Transcript Highlights:

• We asked CMS to do was to have work requirements, to put in a waiver for work requirements.
• that are in the federal requirements.
• quite as tight as what we were looking for in the work requirements, but it was the federal requirements
• quite as tight as what we were looking for in the work requirements, but it was the federal requirements
• So in terms of your conversations with the department, if they were required last year to do work requirement

Committee: House Health and Welfare

Transcript Highlights:

• I believe basic land use requirements...
• Similarly, the county had a high-bar requirement for my private well.
• Parking requirements: minimum parking requirements are often very restrictive for child care facilities
• such as parking requirements.
• are, what our frontage requirements are.

Summary: The committee held a work session on form-based codes, child care facility siting, and street standards/frontage improvements. On form-based codes, Commerce’s Dave Anderson explained that these codes emphasize building form, orientation, and the public realm more than traditional use and density tables, and that they are typically applied in specific districts rather than citywide or statewide. Lacey’s Vanessa Dolby described the city’s Woodland District code, developed through community charrettes, fiscal and market analysis, and subdistrict-specific standards to create a walkable downtown. She said the approach has helped produce a more desirable built environment and more flexibility in permitted uses, but also noted it can be less user-friendly for applicants and still requires some use restrictions; both presenters said a hybrid approach is often best. The committee then heard from DCYF and multiple providers about barriers to opening child care facilities. DCYF officials said Washington has more than 6,500 licensed providers and that a new pre-licensing support team is helping applicants navigate licensing, but local zoning, building, fire, parking, utility, and occupancy requirements still create delays and confusion. Testifiers described long permitting timelines, inconsistent local interpretations, costly upgrades, and utility hookup delays; one Yakima provider said county requirements, a floodplain-related elevation certificate, and a private well issue stopped her in-home child care proposal, while others described traffic impact fees, parking mandates, and zoning barriers that made projects infeasible. Enterprise Community Partners highlighted examples of successful local reforms, including fee waivers, expedited permitting, and zoning changes in several cities, and DCYF said it is working toward a 2026 action plan and a resource guide for providers. In the final section, planners and developers discussed how street standards and frontage improvement requirements can undermine infill and middle housing. Poulsbo’s planning manager said current standards were designed for greenfield subdivisions and often force costly curb, gutter, sidewalk, stormwater, and utility upgrades on small infill sites, sometimes adding tens of thousands of dollars and causing projects to be abandoned. A Seattle-based developer made similar points about small middle-housing projects being burdened by frontage work, curb ramps, buried standards, and EV-ready parking requirements that can trigger expensive undergrounding. Committee members asked about possible state-level changes, including whether child care should be treated as an essential public facility and whether parking requirements had already been reduced; one senator noted that minimum parking requirements for child care facilities were eliminated in prior legislation, with implementation phased in over the next few years.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I'm curious, when the landlords are required to provide the cooling that's reasonably required, could
• So, again, reasonably required is not defined in the proposed law. Thank you.
• requirements for housing authority buildings.
• requirements for housing authority buildings.
• House Bill 2452 modifies requirements for service of rent increase notices.

Summary: The committee heard public hearing testimony on House Bill 2265, which would expand tenant protections during extreme heat. Staff explained that the bill would bar landlords from restricting portable cooling devices, require written notice of tenant rights and landlord immunity for tenant-installed devices, add a cooling duty under the Residential Landlord-Tenant Act, and prohibit sheriffs from physically evicting tenants during defined extreme heat periods. Representative Mena said the bill responds to the 2021 heat dome and is intended to address a gap in housing law, while committee members and the sponsor discussed unresolved questions about what “reasonably required” cooling means, how the eviction pause would work, and whether the bill could raise rents or create liability and operational burdens for landlords. Supporters, including climate, public health, tenant, and clean energy advocates, said extreme heat is a growing health threat and that renters need a right to cooling; opponents from multifamily housing, property management, and rental housing groups argued the bill is too vague, could effectively mandate costly cooling upgrades, create safety and insurance issues, and complicate eviction enforcement. The hearing also included testimony from landlords and housing providers who said the bill should be narrowed or amended, and from tenants and advocates who said it does not go far enough because it mostly permits tenant-installed cooling rather than requiring landlords to provide it. The committee then heard House Bill 1974, a proposed substitute authorizing land banks. Staff described the bill as allowing public corporations, housing authorities, and nonprofit corporations to acquire, hold, improve, lease, transfer, or dispose of property for affordable housing, with 30-year affordability requirements, annual reporting, tax exemptions, and priority transfer of certain tax-foreclosed properties. Vice Chair Hill said the bill was scaled back from earlier versions and is meant to create a flexible tool for turning difficult parcels into housing-ready land aligned with local housing plans. Testifiers from the Spokane Regional Land Bank, housing authorities, developers, youth shelter providers, and housing advocates supported the bill as a way to lower land costs, clear title issues, reduce displacement, and create a pipeline of permanently affordable housing. A counties representative also supported the concept but said they would like the grant program restored. One committee member raised a question about whether the tax-foreclosed property language could bypass the normal surplus distribution process, and staff said the provision is placed in the chapter governing properties that have already gone through foreclosure and auction, though the wording may need further review. Finally, the committee opened House Bill 2452, which would change how rent increase notices are served. Staff said the bill would remove the current requirement that rent increase notices be served like unlawful detainer notices and instead allow service by personal delivery, mail, or posting on the dwelling unit, with service by mail complete when deposited in the mail; the manufactured home version would follow the general notice rules under that act. Representative Connors said the bill responds to problems created when prior legislation required certified mail, which she said has led to tenants not receiving notices and housing providers facing higher costs and administrative burdens. Housing provider and industry witnesses supported the bill, saying certified mail is expensive, inefficient, and often not actually received, while tenant advocates opposed it, arguing that mail-only service weakens notice protections and can cause missed rent increases and displacement; they urged the committee to preserve stronger in-person or posting requirements. Some witnesses also suggested broader changes, including electronic notice, while others said the bill should be expanded to fix certified mail requirements for more than just rent increase notices.

Transcript Highlights:

• Madam Chair, Senate Bill 1331 requires DES to require able-bodied adults under 60 years old who are receiving
• This is the general work requirement, not the ABOD work requirement.
• So the amendment requires coordination between ADHS and Access.
• These requirements are often involved.
• outlines requirements to ensure participation from the stakeholders.

Committee: Senate Senate Health and Human Services COR

Summary: The Senate Health and Human Services Committee met and first recognized Physical Therapy Day at the Capitol, welcoming Arizona physical therapy leaders and students. The committee then took up several bills related to SNAP, health care regulation, child welfare, dementia services, and safe haven newborn surrender. SB 1334 would bar DES from seeking or renewing SNAP work-requirement waivers for able-bodied adults without dependents unless required by federal or state law; supporters said it would curb administrative expansion and opponents argued it would reduce flexibility during high unemployment and harm food-insecure Arizonans. The bill received a do-pass recommendation on a 4-1 vote. SB 1333 would require DES to reduce the SNAP payment error rate to 3% by 2030, with annual reporting, corrective action plans, Auditor General oversight, and possible funding penalties if targets are missed. After adopting a committee amendment changing reporting to quarterly updates and replacing a forensic audit with a special audit, the committee approved the bill as amended on a 4-1 vote. SB 1331 would require able-bodied adults under 60 receiving SNAP to participate in mandatory employment and training unless exempt; proponents said it would strengthen work expectations, while opponents and DES raised concerns about administrative burden and food bank impacts. The bill passed 4-2, with members explaining no votes due to child care, rural access, and food insecurity concerns. The committee also advanced SB 1162, which clarifies DHS’s role in licensing and monitoring health care institutions and, as amended, requires DHS and AHCCCS/Access to coordinate to reduce duplicative oversight and report periodically to the legislature; it passed 6-0. SB 1017, requiring additional signatures and witness verification on emergency informed consent forms for surgical procedures, passed 4-2. SB 1149, which adds reporting and procedural requirements for DCS periodic review hearings, passed as amended 5-1. SB 1249, designating DHS as the lead agency on Alzheimer’s and dementia and creating a state plan and services program funded through lottery monies rather than the general fund after amendment, passed 6-0. Finally, SB 1253 clarified that a parent may surrender a newborn at the hospital of birth without leaving and returning, and requires updated safe-haven reporting; it passed 5-0, after testimony from hospital and safe-haven advocates in support. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• may not require any standards, conditions, or requirements for step housing that are more restrictive
• The city or county may not require any standards, conditions, or requirements for step housing that are
• that are far more suited to LECs than the UCA requirements. ...suited to LECs than the UCA requirements
• In addition, these are sometimes at odds with UCA requirements.
• And last, the ownership and management of LECs is different than what UCA requires. Requires.

Bills: HB2304 , SGA9280 , SGA9281

Committee: Senate Housing

Keywords: condominium, housing, warranty, property rights, construction

Transcript Highlights:

• certain shed features or amenities that would require homeowners associations to maintain or operate
• Lastly, it establishes court requirements for an expedited judicial review of a malicious delay claim
• Madam Whip, members, Senate Bill 1568 requires election systems and software to have their clocks and
• Seeing none, Madam Chair, this is a simple bill that requires that currently law requires the mother
• aircraft, requiring the roadable aircraft to maintain both aircraft and vehicle registration.

Summary: The caucus reviewed a long list of Senate bills and memorials, mostly on consent calendars, covering housing, elections, health care, public safety, land use, transportation, and water. Several measures focused on housing and local government regulation, including limits on municipal interference with home design standards, restrictions on alleged “malicious delays” in permitting, and rules on exactions. Election-related bills addressed internet access for voting equipment, timekeeping requirements for election systems, primary election timing, precinct committeeman vacancies, and other election administration changes. Other topics included liquor law updates, assisted living facility rules, deed and title fraud prevention, a Freedom of Speech Monument committee, renaming public spaces, and a bill restricting gender transition procedures for minors. Health and human services bills drew discussion on behavioral health technician definitions and AHCCCS/DHS coordination, Medicaid billing during facility ownership changes, breast cancer screening cost-sharing, naturopathic physicians administering IV antibiotics and similar drugs, safe-haven newborn surrender at hospitals, and reporting requirements for dialysis social workers. In public safety and judiciary, members considered bills on probation for dangerous crimes against children, sex offender registration limitations, victim restitution costs, unlawful alerting, increased penalties for unlawful flight, and a new offense for motor fuel theft. One member noted a no vote on extending the Vulnerable Adult System Study Committee, saying it would become a long-running study committee, while supporters said the committee had produced useful recommendations. The caucus also heard land, agriculture, energy, water, and transportation measures, including creation of a foreign entity land review commission, restrictions on transporting Mexican gray wolf pups with state resources, water reuse and banking provisions, solar installation disclosures and roof inspections, a larger revolving fund loan cap, and several congressional memorials. Transportation items included roadable aircraft registration, motor vehicle booting rules, military property signage, a towing and impound study committee, and photo enforcement penalties. Public safety bills included extending traumatic event counseling programs and requiring state data sharing with the federal government regarding unauthorized aliens. No formal votes were taken in the transcript; members mostly asked clarifying questions and several sponsors explained the intent and practical effects of their bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• For example, a construction detail that might require 15 nails in another state would require closer
• And lastly, they're required to adopt housing density requirements that are far more stringent than those
• And lastly, they're required to adopt housing density requirements that are far more stringent than those
• They require me to do the perfect solution.'
• to make sure they're realizing those bill savings within those cost-effectiveness requirements. ...requirements

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Regulatory Authority held its first hearing to examine how California’s regulatory framework affects housing availability and affordability. Chair Pacheco and Assembly Member Haney framed the discussion around the state’s housing shortage, rising costs, and the need to reduce unnecessary delays and burdens while still protecting public health, safety, and environmental goals. The first panel included housing policy experts and industry representatives, who argued that overlapping state and regional rules, complex code requirements, utility delays, and lengthy review processes add substantial cost to new housing. Bill Fulton described California’s land use system as a “big Rubik’s Cube” of competing goals, while CBIA’s Chris Ochoa and Bob Raymer urged more attention to affordability impacts in code adoption and state agency rulemaking. The Bay Area Council’s Louis Marante called for a statewide cost target for housing and stronger accountability for state agencies, citing project review delays, regulatory costs, and indirect impacts from water, stormwater, and transportation policies. State agency witnesses generally defended their roles as balancing housing with other statutory mandates. HCD said its enforcement of housing element law, streamlining statutes, and technical assistance has helped increase production, reduce entitlement times, and approve tens of thousands of homes that might otherwise have faced discretionary review. CARB said SB 375 does not regulate local land use or reduce housing supply, and that sustainable community strategies are planning tools that could support housing if fully implemented. The Coastal Commission said it has worked with local governments to streamline coastal housing approvals, approve density bonus and ADU ordinances, and support legislation to exempt some affordable housing from coastal permits, while still protecting coastal resources and sea-level-rise hazards. The Energy Commission said its building energy standards are required by statute to be cost-effective and save consumers money over time, though they can add some design complexity and upfront cost. Other agencies emphasized collaboration and early engagement as the best way to reduce delays. Fish and Wildlife said its mission is to protect California’s natural diversity and that better early coordination with developers can improve outcomes. DTSC said brownfield cleanup and vapor intrusion review are necessary to protect public health, but that early engagement, workshops, and site-specific approaches can help projects move forward; it also noted grant funding supporting affordable housing on contaminated sites. The Water Board said it uses general orders and basin planning to streamline permitting while meeting federal and state water-quality obligations, and that its infrastructure grants and loans support housing affordability. In response to Assembly Member Haney’s questions, several agencies said they already coordinate across departments, but he pressed for more cross-agency clarity and less siloed decision-making. No votes or formal actions were taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• As it relates to public notification requirements, what are public notification requirements, and do
• So the law does require notification, and that requires the proponent to make that notification.
• Would they be removing the requirement?
• It's required, you know, a station plan. Is that something, though, that's not required?
• You're saying it's only required at the local level, and that's what triggers whether MEPA is... ...required

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on State Administration and Regulatory Oversight

Summary: The Joint Committee on State Administration and Regulatory Oversight held an oversight hearing on draft regulations implementing Article 97 of the Massachusetts Constitution under Chapter 274 of the Acts of 2022, the Open Space Act. Chairs Cabral and Collins framed the hearing as a review of how the new process for dispositions or changes in use of Article 97 land would work, including public notice, environmental justice protections, replacement land, appraisals, and the role of the legislature. Under Secretary Stephanie Cooper and Commissioner Adam Bakke testified for EEA/DCAM, followed later by Deputy Inspector General O’Neill and Deputy Inspector General Giles on appraisal review. Much of the discussion focused on how the draft regulations would operate in practice. EEA said the regulations would require advance public notice, define “comparable location” for replacement land, and allow the Secretary to make findings on whether an action would adversely affect environmental justice communities. Members pressed for longer public comment periods, clearer notice to local officials, more frequent updates to the site evaluation tool, and a clearer definition of terms such as “limited duration” for permits and licenses. EEA said the regulations are intended to standardize a process that has been handled through policy and case-by-case review, and that the legislature still retains the final authority to approve any Article 97 disposition. Committee members also questioned whether the draft rules shift too much discretion to the Secretary and whether the proposed “proponent” process could allow private entities to drive Article 97 actions. EEA responded that non-public proponents would still need municipal support and legislative sponsorship, and that the regulations do not create a new avenue to bypass the existing home rule and legislative process. Members raised concerns about the current policy’s unanimous-vote requirements for municipal commissions, the proposed waiver provisions, whether MEPA applies, and the lack of explicit enforcement or penalty language in the act or regulations. EEA and DCAM said the act does not provide an enforcement mechanism and that disputes would generally be handled through the courts or the Attorney General. The Inspector General’s office explained its role in reviewing appraisals for special legislation, including Article 97 matters, to ensure compliance with USPAP standards and to forward its review to DCAM. The hearing did not include any votes or formal committee action; members indicated that the committee may later issue recommendations to the executive agencies based on the testimony and questions raised.

Transcript Highlights:

• We actually, the block grant requires us to do national outcome measure reporting.
• We also have the GAA measures that you all have in statute that we're required to do.
• You had mentioned under H.B. 633, the requirements of you putting the...
• requirement, they are occurring on a much more frequent basis within the system of care, requiring case
• Every model will require a little bit of that.

Summary: The subcommittee heard two Department of Children and Families implementation updates on measures passed in prior sessions. First, DCF reviewed House Bill 633, which increased oversight of behavioral health managing entities through biennial independent audits, standardized claims-based reporting, and new monthly outcome dashboards. The department said it had awarded the inaugural audit to Ernst & Young, found no significant waste, fraud, or abuse, but identified process risks involving financial controls, claims validation, data access, and system access controls. DCF also described its transition to standardized behavioral health coding and said the new public dashboard of 11 measures is posted on its website, though members asked for easier access and for hard copies of the audit report. Members asked about how the department distinguishes Medicaid-covered services from department-funded services, how duplicate payment risks are being addressed, and whether the new reporting and audit requirements would improve oversight without disrupting services. DCF said it is the payer of last resort for uninsured or underinsured individuals, that some overlap with Medicaid is expected because Medicaid does not cover all behavioral health services, and that new claims edits and cross-checks are being built into the system. The department also said it had not found significant negative feedback from providers and that the new requirements are intended to improve transparency and accountability. DCF then updated the committee on Senate Bill 7012, covering human trafficking data collection, domestic violence center certification, limited background-screening exemptions, expanded recruitment for child welfare staff, subcontractor liability protections, a four-year treatment foster care pilot, case management efficiency recommendations, and a statewide study of residential bed capacity for child victims of commercial sexual exploitation. The department said several items are already complete or underway, including limited exemptions in the screening clearinghouse, while others are in procurement or rulemaking. It identified Circuits 4 and 12 as the treatment foster care pilot sites and said the pilot will launch in January 2026. Members questioned recruitment metrics, pilot timing, and report deadlines; the department said final reports are expected by January and that some dates were flexible because of procurement and implementation timelines. The meeting ended after the presentations and questions, and the subcommittee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• For SNAP and work requirements and all of the extra requirements.
• For SNAP and work requirements and all of the extra requirements.
• For SNAP and work requirements and all of the extra requirements.
• So in SNAP, these processes... work requirements and all of the extra requirements.
• meeting the requirement.

Committee: All ALC-HOSPITAL, MEDICAID, & DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES STUDY SUBCOMMITTEE

Summary: The subcommittee first recognized the Arkansas Community Colleges Leadership Institute and received a brief DHS update on the Living Choices Assisted Living Waiver reimbursement process, including that the new cost-reporting period began in January and provider/contractor calls are underway. The main presentation then focused on SNAP and TANF, with DHS describing federal changes under the One Big Beautiful Bill that tighten SNAP work requirements for adults ages 18 to 64 without certain exemptions, remove some prior exemptions, and add new federal definitions for Native American populations. DHS also reviewed SNAP Employment and Training providers, their service areas, projected budgets, participant characteristics, and outcomes, noting that the program is currently voluntary but will shift toward mandatory participation for those subject to the new rules. Members asked detailed questions about how mandatory participation will be implemented, how referrals will be made, what other training options exist, how verification of work, volunteering, disability, and exemptions will be handled, and whether DHS has enough funding and provider capacity. DHS said it will conduct verbal and written notices during eligibility interviews, make direct referrals to providers, use six-month recertifications and documentation from employers or volunteer organizations, and apply sanctions for noncompliance after determining whether a good cause exists. Members also requested additional data, including age breakdowns of at-risk SNAP recipients, provider-level outcomes and costs, and information on other training programs such as WIOA. The committee then moved to Medicaid community engagement requirements for ARHOME, which DHS said are also required by the same federal law and must be implemented by January 1, 2027. DHS said it is preparing policy, system changes, communications, and a customer-service/outbound verification vendor, and plans a soft launch beginning in July to help clients understand what would be required if the rule were already in effect. Members raised concerns about timing, local versus central decision-making, and how clients in rural areas will be notified and assisted. The meeting concluded with broader discussion of the committee’s workforce-development goals, the recently released Alliance for Opportunity audit, and interest in continuing the contract with that group to help guide future reforms.

Transcript Highlights:

• Now let's talk about the details of what is required or not required in the future.
• Now let's talk about the details of what is required or not required in the future. Next slide.
• Listed on this slide are the required and optional FDM.
• As you can see, many of the required work tags are very similar to what we required in AFERS today.
• reporting requirements.

Committee: Joint Joint Higher Education Committee

Summary: The Joint Higher Education Committee met with introductions from members and then held a work session on higher education and statewide accounting practices. OFM Deputy Director Sarah Rupp explained how state and university accounting/reporting differ, including current AFRS/SAM requirements and the transition to Workday/WAM, and described what higher education data are currently included in state reporting versus what will remain excluded, such as transaction-level detail and vendor payment information. University of Washington and Washington State University officials then described the complexity of their institutions’ financial structures, including multiple campuses, auxiliary enterprises, component units, hospitals, clinics, bonds, and other reporting obligations, and how they submit summarized data to the state while maintaining more detailed local accounting systems. The Education Research and Data Center also presented the public four-year finance dashboard created under Senate Bill 5512, emphasizing that the metrics are best used to examine trends within institutions rather than direct comparisons across schools; members asked about data availability and federal reporting delays, and ERDC said it was on track to update the dashboard with newer data and additional metrics. The committee then heard a presentation from the Washington Student Achievement Council on the Workforce Education Investment Account (WIA). Joel Anderson reviewed WIA’s creation under House Bill 2158, its revenue sources, and its intended purpose of supporting postsecondary attainment, high-demand fields, student aid, and workforce education. He said WIA revenue has grown substantially, especially after recent tax changes, and noted that most current appropriations go to higher education, including the Washington College Grant, community and four-year institutions, and some workforce-related programs. Members asked whether WIA supports apprenticeships and trades, and Anderson said it has in some cases, though nearly all current appropriations are now within higher education. Anderson also highlighted a major policy shift in the 2025-27 budget: WIA is now being used to supplant some general-fund higher education spending, especially a large transfer for University of Washington general operations. He said this has reduced the general fund share of higher education funding and increased the share from WIA, raising concerns about whether the account is still being used as originally intended. He also described how WIA is increasingly covering Washington College Grant caseload growth and faculty compensation costs, and said WSAC is working to improve public documentation of ongoing and carry-forward appropriations. The committee did not take any substantive votes on the presentation topics and then moved toward executive session and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Now it simply states the Commission must require compliance.
• However, none of these incentives required officers to complete all of the required training.
• And was required to develop the digital equity plan.
• Rule number two, you have to adhere to the requirements.
• Policy and programmatic requirements.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee subcommittee held a hybrid hearing to receive three State Auditor’s Office performance audits. The first audit examined implementation of the Law Enforcement Training and Community Safety Act. Auditors said the Criminal Justice Training Commission had developed most required training, but six community/cultural topics were still unfinished, the patrol tactics curriculum was incomplete in one area, and the agency lacked a systematic project management approach. They reported that most officers had not completed the 40 required hours, with low participation in patrol tactics training, weak communication, limited data to track compliance, and ineffective incentives or consequences. Committee members questioned staffing, liability, and enforcement, and the Commission said it generally agreed with the findings and had begun implementing recommendations, including improving training development and communication. The second audit reviewed Washington’s digital equity planning. Auditors concluded the state lacked a comprehensive, unified digital equity strategy, a designated lead, and reliable funding. They said the existing PEAR/Impact Plan, BEAD five-year plan, and NTIA-approved digital equity plan each addressed parts of the issue but none provided a full statewide framework with clear authority across agencies. The Department of Commerce’s Broadband Office and the Office of Equity said they agreed with the findings and were open to working with the legislature and the Digital Equity Forum on a more structured approach. A public witness described local and regional digital equity planning efforts and emphasized the importance of coordination and community-based work. The third audit focused on Commerce’s management of the Digital Navigator Program. Auditors said Commerce did not consistently use a competitive process, did not adequately vet grantees and subgrantees, wrote contracts that lacked clear deliverables and monitoring requirements, failed to enforce reporting, and paid $10.7 million without sufficient documentation to verify reimbursement eligibility. They said agency staff had raised concerns that were ignored and that some payments and contract expansions occurred despite warnings. Commerce officials said new leadership had already begun major contract-management reforms, including centralized oversight, risk assessments, clearer documentation standards, and staff training, and they said they would pursue recapture where appropriate. Committee members expressed strong concern about accountability, and the hearing ended after public testimony and committee discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• For work requirements and more frequent eligibility redeterminations, H.R. 1 requires these apply to
• For work requirements and more frequent eligibility redeterminations, H.R. 1 requires these apply to
• For work requirements and more frequent eligibility redeterminations, H.R. 1 requires these apply to
• That requires a build-out... ...requirements for individuals who must comply.
• to these work requirements.

Committee: Senate Budget and Fiscal Review

Transcript Highlights:

• to do and not required to do.
• to do and not required to do.
• requiring public involvement plans?
• Requiring public involvement plans?
• One of the things I think that to get at the question of the requirement or not requirement, it's less

Committee: Joint JLARC I-900 Subcommittee for SAO Performance Audits

Summary: The I-900 Subcommittee held a public hearing on the State Auditor’s performance audit, “Community Engagement During Contaminated Site Cleanups.” Audit staff said Ecology oversees only about 8% of Washington’s active contaminated sites, while most sites are handled by third parties or have no cleanup plan yet. The audit found that community engagement requirements apply mainly to Ecology-conducted or Ecology-supervised sites, leaving many independent cleanups without required public involvement or Ecology oversight. The auditors also reported inconsistent coordination between Ecology and the Department of Health, and noted that Ecology’s community engagement practices were generally compliant at the sampled sites but lacked systematic lessons-learned evaluations, earlier outreach in some cases, and more tailored language/accessibility efforts. Tribal feedback was mixed, with some tribes saying engagement was adequate and others asking for earlier, more tailored consultation. Committee members questioned how Ecology could be absent from many cleanups, whether SEPA or other laws still require public involvement, and whether Ecology has authority to require public participation at third-party sites. Audit staff responded that their work focused narrowly on community engagement requirements under MTCA and did not evaluate the full cleanup or permitting process, but they recommended Ecology increase transparency and consider engagement expectations for higher-risk third-party sites. Members also raised concerns about tribal identification, exposure scenarios, and whether Ecology is using the best available information early enough in site prioritization. Ecology said it appreciated the audit, agreed that community engagement should be the norm for higher-risk sites, and said it is already taking steps such as improving staff guidance, developing a tribal engagement plan, and launching a public notification subscription system. The Department of Health also said it values its partnership with Ecology and that clearer written procedures would help preserve institutional knowledge. During public testimony, Washington Conservation Action supported the audit’s findings and urged stronger community engagement, especially in communities of color and low-income areas disproportionately affected by toxic sites. The organization said fully funding MTCA is necessary for Ecology to implement the needed improvements and noted that more modern outreach approaches and additional staff resources will likely be required. The hearing ended with the chair inviting written comments and adjourning the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Step housing may not be subject to standards, conditions, or requirements more restrictive than is required
• required for other types of developments in the zone, except for requirements like setback, lot coverage
• These projects do not require massive parcels, complex redevelopment zones, and often don't require multi-year
• We do not require sobriety.
• We allow pets, couples stay together, we do not require sobriety, we do not require ID for entry, and

Bills: HB2266 , HB2489

Committee: House Housing

Keywords: housing, supportive housing, transitional housing, emergency shelters, homelessness prevention, public space, local governance, life-sustaining activities, statewide standards, regulation

Transcript Highlights:

• However, none of these incentives required officers to complete all of the required training.
• If we were to fold in these requirements, these training-hour requirements, into the accreditation process
• And was required to develop the digital equity plan.
• Rule number two, you have to adhere to the requirements.
• Policy and programmatic requirements.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee subcommittee heard three State Auditor’s Office performance audits: implementation of the Law Enforcement Training and Community Safety Act, Washington’s digital equity planning, and the Department of Commerce’s Digital Navigator Program. In the law enforcement training audit, the State Auditor found the Criminal Justice Training Commission had developed most required training content but had not developed all required topics, lacked a systematic project management approach, and had weak tools to ensure participation and compliance. Auditors said most officers had not completed the required 40 hours, patrol tactics training was a major bottleneck, and the Commission’s reporting did not clearly show statewide compliance. The Commission said it generally agreed with the recommendations and had begun implementing some changes. Committee members raised concerns about staffing, liability, incentives, and whether the law had enough enforcement “teeth.” In the digital equity audit, auditors said Washington lacked a comprehensive, unified statewide plan, a designated leader, and reliable funding for digital equity efforts. They said existing plans were fragmented, with the NTIA-approved plan the most complete but no longer fully funded after federal changes. The State Auditor recommended the legislature establish oversight authority and require a lead organization to coordinate and evaluate statewide digital equity efforts and develop a unified plan. The Department of Commerce and Office of Equity agreed with the need for clearer leadership and coordination, and a public witness described ongoing coalition and local planning work. Committee members asked about best practices from other states and whether the auditor could provide additional research on coordination models. In the Digital Navigator Program audit, the State Auditor concluded Commerce did not consistently follow core grant-management practices, including competitive award processes, vetting of grantees, clear contracts, performance monitoring, and reimbursement controls. Auditors said Commerce expanded grants without a new competition, lacked adequate documentation and reporting, and paid out millions without sufficient support; they also cited management decisions that overrode staff concerns. Commerce said it had already begun major contract-management reforms, created a new contracts and compliance structure, and was working on risk assessments, documentation standards, and staff training. Members pressed Commerce on accountability, possible recoupment of improper payments, ethics issues, and whether the agency had clear performance metrics for the program. No votes were taken, and the hearing ended after public testimony and committee discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Notarization was required.
• Notarization was required.
• Notoriization was required. In beliefs. Notoriization was required.
• </c> required, not the form. required, not the form.
• requires a notary signature.

Committee: Senate Health and Human Services

Transcript Highlights:

• before being appointed; it requires that JLARC review the arbitration requirements and report to the
• consecutive days' work requirement for occupational disease claims and instead requires a worker submit
• the 90 consecutive days' work requirement for occupational disease claims, and it also requires a worker
• check investigation requirements.
• It removes the requirement that CJTCs, For a sheriff candidate meet certain requirements, it removes

Summary: The Ways and Means Committee met in executive session on February 9, 2026, first hearing a staff briefing on Senate Bill 6346, which would impose a tax on individuals earning over $1 million. Staff described the bill’s revenue and spending impacts and reviewed a proposed substitute and 11 amendments addressing items such as public defense funding, charitable deductions, out-of-state tax credits, small business credits, diapers, constitutional issues, and a contingent constitutional amendment. The committee later took up the bill and rejected all of the offered amendments, then advanced the substitute bill with a due pass recommendation to the Rules Committee. Members supporting the bill argued it would help address tax fairness and fund public services, while opponents raised concerns about constitutionality, economic harm, and the effect on businesses and charitable giving. The committee also acted on a series of policy bills. It advanced a substitute bill on grocery store closures in food deserts after adopting a narrower substitute, despite concerns from some members about burdening grocers. It approved a substitute bill expanding voting access for military, overseas, Native American, and disabled voters, adopting a second substitute that removed a cybersecurity review requirement. The committee also advanced bills on tort claim arbitration against governments, victim and witness protections in sexual assault and domestic violence cases, JLARC review of student aid fraud, agricultural collective bargaining, labor relations if federal preemption ends, a cost-of-living adjustment for Plan 1 retirees, workers’ compensation and medical care access, line-of-duty death reimbursements, law enforcement background checks and eligibility, veterans’ discharge definitions, and extraordinary medical placement. Several of these bills had amendments adopted, including changes to tort claim oversight, victim-requested standby counsel, agricultural labor definitions, workers’ compensation penalties, law enforcement volunteer support, and extraordinary medical placement criteria. In the second group of bills, staff briefed measures affecting property taxes, housing, cannabis, disaster-related tax relief, technical tax code changes, aircraft fuel tax revenues, the estate tax, and a pesticide tax exemption. The committee heard that a substitute for the fire protection district bill would alter how city or town levy capacity is reduced and include consultation requirements and board-creation provisions. It also heard that the property tax relief expansion for seniors and disabled retirees needed a substitute to make the consolidated school levy revenue-neutral. Other bills would expand tax exemptions for low-income housing and nonprofit homeownership, authorize local cannabis excise taxes, extend disaster repair tax relief, expand housing-related local sales tax uses, make technical tax code changes, redirect aircraft fuel tax revenues to aeronautics, reduce the estate tax rate, and extend a pesticide tax exemption. The transcript ends during the committee’s consideration of Senate Bill 6346, with the committee debating and rejecting amendments before moving the bill forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 1662 requires the State Board of Education, the Washington Professional Educator Standards
• unless otherwise required by state or federal law.
• Yes, the OSPI rule does require that, I believe.
• liaisons to meet specified requirements.
• It will also require OSPI to show the legislature.

Bills: HB1662 , HB1683 , HB2534 , HB2557 , HB2594

Committee: House Education

Keywords: education agencies, administrative independence, superintendent, education reform, agency authority, education, school boards, district adjustments, administrative boundaries, educational governance, military families, child stability, transitional schooling, support services, special education, parental rights, educational access, evaluation reports, disability services, unhoused

Transcript Highlights:

• If a pre-application conference for a complete application is required, the bill sets forth certain requirements
• Yeah, it meets all the code requirements.
• WUI Code to ensure that those requirements comply with other state land use requirements.
• Please add a requirement for public access and comment.
• That's a BRPELS requirement.

Summary: The Senate Local Government Committee heard several land use and infrastructure bills. SB 5633 on subdivision of land drew the most discussion: staff described a broad rewrite that would move many subdivision decisions from legislative bodies to administrative personnel, limit or eliminate public hearings for preliminary plats, require notice to nearby landowners, set completeness and 100-day decision timelines, and streamline concurrent review of related permits. Builders, Realtors, and some cities supported the bill as a long-overdue modernization that could reduce delays and housing costs, while county and city representatives raised concerns about eliminating public hearings, implementation details, and local accountability. The committee also heard SB 6274 on street standards and frontage improvements, which would require jurisdictions to identify infrastructure barriers to infill and middle housing and periodically review street and frontage standards; supporters said frontage mandates can make housing infeasible, while local government witnesses warned about conflicts with safety, ADA, and transportation goals. SB 6309 on high-capacity transit permits would let Sound Transit apply for permits before acquiring property and before some land use decisions, and would allow certain development agreements and subdivision exemptions to speed transit delivery; Sound Transit and city representatives supported it, and the committee waived the five-day notice rule to hear it. The committee also took testimony on SB 6279, which would incorporate the wildland-urban interface code into the state building code after statewide wildfire maps are completed and require state and local coordination on defensible space and local amendments. Supporters framed it as needed wildfire resilience planning, while opponents from counties, builders, environmental groups, and local officials argued the bill was premature, too rigid, and potentially inconsistent with environmental laws, local conditions, and insurance realities; several asked for more local flexibility, clearer map processes, and changes to the timing and scope of adoption. SB 6291 would extend from two to four years the period during which local health jurisdiction staff may inspect on-site wastewater systems under supervision before certification; public health officials supported it as a workforce and training fix, saying the current timeline is too short and costly. The committee also heard SB 5903, SB 6016, SB 5820, SB 6132, and SB 6189 in executive session, adopted substitutes on some bills, and advanced SB 6016, SB 5820, SB 6132, and SB 6189 out of committee by due-pass votes, with SB 6016 receiving a substitute and a member noting support but remaining concerns.