Transcript Highlights:

• Item C is an increase of $3.7 million in all funds to fund increases in utility costs due to the...
• **Chair**: This is key for ensuring that we utilize our funding efficiently and effectively.
• funds.
• funds.
• However, recommendations reduced the GR by $6 million due to the utilization of federal funds and other

Bills: SB1 , SB 1

Committee: Senate Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• of the utility, and that's also done to fund the Public Utilities Commission.
• of the utility, and that's also done to fund the Public Utilities Commission.
• of the utility, and that's also done to fund the Public Utilities Commission.
• of the utility, and that's also done to fund the Public Utilities Commission.
• of the utility, and that's also done to fund the Public Utilities Commission.

Summary: The hearing focused on House Bill 610, which would fold the Office of the Consumer Advocate into the Department of Energy rather than fully eliminate consumer advocacy functions. The prime sponsor argued the current office is small, funded by a special assessment on ratepayers, and duplicative of DOE work. He said moving the function to DOE would streamline energy policy review, reduce bureaucracy, and better focus the larger agency on lowering residential energy costs. He also disputed claims that the Consumer Advocate is independent, saying the office is appointed through a political process similar to DOE leadership. Committee members and the sponsor discussed whether the bill would actually relocate existing positions or replace them, and whether the Department of Energy would absorb the cost of the transferred staff. The sponsor said the fiscal note shows roughly a million-dollar reduction in both revenue assessment and spending, and that the bill would effectively reduce the office from five positions to three. He also defended his cost estimates for energy-code-related housing impacts and said the Consumer Advocate has sometimes supported policies he считает increase costs, such as energy-efficiency measures and building code changes. He argued the office should focus more on energy supply and generation, including natural gas and nuclear, rather than efficiency alone. Representative Wendy Thomas testified in opposition, saying the Consumer Advocate is an important, fair, and impartial voice for ratepayers and warning that the bill was fiscally irresponsible because the incumbent could still be owed salary and benefits if the office were repealed. She also said the bill’s drafting was confusing and that the Consumer Advocate’s role is to push back on utilities on behalf of consumers. Other members raised questions about whether the DOE would simply inherit the same political appointment structure and whether the bill would meaningfully lower bills. No vote was taken in the excerpt; the chair indicated additional testimony would follow, and the Department of Energy was present to answer questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• So first, we added in here the Medicaid Oversight Advisory Board.
• This is because we did this in another bill, and we referenced the oversight of Moab in it.
• Family Services instead of the Finance and Administration Cabinet, and requires that monies in the fund
• Sections 12 to 19, which is where we added House Bill 9, the Medicaid Oversight and Advisory Bill, into
• See no other business. the Medicaid oversight and advisory bill the Medicaid oversight and advisory bill

Summary: The Appropriations and Revenue Committee met to consider House Bill 695 and first adopted a committee substitute. The substitute made a number of Medicaid-related changes, including adding the Medicaid Oversight Advisory Board, exempting federally required Medicaid changes from needing separate General Assembly authorization, revising the treatment of University Hospitals payment programs, clarifying that the community engagement program is mandatory, moving the Medicaid pharmaceutical rebate fund to the Cabinet for Health and Family Services, and narrowing reporting requirements. It also removed provisions on Medicaid coverage for psychoeducational services and replaced them with reporting on behavioral health and substance use disorder service utilization and expenditures. The substitute further added language allowing the Medicaid program to be administered through fee-for-service, managed care, or other federally permitted delivery systems, incorporated the Medicaid Oversight and Advisory Bill, authorized a state plan amendment if needed, and made entities that failed to comply with prior Medicaid managed care reporting requirements ineligible for new MCO contracts. It also shifted responsibility for a behavioral health and substance use disorder treatment scorecard from MCOs to the Department for Medicaid Services. The sponsor noted that all language related to long-term managed care in the waiver program had been removed. After the explanation, Senator Richardson moved to adopt the substitute and Senator Nunn seconded. The committee then voted to pass the measure favorably; the transcript reflects a roll call with no nays and the bill reported out with favorable expression.

Transcript Highlights:

• Further erosion of these funds, whether from HIRF or the state highway fund, would compound existing
• Further erosion of these funds, whether from HIRF or the state highway fund, would compound existing
• We are concerned that depriving the State Highway Fund of this funding would exacerbate the challenges
• That fund goes for two programs.
• It also funds a T-SIP program.

Committee: House House Natural Resources, Energy & Water Committee of Reference

Summary: The committee took up several energy, transportation, and land-use bills. HB 2428, dealing with county and ADEQ authority to issue voluntary permits certifying emission reduction credits for mobile and non-road sources, received neutral testimony from ADEQ and support from Maricopa County; the committee adopted the Griffin amendment and passed the bill 10-0 with a due pass recommendation. HB 2145, which expands who may request certain gasoline fuel reformulation actions and is contingent on EPA approval, also passed on a 5-4 vote after brief staff explanation and no amendment. The committee then considered HB 2331, a strike-everything amendment requiring electric utilities to ensure 85% of generating capacity serving retail load comes from “reliable resources” by 2030. Supporters, including the sponsor and Arizona Free Enterprise Club, argued it would protect affordability and grid reliability by favoring dispatchable power; opponents, including the Sierra Club and Rural Arizona Action, said it would effectively favor fossil fuels, raise costs, and limit cleaner resources. The committee adopted the amendment and passed the bill 6-4. HB 2795, which would bar counties from using zoning to block small modular reactors once federal permitting conditions are met, drew strong support from the sponsor and industry advocates who framed it as pro-property-rights and pro-nuclear, and opposition from county, city, and environmental groups who raised preemption, local control, safety, waste, and siting concerns; it passed 6-4. The committee also passed HB 2340, which allows the Power Plant and Transmission Line Siting Committee to evaluate proposed generating facilities along with transmission lines, on a 5-4 vote. HB 2400, an emergency measure to suspend the motor vehicle fuel tax in Areas A and C during part of the year and replace the lost revenue through state highway funding, drew opposition from cities and counties over transportation funding impacts but support from the sponsor and some members focused on gas affordability; the Griffin amendment was adopted and the bill passed 6-4. Finally, HB 2401 was introduced as a requirement for ADEQ to conduct a biennial review of available fuel formulations and their air-quality impacts in Areas A and C, but the transcript ends before testimony or action on that bill is completed.

Transcript Highlights:

• by special funds, positions that are funded by general funds.
• other pots of funding, including the state revolving funds, general bond obligation, and general fund
• be funded by revolving funds or general obligation bonds?
• Are they 100% funded by special fund or is some General Fund slipping in there?
• that fund it and the General Fund.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Medicaid Oversight Advisory Board, the Medicaid Oversight Advisory Board, the sixth meeting, and
• </c> health care needs leads to utilizing health care needs leads to utilizing services<00:17:27.199>
• </c><00:22:26.160><c> You</c> about the funding going forward. You about the funding going forward.
• </c> you utilizing a great deal. you utilizing a great deal.
• &gt;&gt; utilization or MLR? &gt;&gt; utilization or MLR? &gt;&gt; No, I'm<00:50:46.240><c> sorry.

Summary: The Medicaid Oversight Advisory Board first approved the September 24 minutes and then heard a presentation from four certified community behavioral health clinic providers: Pathways, NorthKey, Seven Counties Services, and NewVista. The presenters explained the difference between traditional community mental health centers and CCBHCs, describing CCBHCs as an enhanced model that integrates behavioral health, primary care, wraparound services, and crisis response. They reviewed the federal history of the model, Kentucky’s entry into the Medicaid demonstration in 2022, and the scheduled end of the enhanced federal match on December 31, 2027. They also emphasized required services such as 24-hour mobile crisis, care coordination, and services for veterans, and described care coordination as a key feature that helps patients follow up after hospital or emergency discharge, manage medications, and connect to transportation and other supports. The presenters gave examples of improved outcomes, including a patient who was able to remain living independently because of coordinated home-based and telehealth support, and they argued that CCBHCs are helping Kentucky build a more responsive crisis system through 988, mobile crisis teams, and crisis stabilization units. They said the model is data-driven, uses performance metrics, and has led to stronger collaboration among community partners. One speaker said more than 100 agencies participated in a Jefferson County community health needs assessment and continued meeting afterward to reduce redundancies and barriers to care. They also said crisis call hub compliance and mobile crisis outreach compliance improved significantly over the past year. Members asked about how navigators and connectors fit into the model, how CCBHCs work with managed care organizations, and how the program could expand statewide. The presenters said navigators are not built into the CCBHC model but may be used through referrals, while the CCBHCs continue to bill MCOs the same way and receive a Medicaid wrap payment for the enhanced rate. They said the goal would be for all community mental health centers to become CCBHCs, but that a state plan amendment would be needed and could not be limited only to CMHCs if submitted to CMS. They estimated about $28 million would be needed statewide to continue the program in the next biennium, combining the loss of enhanced federal match and the state share of enhanced service costs. The board also discussed transportation, with one presenter explaining that their program arranges Medicaid transportation for eligible appointments, and members raised concerns about mental inquest warrant transport and whether sheriffs should remain involved. No votes were taken on the CCBHC or transportation items during the discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• I know you said you utilize CPI, and I didn't know if it was CNR or CPI or PMT or what you utilized from
• We have utilized contracts for many, many years. I’m talking about this.
• And then chemical restraint review and oversight of when you can use that.
• and I ask y'all, is who's responsible for oversight and looking after these HDCs?
• It's sure that we have the funding to do such a thing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Why the emphasis on... ...utilities?
• And we need to talk about utility return on equity and reforming the utility business model.
• Did you use your utility bill? I did. It is not utilities.
• Did you use your utility bill? I did. I was, it is not utilizes. Jennifer Bosco. Thank you.
• You require better and more focused use of ratepayer funds and allocation of utility investments than

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy

Summary: The committee heard testimony on H. 4144, the Governor’s Energy Affordability, Independence, and Innovation Act, with the administration arguing the bill would lower bills in the short and long term while expanding clean energy supply and innovation. The Governor and Secretary said the bill would reduce or restructure charges on customer bills, reform Mass Save, expand securitization as a financing tool, speed interconnection, create energy-ready zones, strengthen consumer protections in competitive supply, and allow broader state procurement of energy resources. They said the package could save consumers billions over time and would help address high energy costs, especially during extreme heat and winter spikes. Committee members pressed the administration on several provisions, especially securitization, asking whether the bill requires an apples-to-apples comparison of total costs over time, including interest and lost tax revenue, versus paying through rates. Administration witnesses said DPU review and public comment would be required and said they would work to clarify the language if needed. Members also questioned the bill’s solar and procurement provisions, including reduced net metering compensation for some large facilities, the scope of all-resource procurements, and whether hydro, solar, and nuclear would be included; the administration said those resources were contemplated and that procurement would still be reviewed by DPU. Other questions focused on the short-term relief from bill changes, the treatment of low- and moderate-income discounts, and whether the bill’s heat pump and Mass Save reforms would help customers who cannot afford upfront costs. Several witnesses and committee members discussed Mass Save reforms, including securitization of program costs, on-bill financing, pre-approval of rebates, and shifting program administration away from gas utilities. Administration witnesses said the changes were intended to reduce volatility, lower administrative costs, and better align costs with long-term savings. Questions also touched on geothermal permitting, municipal participation in offshore wind procurement, and the proposed repeal of the ballot requirement for nuclear power, which the administration defended as preserving future options under heavy review. No votes were taken during the hearing portion described. Supportive testimony came from labor, environmental, business, planning, and development groups. The AFL-CIO, NECA, and the Environmental League of Massachusetts backed the bill, emphasizing lower bills, job creation, labor standards, just transition protections, and cleaner energy. NAIOP, the Massachusetts Business Roundtable, and MAPC supported provisions on energy-ready zones, interconnection reform, microgrids, extreme-heat shutoff protections, and Mass Save improvements. A HEET representative praised the bill’s use of securitization, geothermal, and utility financing tools but urged guardrails and workforce protections. Overall, testimony was broadly favorable, with most witnesses calling for refinements rather than opposing the bill outright.

Transcript Highlights:

• TREC, and actually no other agency in the state, has oversight over HOAs.
• Saving goals on a level that we think utilities can actually achieve.
• Please pass this bill and... help us to pay our utility bills. Mr.
• I think even the utilities. want to do the right thing, to be honest.
• We've got two bodies that determine what these utilities do.

Bills: SB383 , SB1012 , SB1181 , SB1705 , SB2075 , SB2221 , SB2586 , SB2864 , SB2994

Committee: Senate Business & Commerce

Transcript Highlights:

• Third, we ask for stable, ongoing state funding.
• Alvarez, there's kind of two streams of funding that we are utilizing for purposes of trying to address
• For the $5 million in funds, how is that used? Well, how are those funds utilized?
• And for the $5 million in funds, would that use for outreach? Well, how is those funds utilized?
• is being utilized for?

Summary: The joint Assembly Higher Education and Budget Subcommittee hearing focused on the California State University system’s enrollment trends, fiscal pressures, and how state funding should be allocated across campuses. Chairs and members emphasized CSU’s importance to California’s workforce and economy, but also raised concerns about declining enrollment at some campuses, unmet enrollment targets, and whether funding is aligned with student demand. The hearing was framed as preparation for the 2026 budget, with particular attention to campuses such as Humboldt, Sonoma, San Francisco, Channel Islands, and others that have received significant state support or are below target enrollment. In the first panel, CSU Academic Senate Chair Dr. Elizabeth Boyd urged the Legislature to protect academic freedom, strengthen faculty governance, provide stable ongoing funding, end unfunded mandates, support student food and housing security, expand flexible scheduling, improve transfer systems, and maintain regional access rather than over-centralizing programs. Cal State Student Association Vice President Katie Karam said students are feeling the effects of budget shortfalls through fewer course sections, reduced advising and services, longer time to degree, and rising tuition, and she called for transparency, meaningful student involvement in budget decisions, and sustained state investment rather than one-time fixes. In the enrollment panel, CSU Chancellor’s Office and campus administrators described a systemwide strategic enrollment plan under CSU Forward, with efforts to expand access, improve recruitment, and better align programs with workforce needs. Dr. Delcy Perez said systemwide resident enrollment and applications are up, and highlighted direct admissions and outreach partnerships. Campus representatives from Chico State, Cal State L.A., and San Diego State described local recruitment, transfer partnerships, and retention strategies. Members pressed CSU officials on discrepancies between reported enrollment growth and public data, the per-student funding formula, and the use of reserves and reallocation to shift money from lower-enrollment campuses to high-demand campuses. CSU officials said they are reviewing all campuses’ fiscal health, developing turnaround plans, and expect to provide reports to the Legislature in the spring, while also acknowledging the need for longer-term changes to enrollment management and academic program alignment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Would TxDOT ever use their funds?
• We need to do better on victims' compensation funds.
• The funds raised will be deposited into the state's general revenue. Mr.
• I issue the Public Utility Commission to decertify a portion of the Retail Water Utility Certificate
• It is, along with your utility bill. Bills and things like that, right?

Bills: SB203 , SB317 , SB397 , SB511 , SB524 , SB731 , SB781 , SB801 , SB867 , SB1071 , SB1087 , SB1232 , SB1444 , SB1483 , SB1782 , SB1798 , SB1861 , SB1944 , SB2082 , SB2233 , SB2309 , SB2363 , SB2497 , SB2549 , SB2566 , SB2603 , SB2607 , SB2617 , SB2688 , SB2717 , SB2797 , SB2841 , SB2919 , SB2928 , SB2969 , SB3063 , HB 12 , HB26 , HB33 , HB34 , HB45 , HB48 , HB 130 , HB148 , HB198 , HB431 , HB647 , HB668 , HB677 , HB748 , HB754 , HB791 , HB 1022 , HB 1193 , HB 1240 , HB 1242 , HB1318 , HB1397 , HB1520 , HB1584 , HB1729 , HB1922 , HB1950 , HB2003 , HB2027 , HB2029 , HB2254 , HB2350 , HB2559 , HB2607 , HB2663 , HB2712 , HB2768 , HB2775 , HB2788 , HB2789 , HB2802 , HB2894 , HB2960 , HB3033 , HB3041 , HB3126 , HB3228 , HB3229 , HB3474 , HB3560 , HB3594 , HB3611 , HB3698 , HB3699 , HB3700 , HB3805 , HB4187 , HB4219 , HB4238 , HB4344 , HB4384 , HB4739 , HB4753 , HB4804 , HB4850 , HB4885 , HB5560 , HCR90 , SJR34 , SB529 , SB541 , SB693 , SB963 , SB1173 , SB1241 , SB1383 , SB1559 , SB1646 , SB1734 , SB1833 , SB1883 , SB1968 , SB2544 , SB1 , SB17 , SB260 , SB509 , SB1506 , SB1637 , SB2308 , SJR36 , SJR50 , SJR63 , SJR60 , SCR12 , SCR39 , SB2023 , SB2309 , SB1861 , SB2617 , SB62 , SB666 , SB847 , SB284 , SB854 , SB810 , SB1505 , SB583 , SB507 , SB1434 , SB1772 , SB2016 , SB1122 , SB731 , SB397 , SB508 , SB1436 , SB287 , SB1882 , SB393 , SB1791 , SB209 , SB2429 , SB511 , SB1085 , SB1975 , SB2717 , SB1262 , SB636 , SB2056 , SB884 , SB1200 , SB1845 , SB2458 , SB801 , SB3014 , SB3013 , SB758 , SB2797 , SB2076 , SB2876 , SB1640 , SB1449 , SB1181 , SB1234 , SB2926 , SB2841 , SB1528 , SB1854 , SB317 , SB1250 , SB2082 , SB1237 , SB2819 , SB629 , SB2608 , SB1602 , SB2009 , SB867 , SB640 , SB1698 , SB2680 , SB913 , SB1071 , SB1086 , SB1087 , SB1483 , SB1444 , SB1553 , SB1556 , SB1703 , SB2133 , SB2297 , SB2298 , SB2622 , SB2955 , SB2334 , SB1367 , SB2044 , SB2363 , SB2565 , SB1888 , SB3036 , SB3057 , SB3043 , SB3063 , SB3035 , SB203 , SB2688 , SB2522 , SB2459 , SB2655 , SB2251 , SB1884 , SB2928 , SB2566 , SB1749 , SB2549 , SB2553 , SB2919 , SB1782 , SB1944 , SB1232 , SB2969 , SB2497 , SB1798 , SB2603 , SB2607 , SB781 , SB524 , SB2233 , SB2683 , SB1319 , SB1978 , SB3038 , SB3045 , SB1633 , SB1538 , SB719 , SB3071 , HB1393 , HB2559 , HB26 , HB2607 , HB3810 , HB388 , HB 12 , HB2712 , HB1633 , HB1318 , HB685 , HB4753 , HB198 , HB762 , HB148 , HB1520 , HB2286 , HB1606 , HB132 , HB45 , HB48 , HB33 , HB 1022 , HB1458 , HB5560 , HB 1240 , HB1950 , HB2027 , HB2768 , HB2788 , HB2791 , HB3146 , HB3698 , HB3699 , HB1893 , HB3700 , HB4850 , HB4187 , HB1397 , HB4885 , HB4804 , HB3751 , HB3611 , HB2775 , HB2061 , HB2003 , HB1729 , HB 1242 , HB791 , HB2029 , HB647 , HB2522 , HB4738 , HB3033 , HB3594 , HB3474 , HB2563 , HB2802 , HB34 , HB 128 , HB 130 , HB581 , HB668 , HB677 , HB766 , HB2259 , HB2960 , HB2358 , HB2894 , HB4384 , HB2663 , HB748 , HB793 , HB 1193 , HB1734 , HB2340 , HB2350 , HB3104 , HB5180 , HB4739 , HB1584 , HB4344 , HB4238 , HB4219 , HB3806 , HB3805 , HB3804 , HB3803 , HB3229 , HB3228 , HB1922 , HB1522 , HB431 , HB3597 , HB1612 , HB4224 , HB754 , HB1314 , HB2254 , HB2789 , HB3560 , HB4643 , HB 1237 , HB3126 , HB2856 , HB3114 , HB3041 , HB3505 , HB4205 , HB5652 , HB3687 , HB5424 , HB4506 , HB3370 , HB2025 , HB4273 , HB3395 , HB3376 , HB2733 , HB2495 , HB4325 , HB2071 , HB2510 , HB138 , HB18 , HB 107 , HB694 , HB923 , HB1639 , HB1700 , HB2187 , HB3211 , HB4529 , HB4655 , HB5342 , HB2516 , HB4783 , HB1894 , HB1965 , HB 102 , HB300 , HB1875 , HB2513 , HB2713 , HB39 , HB 114 , HB24 , HB3088 , HB4163 , HB3479 , HB2842 , HB519 , HB609 , HB 1275 , HB1592 , HB3348 , HCR90 , HCR98 , SB524 , SB781 , SB1782 , SB2497 , SB2969 , HB 12 , HB33 , HB34 , HB45 , HB48 , HB 130 , HB148 , HB198 , HB431 , HB668 , HB677 , HB754 , HB791 , HB 1022 , HB 1193 , HB 1242 , HB1318 , HB1520 , HB1729 , HB1922 , HB1950 , HB2003 , HB2027 , HB2029 , HB2559 , HB2607 , HB2663 , HB2768 , HB2775 , HB2789 , HB2802 , HB2894 , HB2960 , HB3041 , HB3228 , HB3229 , HB3474 , HB3560 , HB3594 , HB3611 , HB3698 , HB3699 , HB3700 , HB3805 , HB4238 , HB4344 , HB4739 , HB4804 , HB4885 , HB5560 , SB1861 , SB2309 , SB2617 , SB511 , SR545 , HJR47 , HB75 , HB 108 , HB 111 , HB521 , HB 1052 , HB 1249 , HB1373 , HB1403 , HB1449 , HB1586 , HB1629 , HB1646 , HB1794 , HB1820 , HB1831 , HB1845 , HB1939 , HB1960 , HB1991 , HB2014 , HB2080 , HB2136 , HB2159 , HB2293 , HB2313 , HB2399 , HB2512 , HB2581 , HB2593 , HB2621 , HB2638 , HB2655 , HB2658 , HB2694 , HB2731 , HB2757 , HB2803 , HB2807 , HB2814 , HB2844 , HB2999 , HB3053 , HB3142 , HB3171 , HB3234 , HB3254 , HB3320 , HB3349 , HB3405 , HB3420 , HB3463 , HB3516 , HB3520 , HB3631 , HB3679 , HB3680 , HB3694 , HB3722 , HB3732 , HB3749 , HB3793 , HB3833 , HB3928 , HB3977 , HB4014 , HB4042 , HB4076 , HB4099 , HB4105 , HB4112 , HB4158 , HB4204 , HB4207 , HB4234 , HB4449 , HB4454 , HB4520 , HB4535 , HB4559 , HB4582 , HB4630 , HB4669 , HB4748 , HB4795 , HB4847 , HB4848 , HB4916 , HB4924 , HB5093 , HB5302 , HB5509 , HB5624 , HB5627 , HB5629 , HB5632 , HB5639 , HB5664 , HB5693 , HB5698 , HB2851 , HB5154 , HB5339 , HJR47 , HB75 , HB 108 , HB 111 , HB521 , HB 1052 , HB 1249 , HB1373 , HB1403 , HB1449 , HB1586 , HB1629 , HB1646 , HB1794 , HB1820 , HB1831 , HB1845 , HB1939 , HB1960 , HB1991 , HB2014 , HB2080 , HB2136 , HB2159 , HB2293 , HB2313 , HB2399 , HB2512 , HB2581 , HB2593 , HB2621 , HB2638 , HB2655 , HB2658 , HB2694 , HB2731 , HB2757 , HB2803 , HB2807 , HB2814 , HB2844 , HB2999 , HB3053 , HB3142 , HB3171 , HB3234 , HB3254 , HB3320 , HB3349 , HB3405 , HB3420 , HB3463 , HB3516 , HB3520 , HB3631 , HB3679 , HB3680 , HB3694 , HB3722 , HB3732 , HB3749 , HB3793 , HB3833 , HB3928 , HB3977 , HB4014 , HB4042 , HB4076 , HB4099 , HB4105 , HB4112 , HB4158 , HB4204 , HB4207 , HB4234 , HB4449 , HB4454 , HB4520 , HB4535 , HB4559 , HB4582 , HB4630 , HB4669 , HB4748 , HB4795 , HB4847 , HB4848 , HB4916 , HB4924 , HB5093 , HB5302 , HB5509 , HB5624 , HB5627 , HB5629 , HB5632 , HB5639 , HB5664 , HB5693 , HB5698 , HB2851 , HB5154 , HB5339

Transcript Highlights:

• So when are those funds, when do we have to spend all of the gumbo one of point of funds?
• Yeah, like a utility broadband project.
• And then the last thing: there were certain electric utilities that had investor-owned utilities, had
• And so there is an oversight for those piles that come in here.
• And we just... ...public project has oversight for the piles.

Committee: House Commerce, Consumer Protection, and International Affairs

Summary: The House Committee on Commerce met on May 18, 2026, with a quorum present and the chair noting it was the committee’s last meeting of the session. The committee first considered Senate Bill 254, which would prohibit certain excess debit card surcharges and authorize enforcement by the Attorney General. After adopting technical amendments and a committee amendment requiring written notice before a private right of action, the bill was reported favorably as amended. The committee then took up Senate Bill 80 on broadband administration fees and GUMBO program closeout. Members questioned the proposed increase in administrative and contractor fees, the timing of project completion, and how withheld reimbursements would work for utility damage. After adopting several amendments, including cleanup language and a provision to restore the reimbursement process, the bill was reported favorably as amended, though the Louisiana Telecommunications Association voiced concerns about the withholding language and lack of a clearer fault-determination process. The committee next considered Senate Bill 469, updating the Louisiana Underground Utilities and Facilities Damage Prevention Law. Technical amendments were adopted, along with amendments clarifying that the bill’s 30-day notice to utility owner-operators is separate from existing GUMBO notice requirements and creating a rapid dispute-resolution process involving the Office of Broadband, the utility operator, and the local governing authority. Testimony from broadband and municipal stakeholders emphasized the need for quicker responses to excavation damage and better enforcement, while some witnesses raised concerns about the late amendment and the need for clearer recourse and standards. The bill was reported favorably as amended. Senate Bill 468, dealing with fuel rewards programs and fuel discount limits, was also amended to allow such discounts while capping them at $1 below the advertised price; it was reported favorably as amended. Senate Bill 131, concerning attorney’s fees and costs in professional licensing disciplinary proceedings, drew testimony from a cosmetology board representative and the Pelican Institute. Supporters argued the bill would curb incentives for boards to generate revenue through enforcement and give licensees a fairer opportunity to resolve cases; board testimony noted that some boards already have fee caps and that enforcement actions are relatively limited. After adopting an amendment clarifying when a licensee is the prevailing party, the bill was reported favorably as amended. Senate Bill 251 on critical infrastructure protection also received technical amendments and several substantive changes, including adding ports and airports to the definition of critical infrastructure, clarifying “significant access,” adding a knowledge requirement, and adjusting exemptions and enforcement timing; it was reported favorably as amended after testimony from State Armor representatives about foreign adversary threats. Finally, House Resolution 253 was introduced to create a task force to study how post-2005 building code additions and inspection requirements affect residential construction costs, with the sponsor explaining the goal was to gather industry input and return recommendations next session.

Transcript Highlights:

• opportunities to... ...and supports research, policy advances, and funding opportunities to support
• So Senate Bill 6269 would better guide alternative fuel projects that draw on state funding, offering
• The bill amends the definition of consumer-owned utility to include port districts under CETA.
• The bill amends the definition of consumer-owned utility to include port districts under CETA.
• And it authorizes an electric utility to remove a device not meeting the specific requirements.

Summary: The Senate Environment, Energy and Technology Committee first held a public hearing on SB 6269, which updates the Motor Fuel Quality Act to broaden the definition of motor fuel to include gaseous fuels and electricity and remove the separate alternative fuel definition. Staff and the Department of Agriculture said the change would let WSDA inspect and test hydrogen and other newer fuels; Commerce and Douglas County PUD supported the bill as needed for hydrogen fueling infrastructure. The bill drew no opposition testimony, and the hearing closed with the chair noting broad support. The committee then heard SB 6223, which would authorize community-scale weatherization projects under the low-income weatherization program. Supporters from community action, Spark Northwest, Commerce, and Washington Conservation Action said the bill would let the state weatherize multiple homes at once, improve health and safety, reduce energy burdens, and help meet climate and grid goals more quickly. Staff said the bill has a fiscal note for rulemaking and administration. The hearing ended with strong support and no opposition testimony. In executive session, the committee adopted proposed substitutes and passed SB 5982, SB 6050, SB 5965, SB 6010, SB 5984, SB 6076, and SB 5652 to the Rules Committee or Ways and Means, depending on the bill. Amendments were adopted on SB 5965 to adjust carryout bag provisions, while amendments on SB 6010 were not adopted. SB 5982 would update CETA-related utility definitions and reporting, SB 6050 addresses distributed energy resources and utility rules, SB 5965 revises carryout bag requirements, SB 6010 concerns EFSEC tribal consultation, SB 5984 regulates AI companion chatbots, SB 6076 streamlines procurement for certain clean energy projects, and SB 5652 concerns environmental and health mitigation in large port districts. The committee also noted it would not take action that day on SB 5975 and SB 5466.

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill establishes a board with recurring general fund costs and no dedicated funding source.
• There is no general fund impact.
• There is no general fund impact.
• Sorry for the oversight.
• Sorry for the oversight.

Summary: The committee first heard Substitute House Bill 1128, which would create a Child Care Workforce Standards Board within the Department of Labor and Industries to study child care workforce conditions and make recommendations on employment standards. Staff explained that the proposed second substitute narrows the board’s role from setting enforceable standards to making recommendations, with estimated ongoing costs for L&I staffing and smaller costs for board member stipends and possible DCYF support. Supporters, including child care providers, SEIU 925, and labor representatives, said the bill would help address understaffing, low wages, and retention problems; opponents, including child care industry groups and private schools, argued it duplicates existing work, adds bureaucracy, and creates unfunded costs. No vote was taken in the hearing. The committee then heard Second Substitute House Bill 1634, which would direct OSPI and ESDs to develop a technical assistance and training framework to help schools coordinate student behavioral health supports. Staff said the bill aligns with the Washington Thriving Strategic Plan and could largely be implemented with existing work and limited additional costs, though DOH would need some support. Testifiers from behavioral health and school counseling fields described severe youth mental health needs and urged passage, and OSPI said the work is doable with current resources. The committee also heard Substitute House Bill 2636, which would create a public education review advisory council to recommend K-12 policies and funding provisions for JLARC review; staff described JLARC, OSPI, and State Board costs, and no public testimony was offered. The committee next heard House Bill 1316, which would expand the Supporting Students Experiencing Homelessness program so additional university campuses can access funding. The sponsor said the program has strong retention outcomes, and student advocates testified that campuses such as UW Bothell need access to already appropriated funds for emergency aid, food pantries, and case management. Staff then briefed Substitute House Bill 2474, which would allow the Student Achievement Council Tuition Recovery Trust Fund to be used for refunds tied to broader consumer protection violations, with no expected fiscal impact; there was no testimony. The committee also heard Substitute House Bill 2365 on digital equity, which would expand the Broadband Office’s role, revise the digital equity forum, and rename the grant program; supporters emphasized rural access, affordability, and the loss of federal digital equity funding, while staff estimated significant Commerce staffing costs and some additional agency impacts. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 2401, creating a Washington State Boys and Men Commission contingent on non-state funding, with staff outlining OFM startup and fundraising costs and an estimated operating budget if fully funded. Supporters said boys and men face mental health, education, and mentorship gaps and that the commission would improve coordination; the bill drew testimony from rural school leaders, nonprofit advocates, and community members. The committee then heard Substitute House Bill 2475 on language access, which would require the Office of Equity to develop uniform language-access guidelines and a report on interpreter and translator shortages; staff said the office could absorb the work but other agency and local government impacts were uncertain. Substitute House Bill 2517, on permitting for high-capacity transit, would let regional transit authorities apply for permits earlier and streamline land-use processes; Sound Transit and the sponsor said it would speed delivery of major projects, while staff estimated Commerce technical-assistance costs and possible local government impacts. The last bill heard was Substitute House Bill 2145 on the 340B drug pricing program, which would bar manufacturers from restricting contract-pharmacy access and require reporting to DOH; supporters said it protects safety-net providers and patient services, while opponents warned of higher costs for employers, state health plans, and litigation burdens. No final committee action or votes were recorded in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• And some large increases in non-personnel costs, insurance, and utilities, and discretionary funding,
• The identified fund source is federal individuals with Disabilities Education Act funds or IDEA funds
• Though the identified fund source is federal Title II, Part A funds, funding is fungible with Prop 98
• A funds.
• Are either of you at all concerned that these funds get misinterpreted by locals and they get utilized

Summary: The committee heard an overview of the May Revision’s Proposition 98 changes for K-12 and community colleges. The Department of Finance said the minimum guarantee rises by $6.4 billion over the Governor’s Budget across the three-year window, with higher guarantees in each year, full payment of the prior settle-up, and larger deposits into the school rainy-day fund. The LAO said the revenue and LCFF updates were reasonable, but urged caution about the settle-up approach and recommended using more of the available funding to protect ongoing programs and build budget resilience. Members focused heavily on the size of the proposed $3.9 billion settle-up, the $10.3 billion reserve deposit, declining K-12 enrollment, and how much of the new funding should be ongoing versus one-time. The committee then reviewed the community colleges portion of the budget. Finance described the May Revision’s higher SCFF COLA, additional funding for enrollment growth, a student support block grant, apprenticeship adjustments, and continued funding for deferred maintenance, Calbright, Common Cloud, and credit for prior learning. The Chancellor’s Office supported the core investments but asked for more funding for enrollment growth, changes to the growth formula, and a COLA for Student Equity and Achievement. The LAO recommended prioritizing the statutory COLA increase, noted that more than half of districts are already above current-year growth targets, and said the new adult learner demonstration project should be rejected because districts already have tools to support similar services. Members also discussed a $52 million current-year apportionment shortfall, which Finance said was discovered too late for the May Revision and would need to be addressed later. Finally, the committee took up the proposed implementation of the federal Workforce Pell program. Finance proposed one-time funding for the California Student Aid Commission and Cradle to Career to build eligibility and data systems, along with trailer bill changes to set up state approval processes. CSAC said the program is promising but highly complex, that California lacks the needed infrastructure, and that the state will need emergency regulations, data linkages, and ongoing funding beyond the one-time proposal. The LAO agreed that some initial funding is needed but warned that the amounts and ongoing costs remain uncertain and that the Legislature should carefully draft the trailer bill language. Members asked about timing, other states’ actions, and how the state would ensure the program is ready for students and institutions.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we are not asking about moving funds from Merced to Bakersfield because we have the funds to build
• So if you could give us an update on whether there are any federal funds that we're hoping to utilize
• funding materialize.
• A funding gap there as well.
• And I think anything beyond that, there is a large funding gap, a very large funding gap.

Committee: Senate Transportation

Summary: The Senate Transportation Committee held an informational hearing on the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s 2026 draft business plan and next steps for the project. Chair Cortese opened by noting major changes since the 2024 plan, including new leadership, a bottoms-up review, scope changes in the Central Valley, loss of federal funds, and renewed interest in private investment and value capture. The Authority’s CEO, Ian Chaudhary, presented the project as moving into a construction and track-laying phase, citing progress on Central Valley structures, right-of-way acquisition, utility relocations, and a new procurement for track and systems. He said the plan reflects a more disciplined, optimized approach, with the Merced-to-Bakersfield segment targeted for revenue service around 2033 and the broader Phase 1 corridor envisioned as commercially viable through ancillary revenues, public-private partnerships, and future private financing. Committee members questioned the Authority about station relocations, single-tracking, tax increment financing, utility relocation authority, transparency, and the feasibility of private financing. Chaudhary said the Merced and Bakersfield station locations were still under discussion with local governments and that no contracts had been finalized. He defended the reduced scope and single-track approach as a just-in-time strategy to avoid overbuilding, while maintaining high-speed standards. He also said the Authority was exploring land value capture, broadband, energy, and other corridor-based revenue sources, but acknowledged that some tools would require legislative action and that private financing options were still being evaluated. Several senators expressed support for the project but raised concerns about permitting delays, local opposition, constitutional and statutory limits, and the need for stronger accountability. The Legislative Analyst’s Office and the High-Speed Rail Inspector General then gave critical assessments of the draft plan. LAO staff said the plan assumes major statutory changes, understates risk, lacks transparency about scope changes, and may not fully fund even the smaller Merced-to-Bakersfield segment once borrowing costs and other uncertainties are considered. Inspector General Ben Belknap said the draft plan does not comply with newer statutory requirements in SB 198 and AB 377, citing three main deficiencies: unauthorized scope changes to the Merced-to-Bakersfield segment, an inadequate funding plan that omits financing costs, and missing procurement milestone dates. He said the Authority’s presentation obscures the true cost and schedule impacts of the project changes, and that incomplete reporting limits legislative oversight. The Authority responded that it would address the OIG’s findings in the final business plan, and committee members indicated they expected a written response on compliance issues.

Transcript Highlights:

• Yes, what I'm thinking specifically is the funding of the equity training.
• This bill does not appropriate any funds.
• This simply sets up an oversight committee to be good stewards of those funds.
• It ensures that Idaho lawmakers have oversight of those funds.
• I don't like the fact that we actually got these funds in the process that it came through.

Committee: Senate Health and Welfare

Transcript Highlights:

• So if you could give us an update: Are there any federal funds that we're hoping to utilize now and going
• to that funding source.
• funding materialize.
• that funding materialize.
• And I think anything beyond that, there is a large funding gap, a very large funding gap.

Committee: Senate Transportation

Transcript Highlights:

• any oversight by the counties.
• any oversight by the counties.
• So there are thousands of acres of ...utility-scale solar, without any oversight by the counties.
• Seventh, to get at the non-energy drivers of utility rates, because there are reasons why utility rates
• The Legislature is given the Commission authority over utility cost, that box that is the utilities cost

Summary: The Committee on Regulated Industries met with a quorum and took up four bills. SB 288 on rural electric cooperatives was presented as a negotiated glitch bill to narrow statutory language so co-ops can choose generation and power purchases based on cost and reliability without exposure to special-interest litigation, while preserving consumer protections. A representative from the Florida Electric Cooperatives Association waived in support, and the bill was reported favorably. The committee then considered SB 364 on public accountancy, which was described as a modernization and efficiency measure to expand CPA licensure pathways without lowering standards. An amendment correcting a drafting error and restoring automatic mobility language was adopted without objection. Jason Harrell of FICPA waived in support, while one speaker appeared to discuss a utility issue unrelated to the bill. CS for SB 364 was reported favorably. Chair Bradley’s SB 200 on utilities addressed utility-scale solar decommissioning and storm protection plans. The bill would authorize counties to adopt solar decommissioning ordinances, direct DEP to develop best practices, and require the PSC to consider whether storm protection plan benefits exceed costs. County and AARP representatives waived in support, and the Small County Coalition spoke favorably, saying the bill was a needed step that did not restrict solar development. SB 200 was considered favorably. The committee also heard SB 126 on the Florida Public Service Commission, a strike-all bill focused on PSC reform and utility affordability. The amendment would add CPA and financial analyst expertise, require stronger PSC order support, tighten intervention standards, set return-on-equity and review criteria, require consideration of executive compensation and affordability, and direct the PSC to weigh risk from storm and cost-recovery mechanisms. PSC staff answered extensive questions about utility hardening, storm recovery, and rate-setting. Supporters said the bill would improve accountability and affordability, while others urged stronger enforceable affordability standards and restoration of the return-on-equity cap. Despite concerns, the bill was reported favorably as CS for SB 126.

Transcript Highlights:

• , which is where some of the utility funds go, but not enhance utility profit margins.
• The first is an act prohibiting the use of ratepayer funds for utility lobbying, promotions, or perks
• The first is an act prohibiting the use of rate payer funds for utility lobbying, promotions, or perks
• We object to using ratepayer funds, paying for the utilities to lobby and promote themselves.
• Utility companies have investor funds to pay for advertising...

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several energy-related bills, with the main focus on H. 3534/S. 2255, which would ban or sharply restrict residential third-party electric suppliers, and on related reform proposals. Supporters included the Attorney General’s office, municipal and regional planning officials, environmental justice groups, consumer advocates, and city officials from Boston and Chelsea. They argued that the residential competitive supply market has produced higher bills, deceptive sales tactics, auto-renewals into higher rates, and disproportionate harm to low-income residents, seniors, communities of color, and people with limited English. Witnesses cited AG reports estimating hundreds of millions of dollars in overcharges over time, described door-to-door and storefront marketing abuses, and said municipal aggregation programs have saved residents money while offering more stable rates. Several supporters said the Legislature should either ban residential competitive supply or adopt strong guardrails such as ending automatic renewals, banning incentive-based commissions, and capping rates relative to basic service. Opponents or industry representatives from the Retail Energy Advancement League, Vistra, and Constellation argued that the market can provide savings, longer-term price stability, and value-added products such as renewable options and time-of-use offerings. They said Massachusetts has already improved consumer protections through DPU proceedings, that complaints are relatively few compared with the size of the market, and that a ban would eliminate consumer choice. They also defended direct sales and commissions as normal features of a retail market, while saying they would support additional protections, licensing, bonding, and stronger oversight of bad actors. Committee members pressed both sides on whether the market truly saves money, whether automatic renewals should be banned, and whether the AG’s proposed reforms would be enough. The committee also heard testimony on H. 3972, a bill to extend utility shutoff protections during extreme heat, with Rep. Mindy Domb arguing that Massachusetts should treat extreme heat like extreme cold and protect customers facing financial hardship. Rep. Barrett also testified for H. 3450, a municipal broadband/right-of-way bill, arguing that communities need easier and cheaper access to utility poles and public rights of way to build municipal broadband. In addition, Senate Majority Leader Creem testified for S. 2239, which would bar utilities from recovering ratepayer funds for lobbying, promotions, trade association dues, and similar expenses. No votes were taken during the hearing.