Transcript Highlights:

• We have a very good livestock standard board with standards. We were very proactive on that.
• We have a very good livestock standard board with standards. We were very proactive on that.
• "We have a very good livestock standard board with standards. We were very proactive on that.
• </c> standards that we follow nationally? standards that we follow nationally?
• </c><00:31:11.760><c> I've</c> our livestock standard of care. I've our livestock standard of care.

Committee: Senate Agriculture

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00 Attendance Roll Call: 00:32 SB 155 Discussion: 03:00 SB 155 Roll Call Vote: 07:50 SB 45 Discussion: 08:39 SB 45 Roll Call Vote: 36:00, 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , my Red Book standards and the generally accepted government auditing standards, or the Yellow Book
• in the particular requirements of those standards.
• I won't go into the standards because the Yellow Book standards is, I think, several hundred pages long
• in the particular requirements of those standards. sets of standards and so there are a lot of differences
• in the particular requirements of those standards which I won't go into because the yellow book standards

Keywords: 907, all

Summary: The Joint Interim Committee on Legislative Audits met on June 17 for informational presentations. The Department of Administrative Services, through Chief Audit Executive Eli Ritchie, gave an overview of statewide internal audit requirements and the fiscal year 2025 report. He explained the difference between internal and external audit, described Oregon’s statutory and rule-based internal audit structure, and reported that 30 agencies had internal audit functions, with most meeting required standards. He said 73 audits and 49 advisory/consulting engagements were completed statewide, with strong compliance overall, though a few agencies were rebuilding audit committees after vacancies. No committee questions were raised after the presentation. The Secretary of State’s Audits Division then presented its Government Waste Hotline annual report. Director Steve Bergman and audit manager Olivia Rekhed described changes made to align the hotline with statute, including renaming it the Government Waste Hotline, creating a review panel, improving anonymity protections, removing fraud reporting from the hotline’s scope, and adjusting reporting timelines. They said hotline volume increased modestly in 2025, most reports were referred elsewhere or closed for insufficient evidence, and two reports were substantiated, including questioned costs of about $856 for personal use of a state vehicle and about $2.9 million tied to the Preschool Promise program. Committee members asked about hotline staffing, cost, anonymity, and follow-up on findings; staff said the hotline is lightly resourced, uses a contracted intake service, and referrals or recommendations are followed up through management letters and later reviews. The committee also heard an audit of the Oregon Parks and Recreation Department’s safety inspections and asset tracking. The Secretary of State’s office reported that OPRD had not consistently conducted or documented quarterly OSHA safety inspections and had incomplete asset records, including missing acquisition dates and costs for many assets. The audit made eight recommendations covering safety inspection policies, asset management guidance, tagging, reconciliations, disposition controls, training, and a new asset management system; OPRD agreed to all recommendations. OPRD officials said they had already begun training staff, improving inspection procedures, and working toward a replacement asset system, while noting operational challenges from a large, dispersed park system and manual processes. Committee members asked about what kinds of assets are tracked, how tagging works, whether items were actually being lost, and how much tracking is necessary for low-value tools; OPRD said the main issue was inconsistent classification and documentation rather than widespread loss. The meeting ended with no votes or formal actions taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• With the absence of these clear standards...
• standards are being finalized.
• Everyone agreed: California needs uniform, science-based standards.
• In fact, the absence of standards is what drives litigation today.
• In fact, the absence of standards is what drives litigation today.

Summary: The Assembly Insurance Committee met as a subcommittee at first because a quorum was not initially present, then later established a quorum and heard several bills. The main special-order item was AB 1795 (Gibson), which would create statewide standards for testing, inspection, and remediation of wildfire smoke damage in homes, with CalEPA and public health agencies developing science-based standards and insurers required to follow new claims-handling timelines. Supporters, including Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara and wildfire survivors, said the bill would bring consistency and safety; insurers and consumer groups generally supported the concept but sought further amendments on scope, standards, and claim handling. The committee voted do pass as amended and refer AB 1795 to Appropriations, with the roll held open for later additions. The committee also considered AB 1576 (Ortega) on the Subsequent Injury Benefit Trust Fund, which would make changes intended to reduce litigation and employer assessments while preserving the program’s purpose of encouraging hiring of workers with prior disabilities. Labor-side witnesses supported the bill as a reform step, while business, public entity, and insurance groups opposed it, arguing it did not address the core structural problems and that a trailer bill was a better vehicle for broader reform. AB 1576 was voted do pass to Appropriations, with the roll held open. AB 1931 (Papan) would create an optional limited-lines license for utilities to offer home protection products for repairs to appliances and utility service lines. Support came from HomeServe, utilities, and industry groups, who said the bill would clarify current law and add consumer protections such as training, disclosures, and a free-look period; there was no opposition in the room. The committee passed AB 1931 to Appropriations. AB 2361 (Pacheco) would limit vicarious liability for peer-to-peer vehicle-sharing platforms like Turo while preserving insurance coverage requirements; supporters said it would align California with other states, while consumer attorneys opposed it as reducing accountability and consumer recovery. The committee passed AB 2361 as amended to Appropriations. AB 2098 (Kalra), heard later, would require employers to allow leave for workers to attend treatment for occupational injuries during work hours, subject to notice and business-necessity limits; labor groups supported it and business and insurance groups sought narrower standards. It was also voted do pass to Appropriations. The committee then completed roll-call add-ons and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• IEEE 1547 standards, the standards that support and coordinated with the National Electric Code, and
• Grid standards date back actually all the way to the 1890s.
• Another important standard is UL 1741. This is a certification standard.
• The 1547 standard is the requirements.
• The UL standards govern how they're tested and listed.

Summary: The Senate Environment, Energy, and Technology Committee held public hearings on two producer-responsibility bills and then a work session on consumer electrical equipment. On SB 6271, which would create an extended producer responsibility program for mattresses, staff explained the bill’s requirements for a producer responsibility organization, collection and recycling targets, reporting, and enforcement. Senator Hunt said the measure would reduce landfill burden and illegal dumping while creating recycling jobs. Local governments, a recycler, and environmental advocates testified in support, citing landfill capacity concerns, high disposal costs, and the potential to recover most mattress materials. Retail and industry groups said they support the goal but opposed the bill as drafted, arguing it differs from existing state models and could create unnecessary cost and administrative burden. The hearing closed with 459 signed in support and 172 opposed. The committee then heard SB 6174, a proposed substitute on textile producer responsibility that would first require a needs assessment and the creation of a coordinating organization. Supporters, including the sponsor, environmental advocates, Seattle Public Utilities, and a student testifier, described textiles as a fast-growing waste stream with major landfill, pollution, and global labor impacts, and said the needs assessment is an important first step. Opponents from retail, business, apparel, and hospitality groups said they support continued stakeholder work and the needs assessment concept, but raised concerns that the bill still presumes a future EPR program, could impose fees and penalties, and may sweep in retailers and company uniforms in ways that create burdens for small businesses. The hearing closed with 1,253 signed in support and 364 opposed. In the work session, Jeremiah Miller of Pacific Northwest National Laboratory briefed the committee on codes and standards for grid-connected and portable solar equipment. He explained how the National Electrical Code, UL certification standards, and IEEE interconnection standards work together, and described newer supplemental standards such as UL 3141 for power control systems and UL 3700 for portable or plug-in solar. Members asked about safety, certification timing, and how Washington could allow these products while ensuring proper installation and consumer protection. Miller said UL 3700 is very new and not yet widely certified in the market, but that the current code framework can accommodate certified products while standards continue to evolve. The committee took no votes and adjourned after the work session.

Transcript Highlights:

• Texas Military Department follows those standards.
• soldiers and airmen to meet those standards.
• Have other states set standards for their forces?
• I, I'm saying that we're meeting standards. We have standards already set.
• So that's what we go by, the standards by DOD.

Bills: SB 36

Committee: House Homeland Security, Public Safety & Veterans' Affairs

Keywords: transportation, regional authorities, mobility, infrastructure, sales tax

Transcript Highlights:

• These are necessities, and they should be the standard.
• The first one being the evidentiary standard.
• The true gold standard for child welfare law is the best interest standard to specifically meet the needs
• doubt standard or active efforts?
• That has this all-encompassing standard for all.

Bills: HB18 , HB37 , HB116 , HB388 , HB879 , HB913 , HB1151 , HB2216 , HB2358 , HB2809 , SB577 , SB1590 , SB1782 , SB1887 , SB2744 , HB18 , HB37 , HB116

Committee: Senate Health & Human Services

Keywords: rural health, hospital funding, healthcare access, mental health services, financial stability, perinatal bereavement, healthcare, hospital training, bereavement support, maternal care, fetal demise, stillbirth, neonatal death, parent-child relationship, involuntary termination, family law, child welfare, child protection, HB 388, HB388

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> the note does technically meet standards the note does technically meet standards but<00:20:20.039
• The note is meeting standards.
• standard procedures and generally standard procedures and generally agencies<00:25:17.399><c> do</c><
• </c><00:25:50.279><c> and</c> there additional standards and there additional standards and procedures
• </c> say hey this this doesn't meet standards say hey this this doesn't meet standards we<00:31:54.200

Committee: Senate Finance

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Definitions and testing standards.
• requirements with export standards.
• Thompson, so looking at the standards that... Ms.
• Thompson about the seed standards not having a particular date, and then we have other standards that
• Thompson referenced is these seed standards.

Committee: Senate Agricultural Affairs

Keywords: 989, all

Transcript Highlights:

• ><c> academic</c><00:42:58.160><c> standards</c> standards in the academic standards standards in the
• standards</c><00:43:00.720><c> are</c><00:43:00.960><c> not</c> statute that academic standards are not
• So this subdivision to determine exemption standards in addition to the standards set by free school
• </c> standards in addition to the standards standards in addition to the standards set<01:04:56.240><
• nothing to do with health standards.

Committee: House Education Policy

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Is that kind of the standard, or does this seem a little hefty?
• We expect standard language related to authorization to start work, authorization to pay insurance, Standard
• And let's start by going over wildfire property mitigation standards.
• that made sense or if there would be a suite of standards to discuss.
• And what we had learned in the work group is the IBHS standard is that gold standard backed by the insurance

Bills: HB2428 , HB2399 , HB2087

Committee: House Consumer Protection & Business

Keywords: life insurance, policy lapse, policy cancellation, nonpayment of premium, premium grace period, lapse notice, termination notice, third-party notice, third-party designee, beneficiary protection, consumer protection, insurance regulation, insurer notice requirements, policyholder, beneficiary, Washington RCW, insurance code, unintentional lapse, coverage continuation, premium delinquency

Transcript Highlights:

• So those are the standards.
• That's standards of the standards.
• But don't we want to update standards on a more regular basis for those who are using those state standards
• The standard may be critical thinking, right?
• Certainly standards, you know.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• That's more the national standards.
• , the USP standards.
• And there's a lot of standards out there. So.
• That same concept also exists in those national standards that I was referencing.
• I just wanted to point out on issue number 12, the standard of care in the report.

Summary: The joint Assembly and Senate business committees held a sunset review hearing on the California State Board of Pharmacy, with board leadership describing the board’s consumer-protection role and its priorities around access, enforcement, and updating pharmacy law. The board emphasized a proposed shift toward a standard-of-care model for pharmacists, arguing it would reduce rigid protocol requirements and improve access to services such as HIV PrEP/PEP, contraception, and naloxone. Board representatives also discussed pharmacy deserts, possible fee waivers for pharmacies in underserved areas, concerns about payer practices contributing to closures, continuing education audits, and a request to restore more flexibility in licensure decisions and probationary monitoring for applicants with certain criminal histories. A major focus of the hearing was the board’s ongoing compounding regulations, especially the treatment of sterile versus nonsterile compounding and substances such as glutathione and methylcobalamin. The board said the proposal was not a ban on those substances and described the rulemaking as grounded in federal law, USP standards, and public comment, noting the process had gone through multiple modified texts and hearings. Testimony from stakeholders was sharply divided: pharmacists, veterinarians, firefighters, naturopathic doctors, and patient advocates warned the rules were restricting access to compounded medications and harming patients and first responders, while the California Medical Association, psychiatric physicians, and PhRMA raised concerns that the board’s proposals could expand pharmacist authority beyond training, affect physician practice, or create safety risks. Other public comments addressed pharmacy technician ratios, remote processing, flavoring medications, hospital-specific regulation, budget and enforcement transparency, and whether the board should add members with community compounding or pharmacy technician expertise. Committee members also asked about the board’s oversight priorities and the rationale for its standard-of-care proposal. Board staff explained that consumer protection includes education, licensing, policy, and enforcement, with the highest-priority enforcement cases being those posing imminent public harm. After public testimony concluded, the chairs thanked participants and adjourned the sunset review hearing, announcing an immediate transition to the joint informational hearing on the Department of Cannabis Control.

Transcript Highlights:

• Nurse practitioners have no standard of care and no standardized education.
• Is it standardized?
• There's a standard, and those standards are passed on through those states.
• And so there's not two standards of care. held to the same standards of care.
• Standardization is crucial.

Bills: SB1888 , SB3003 , SB2417 , SB2459 , SB3055 , HB1393 , HB2884 , SB2943

Committee: Senate State Affairs

Keywords: grand jury, jury qualifications, jury wheel, small counties, Texas legislation, age verification, obscene devices, online sales, juvenile protection, penalties, antitrust, attorney general, Texas Free Enterprise, business regulations, legal confidentiality, personal identifying information, data brokers, judicial safety, civil rights, data privacy

Transcript Highlights:

• and things in the NFPA standards, but there's a standard called NFPA 1141, which is...
• ><c> a</c> in the NFPA standards, but there's a in the NFPA standards, but there's a standard<00:07:31.200
• I do know a lot of local departments look at that standard as like their, you know, gold standard.
• I do know a lot of local departments look at that standard as like their gold standard.
• You want to be state fire code and NFPA Standard 1141 is what you want to write. All right.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Summary: The Committee of Conference on Senate Bill 564 reconvened to review a new amendment from Representative DuMont. The amendment cleaned up prior language, added a new section carving out wetland buffers and conservation areas for special exception or conditional use permit treatment, and included an effective-date delay. Senator Murphy noted that agreed-upon language was missing to prevent municipalities from imposing new building or lot-size restrictions before the bill’s effective date, and that language was restored using wording from amendment 2070. The committee then heard from State Fire Marshal Sean Toomey, who explained that fire-code concerns centered on road access and dead-end roads, and suggested tying road-length limits to NFPA 1141 so the bill would reference an established standard while preserving existing state fire code provisions on water supply, road widths, slopes, and turnarounds. Members discussed refining the language to say road-length caps must comply with the state fire code and NFPA 1141. Representative Alexander also explained that section 3 would expand by-right treatment for certain subdivision buffers and reduce development costs, while section 4 would require at least conditional use or special exception review for wetland buffers and conservation areas rather than allowing a flat denial. After a brief pause to resolve concerns, participants agreed to keep section 3 and section 4, with the understanding that the changes struck a balance between lowering housing-development costs and preserving local review and environmental protections. The committee then voted unanimously to support the agreement, seconded by Rainforth, and the chair said the revised amendment would be sent to OLS for final drafting.

Transcript Highlights:

• A lot of times you can take a standard that's... Hospitals.
• And that standard, we want quality health care all the way around.
• These are necessities, and they should be the standard.
• These are necessities, and they should be the standard.
• The true gold standard for child welfare law is the best interest standard, to specifically meet the

Bills: HB18 , HB37 , HB 116 , HB388 , HB879 , HB913 , HB 1151 , HB2216 , HB2358 , HB2809 , SB577 , SB1590 , SB1782 , SB1887 , SB2744

Committee: Senate Health & Human Services

Keywords: rural health, hospital funding, healthcare access, mental health services, financial stability, perinatal bereavement, healthcare, hospital training, bereavement support, maternal care, fetal demise, stillbirth, neonatal death, parent-child relationship, involuntary termination, family law, child welfare, child protection, HB 388, HB388

Summary: The Senate Committee on Health and Human Services met with a quorum and took up several House and Senate bills, with public testimony limited to two minutes per witness. The committee first heard HB 2358, a cleanup bill requested by HHSC that would repeal outdated training and conference requirements for long-term care facility surveyors and certain providers; there were no witnesses, and the bill was left pending. The committee then heard HB 18, the rural hospital stabilization bill, which would create financial assessment tools, a rural hospital finance office at HHSC, an academy for rural hospital officers, multiple grant programs, enhanced Medicaid reimbursement tied to average cost, OB/GYN add-on payments, expanded pediatric telehealth connectivity, and a rural pediatric mental health program. Senator Perry and witnesses from TORCH, a rural hospital, AARP Texas, and ARCHI strongly supported the bill as a way to stabilize rural hospitals, improve OB access, and address workforce and financial pressures. Committee members discussed rural hospital closures, low-volume quality metrics, system affiliation, and the need for predictable monthly reimbursement; the bill was left pending after testimony and questions. The committee next heard HB 37, which would create a perinatal bereavement care initiative for families experiencing stillbirth, neonatal death, or intrauterine fetal demise, including counseling, staff training, and access to cooling devices, with possible grants and a recognition program for hospitals. Senator Huffman explained the bill, and several witnesses testified in support, sharing personal stories about infant loss and the importance of time with the baby, trained staff, and cuddle cots or similar devices. A neonatologist also supported the bill while suggesting clarification that hospitals should not be penalized if state funding is unavailable and recommending use of regional advisory councils to help implement training. Public testimony was then closed and the bill left pending. The committee also heard HB 879, which would create a streamlined licensing pathway for veterans with medical or nursing experience to practice in Texas, and HB 913, which would add new state hospitals to statute and split the North Texas State Hospital into two separate hospitals with their own superintendents; both bills had no opposition testimony and were left pending. Later, the committee heard SB 2744, a heart disease screening bill that would update the 2009 Texas Heart Attack Prevention Act to require insurance coverage for coronary CT angiography with plaque analysis, including soft plaque detection, as a preventive screening tool. The author and invited witnesses argued the technology is more effective than calcium scoring alone, can identify patients before symptoms appear, and could save lives at a cost comparable to or lower than colonoscopy. An insurance industry witness opposed the bill, arguing the technology has not been recommended by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force for universal screening and that the mandated coverage and payment level would raise costs; the bill was left pending after testimony. Finally, the committee heard HB 1151, a parental rights bill clarifying that refusing psychotropic medication or psychiatric treatment is not neglect unless the child is harmed. Supporters, including parent advocates and attorneys, said the bill would protect parents from CPS overreach and preserve medical decision-making authority, while one witness urged broader attention to physical causes of behavioral issues. Public testimony was closed and HB 1151 was left pending.

Transcript Highlights:

• At the legislature's direction, OSPI adopted financial education learning standards in 2016.
• With an evolving society as we have, you said you have standards for what they need to learn now when
• Because you just spoke about the standards that are already in place, correct? Yes.
• Because you just spoke about the standards that are already in place, correct? Yes, that's right.
• Number two, in terms of the learning standards, you know, we have learning standards when it comes to

Summary: The committee held a public hearing on Senate Bill 5849, which would require all high school students to receive financial education instruction and meet state financial education learning standards to graduate, beginning with the class of 2033 unless the State Board of Education recommends an earlier date. Staff explained the bill’s relationship to existing graduation requirements, the State Board’s role in integrating the requirement into current pathways, and a fiscal note showing about $201,000 in state costs plus unknown district costs. Senators asked about how the requirement would fit different school schedules, whether teacher preparation and clock hours would be addressed, and how the standards would stay current. The bill’s sponsor said it would be embedded within existing pathways, aligned with the Future Ready initiative, and supported by OSPI, the State Board, and the financial education public-private partnership. Testimony on SB 5849 was overwhelmingly supportive, especially from students, educators, nonprofits, bankers, and advocacy groups. Supporters said many students graduate without knowing how to budget, use credit, file taxes, understand loans, or make other basic financial decisions, and argued that a graduation requirement would make financial literacy more equitable and not dependent on family background or zip code. Several students described personal experiences with W-2 forms, student loans, credit cards, and lack of exposure to finance classes, while organizations such as Junior Achievement and the Washington Bankers Association said they already provide curriculum and support and could help districts implement the requirement. One school directors association representative opposed the bill, arguing districts are already overburdened and underfunded and should not receive new mandates without removing others or providing more resources. After the hearing, the committee moved into executive action on a separate packet of bills. It advanced SB 6278 on teacher preparation program review, SB 613 on National Voter Registration Day activities in high schools, SB 6222 on surplus school technology for students, and SB 6206 on a child care pilot for first responders, adopting proposed substitutes where offered. In a second packet, the committee referred SB 6260 on school bus depreciation, adopted a substitute and advanced SB 5346 on student mobile device use and digital citizenship, advanced SB 6263 on public bid thresholds, adopted a substitute and advanced SB 6268 on public access to special education complaint decisions, and adopted a substitute and advanced SB 6247 on financial oversight and misconduct in school districts. The committee then adjourned after signing the boards.

Transcript Highlights:

• But I don't know that in developing our current elevator standards, that cost was considered.
• But I don't know that in developing our current elevator standards, that cost was considered.
• They said they supported the removal of explicit reference to global safety and related standards in
• To be clear, no jurisdiction in North America has adopted or recognized an international standard.
• No jurisdiction in North America has adopted or recognized an international standard.

Committee: House Housing

Keywords: 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Peterson that clarifies that the standard for EMP will directly parallel the standard for a medical malpractice
• A higher standard of accountability is what I call House Bill 2387.
• A higher standard of accountability is what I call it.
• It weakens rather than strengthens accountability standards.
• Do you believe that would be held to the same standard, or do you think there would be a separate standard

Summary: The House Community Safety Committee held public hearings on several bills. House Bill 2508, concerning the Office of Independent Investigations (OII), would expand OII’s jurisdiction over deadly-force and related use-of-force incidents, require broader notification and records access from law enforcement and emergency responders, and exempt certain OII investigative records from public disclosure. Rep. Deborah Entenman and OII staff supported the bill as a way to improve independent, transparent investigations, while committee members raised questions about when cases are considered “closed” and how to protect against repeated or harassing investigations. OII representatives said formal reviews are referred to prosecutors, administrative closures are not, and the bill would clarify existing public records protections. Law enforcement and public-interest witnesses were split, with some supporting the expansion and others objecting to added secrecy provisions and questioning safeguards and oversight. House Bill 2539, as amended by a proposed substitute, would raise the Department of Corrections inmate indigency cap from $25 to $100 so incarcerated people can retain more money for hygiene and basic necessities before deductions are taken. Rep. Chappala Street said the change would help people buy essential items and reduce conflict, while incarcerated witnesses and advocates testified that current deductions leave too little for basic needs and place burdens on families. A committee member questioned whether DOC already provides those items, and Street and supporters responded that provided items are often low quality or insufficient. No vote was taken. House Bill 2490 would expand extraordinary medical placement for incarcerated people with serious, chronic, or terminal conditions, extending the expected life-expectancy threshold from six months to approximately 18 months and adding clearer DOC review criteria and appeal rights. The prime sponsor and supporters argued the bill would improve humane care, reduce costs, and allow more people to receive treatment in the community when they no longer pose a public-safety risk. DOC said the revised language would reduce legal concerns and allow more time to develop safe placement plans, while opponents of the current system said EMP is underused and people die waiting for decisions. The committee also heard extensive testimony on House Bill 2387, which would tie certain sheriff decertification actions to recall procedures and preserve an elected sheriff’s office unless voters remove them. Supporters, including the sponsor and several sheriffs, said the bill protects voter control and local accountability; opponents, including civil rights and immigrant-rights groups, argued it weakens certification standards, creates unequal accountability for sheriffs, and improperly uses recall-like consequences through statute rather than constitutional process. The chair indicated the committee intended to act on House Bill 2508 the following Monday, February 2.

Transcript Highlights:

• Manufacturing FBH on... ...construction and safety standards.
• Standardization. Standardization all the way through.
• Standardization. Standardization all the way through.
• Standardization. Standardization all the way through.
• An important key, though, is that I heard from Rebecca, is that efficient standardized plans and standardized

Summary: The committee held its second hearing on housing construction innovation, focusing on factory-built and modular housing as a way to lower costs, speed delivery, and expand housing supply. The chair framed the effort as a search for practical innovation paired with land use, financing, and regulatory changes that could make housing more affordable for working families. Government witnesses from HCD, the Strategic Growth Council, and the tax credit and bond allocation agencies explained how factory-built housing is regulated, how California standards and third-party approvals work, and how state programs are trying to build regional demand and financing pipelines for modular production. Testimony from investors and developers emphasized both the promise and the risks of modular construction. JP Morgan Chase and the Housing Accelerator Fund described projects that achieved meaningful time and cost savings, but said lenders still see elevated risk because of manufacturer solvency, upfront deposits, transportation and installation issues, and the need for standardized designs and experienced teams. They urged more standardization, more local factories, better alignment between financing timelines and construction schedules, and state support such as backstops, top-loss capital, and scoring preferences in tax credit and bond programs. Several speakers noted that recent federal changes to the 4% tax credit program increased production capacity, but warned that without continued state investment the pipeline could face a future funding cliff. The workforce panel, including union contractors, factory supervisors, and labor representatives, said modular construction can support good jobs if it is paired with union labor, training, and fair standards. They described benefits for workers such as steadier schedules, less commuting, improved safety, and better work-life balance, while also stressing the need for wages, health coverage, retirement benefits, and apprenticeship opportunities. Union representatives supported a model that keeps both factory and on-site work unionized and said the industry could create more jobs overall if California builds more factories and develops a stable, long-term demand pipeline. No formal votes or actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• I know the bill really does attempt to sort of tie it to current standards.
• I know the bill really does attempt to sort of tie it to current standards.
• My understanding is it doesn't actually include standards.
• One, that there is no National Electrical Code standard yet.
• Under RCW 70.30, Ecology adopts standards for motor vehicle emissions.

Summary: The committee heard public hearings on four bills. SB 5982 would expand Clean Energy Transformation Act coverage to include port districts and certain single-customer utilities, and would revise definitions for market customers and affected market customers. Supporters, including environmental groups, Commerce, Ecology, and some port and utility representatives, said it would close loopholes and ensure large loads such as data centers and port-based generation are subject to CETA. Opponents from ports, PUDs, business groups, and industrial consumers argued the bill could sweep in existing single-customer utilities and burden smaller ports or industrial projects. No vote was taken; the chair closed the hearing after noting substantial pro, con, and other testimony. SB 6008 would create a statewide residential battery incentive and flexible demand program administered through Commerce, with higher incentives for low- and moderate-income customers and requirements tied to utility flexible demand programs. Supporters said it would improve grid resilience, lower bills, and help deploy virtual power plants and distributed storage. Utilities and some advocates supported the concept but asked for changes on funding, low-income verification, compensation, deadlines, and program design. No action was taken beyond the public hearing. SB 6050 would allow portable plug-in solar devices and one meter-mounted device per premises, while restricting utilities, landlords, and HOAs from blocking them and setting safety and certification conditions. Supporters called it a low-cost way to expand distributed solar access, especially for renters and lower-income households. Opponents, including labor, utilities, and safety-focused witnesses, raised concerns about fire risk, backfeeding, lack of existing electrical code standards, utility worker safety, and the need for interconnection review. The committee then heard SB 6056, which would direct Ecology to exempt utility service vehicles from certain clean vehicle emissions standards; Ecology said it was already pursuing a similar rule and flagged the bill’s broad definition and potential policy implications, while utility associations supported the exemption for emergency response vehicles and environmental advocates opposed the statutory approach. No votes were taken on any of the bills.