.800> Mr.
• flexible permit system just recently? flexible permit system just recently?
• <00:09:03.760> is so that when the permitting is so that when the permitting is beginning,
• <00:50:52.000> that authority to permit that authority to permit that even<00:50:53.680>
• <00:51:11.800> and<00:51:11.920> not permitted for reuse scenario and not permitted

Keywords: 916, all

Summary: The joint Minerals Committee met to select interim topics and announced its meeting dates for April 27-28 in Casper, June 4-5 in Casper, and August 27-28 in Cheyenne. Members heard public testimony on several economic development and minerals-related topics and were asked to identify their top priorities for later ranking and consensus. No formal votes were taken during this portion of the meeting. A major topic was removing obstacles to energy development in Wyoming, including possible regulatory, bonding, and permitting barriers. Testimony from the Mining Association and Energy Capital Economic Development supported revisiting barriers to development, similar to the earlier Regulatory Reduction Task Force. Another related topic was industrial siting exemptions on coal mine property, with testimony arguing that mineral-related projects such as rare earths, uranium conversion, and ferroalloys should not have to go through the full industrial siting process when communities have already dealt with similar development. Members also discussed industrial siting bonding requirements, including whether bonding or advance payments should be used to cover impacts on local services and emergency response, especially for projects like solar farms or battery storage. The committee also discussed coal bed methane industrial sovereign zones, tied to House Bill 120, with testimony seeking to include coal bed methane in value-added manufacturing zones. The sponsor said the goal was to create industrial zones that support economic development while protecting scenic values and limiting industrial sprawl. Another topic was sourcing curling stones in Wyoming, which was presented as a lighthearted but potentially useful way to promote Wyoming stone and broader dimension-stone quarrying; a state geologist testified that Wyoming has granite with similar mineralogy to stone used for curling stones elsewhere. Child care as an economic driver was withdrawn. The committee also heard support for a Business Council restructure review, though several members said the Minerals Committee should do the substantive review because the Business Council falls within its jurisdiction, while still coordinating with Appropriations. Finally, the committee heard a proposal for a domestic preference in residential general service contracts, extending Wyoming preference concepts beyond construction into goods and services, with testimony emphasizing local economic multipliers and possible exceptions for federal funding or other procurement limits.

Transcript Highlights:

• AB 2215 seeks to undermine existing processes for extending water rights permits.
• What does that mean if the Water Board has issues with how the department is managing the permit?
• Per the committee's analysis, the state water. are subject to municipal stormwater permits.
• AB 2322 can ensure that existing MS4 permits are applied accurately and fairly across California.
• One, that municipal stormwater permits do not directly regulate CII facilities.

Summary: The Assembly Appropriations Committee heard a regular order agenda with 101 bills and first took up AB 2215, which would extend the time for the Department of Water Resources to fully develop its State Water Project water rights. The author and supporters argued it would improve water reliability and affordability for millions of Californians and could save ratepayers money, while opponents said it would bypass the Water Board’s administrative process, set a precedent for other water rights holders, and potentially facilitate costly projects like the Delta Conveyance Project. The bill was moved on a do pass vote, with Mr. Hoover voting no and Ms. Krell not voting. The committee then approved two consent calendars and heard several bills with little or no opposition. These included AB 2038 on extending insurance nonrenewal/cancellation protections for wildfire victims; AB 2322 on clarifying which commercial, industrial, or institutional sites are subject to municipal stormwater permits; AB 1794 on direct home shipment of enteral nutrition; AB 1696 on clarifying that nurse midwives do not need physician supervision within their scope of practice; AB 1860 on allowing county offices of education to use design-build methods; AB 1876 on codifying nondiscrimination protections in health care; AB 2281 on election cybersecurity resources; AB 2448 on protecting sensitive medical records and reproductive health data; AB 1994 on providing victims with information about federal immigration relief options; and AB 1829 on expanding how CalWORKs community college funds may be used to support student parents. Most were supported by sponsoring organizations and related stakeholders, with limited opposition noted on AB 1696 and AB 2281. The committee also placed a large suspense calendar on approval, listing dozens of additional bills, and then opened public comment on bills not heard that day. No members of the public came forward, and the hearing was adjourned. Several bills were reported out on roll call votes, with some members not voting or voting no on particular measures, but the transcript does not provide full vote tallies for each bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• office processed a permit to carry our office processed a permit to carry for<00:03:46.640> an
• And, you know, when we issue a permit to purchase, permit to carry, we're responsible for that information
• And, you know, when we issue a permit to purchase, permit to carry, we're responsible for that information
• Um, I don't know. because they're applying for a permit to because they're applying for a permit to carry
• Are they keeping a registry of LPRs that have permit to carry?

Keywords: 1183, house