Transcript Highlights:

• I would love for those to be CTE or credit-bearing work with you with NRCS and USDA to make that happen

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Opportunities there are for him for contracts, or like NRCS or federal contracts. Mr.

Transcript Highlights:

• 17 would also add member-owned electric cooperatives to the exemptions regarding any of the NERC or NRC

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:

• You have an NRCS program.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The joint Senate hearing of the Natural Resources and Water Committee and the Emergency Management Committee focused on wildfire resilience, with members discussing the SB 254 report on enhancing California’s response to natural catastrophes. Opening remarks emphasized the scale of wildfire damage, the need for prevention and preparedness, and concerns about the affordability and insurability crisis. Senators repeatedly contrasted the relatively small share of funding going to community hardening with the much larger amounts spent on utility wildfire mitigation and landscape-scale projects, and several members raised concerns about CEQA delays, one-time funding, and the need for more sustainable, ongoing financing. The Legislative Analyst’s Office presented an overview showing about $4.7 billion in state wildfire resilience appropriations from 2018-19 through 2025-26, with funding shifting from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund to the General Fund and then to Proposition 4. LAO noted that only about $65 million had been specifically targeted to community hardening, while most funding went to forest health, fuels, research, and related programs. LAO also said one-time funding will decline in coming years and that future GGRF support is uncertain, though General Fund use is not legally precluded. Members asked about maintenance costs, polluter-pays ideas, and whether performance metrics should focus more on property and community risk reduction than acres treated. Cal Fire’s State Fire Marshal described the state’s community wildfire preparedness strategy, centered on home hardening, defensible space, and neighborhood-scale mitigation. He said roughly 4 million homes are in the wildland-urban interface, most built before modern fire-resistant standards, and argued that the state must move from response to prevention. He said Cal Fire is incorporating the SB 254 recommendations into its updated action plan, has streamlined some fuel-reduction projects under a recent executive proclamation, and is shifting some grant funding toward maintenance of existing treatments. Cal OES described the AB 38 pilot and FEMA hazard mitigation work, saying the pilot helped build tools and standards for home hardening but that federal approval delays remain a major barrier; the agency reported 155 hardened properties, 19 under construction, and 370 assessed and waiting. The Wildfire and Forest Resilience Task Force said it has coordinated more than $6 billion in state and federal investments, is moving toward regional block grants and better data-driven prioritization, and is developing separate community and landscape strategies. The hearing ended with discussion of modeling, data gaps, utility coordination, contractor capacity, and possible legislative or budget changes to better align funding and metrics with community safety outcomes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Wildlife Service, that's our partners for the Fish and Wildlife Program, the conservation district, NRCS

Bills: SF0052, SF0024

Keywords: wildlife management, environmental restoration, funding, invasive species, aquatic ecosystems, native fish, habitat conservation, lottery, debit card payments, gambling regulations, state revenue, financial transactions, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• federal program at USDA NRCS called the Watershed Rehabilitation Program.

Bills: SB1, SB 1

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

Transcript Highlights:

• with Act 854 of 2025 regarding diagnostic mammography and to comply with standards that are set by the NRC

Summary: The Administrative Rules Subcommittee reviewed a long agenda of agency rules, with most items approved without objection after brief presentations and no public comment. Early items included Department of Energy and Environment rules on landfill post-closure trust fund spending thresholds and liquefied petroleum gas standards, DFA’s electronic odometer disclosure rule, and several Department of Health rules covering ionizing radiation, mobile home and RV parks, lead-based paint, counseling board revisions, hearing instrument dispensers, athletic training, dental examiners, nursing, pharmacy, medical board, speech-language pathology and audiology, radiologic technology, massage therapy, community health workers, doula certification, and cosmetology/body art. Most of these changes were described as updates to match recent acts, federal standards, compact participation, fee adjustments, or cleanup/clarification, and the committee repeatedly approved them without objection. A substantial portion of the meeting focused on the Arkansas State Board of Nursing’s broad set of rule changes implementing multiple 2025 acts. Those changes included creating a dialysis patient care technician registry, updating contact information requirements, expanding APRN authority to delegate certain tasks, clarifying death certificate and pronouncement authority, allowing substitution of therapeutically equivalent medications, permitting purchase of compounded products, and updating certified medication assistant rules and training standards. Members asked detailed questions about the meaning of therapeutically equivalent substitutions, delegation limits, compounded products, and how often medication lists would be updated; the board said it would review rules annually and use future rulemaking as needed. The committee also approved new nursing rules for declaratory orders and the new dialysis registry. The Department of Education’s rules drew the most discussion, especially the Arkansas Children’s Educational Freedom Account Program. The department said the revisions, based on Act 920 of 2025, were intended to add guardrails, clarify eligible expenses, and streamline approvals. Changes included defining core educational expenses, limiting sports-related spending, adding an intentional misuse standard, restricting certain technology purchases and requiring extra justification over $1,000, capping carryover funds at $8,500, and creating a reconsideration process for denied expenses. Members raised concerns about oversight, appeal timelines, sports equipment, provider credentialing, and whether the rules were too restrictive; department officials said the rules were meant to protect taxpayer funds while preserving flexibility, and they noted the program had received extensive public comment. The committee also approved Education rules for scholarships, residency classification, teacher programs, accelerated learning, and graduate medical education, as well as Labor and Licensing rules on wage and hour standards, boiler rules, motor vehicle commission requirements, professional wrestling regulation, appraiser qualifications, and military recruiting incentives.

Transcript Highlights:

• comply with Act 854 of 2025 regarding diagnostic mammography and to comply with standards set by the NRC

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We're currently working on our first project with funding from NRCS, which requires a 25% match from

Bills: HB4138, HB4139, HB4140, HB4141, HB4142, HB4143, HB4144, HB4145, HB4146, HB4147, HB4148, HB4149, HB4150, HB4151, HB4152, HB4153, SB1831, SB1832, SB1833, SB1834, SB1835, SB1836, SB1837, SB1838, SB1839, SB1840, SB1841, SB1842, SB1843, SB1844, SB1845, SB1846

Keywords: appropriations, education funding, health care, general fund, state budget, local funding, gaming, pari-mutuel, horse racing, regulatory assessment, first-time starters, budget implementation, federal funds, government services, budget stabilization, financial reporting, capital outlay, infrastructure, veterans services, highway construction

Summary: The committee met in a special joint appropriations session to review the FY 2027 budget package, including House Bill 4138 and Senate Bill 1831, the general appropriations or “feed” bills. Staff described the budget as including a one-time transfer of state funds, a 5% lump-sum reduction to most agencies’ discretionary general-fund budgets, continued funding for the state health insurance plan and school facilities, and various one-time restorations or reversions of prior appropriations. Members spent much of the meeting clarifying how the 5% reductions would work, noting that formula and mandatory funding such as K-12 basic aid are excluded, while the governor’s executive branch would decide how to implement the cuts within agencies. The chair repeatedly emphasized that the committee was not specifying line-item cuts and that agencies would have discretion over implementation. A large portion of the discussion focused on the practical effects of the budget on universities, public safety, health care, rural programs, and fund sweeps. Arizona Board of Regents and university representatives said the proposed reductions would amount to more than $85 million statewide and could affect programs such as the Arizona Promise Program, Teachers Academy, and tuition freezes, though no specific program cuts were written into the bill. Other testimony raised concerns about fund sweeps from encumbered balances, including university research funds, housing trust funds, utility regulation funds, and ADOT-related accounts, with some members warning about possible impacts on rural infrastructure and federal matching dollars. The committee also discussed the state employee health plan, including a $228 million general-fund infusion and proposed employee premium increases over three years, as well as questions about corrections, forestry and fire management, and rural critical access hospitals. Public testimony was largely opposed to the budget. Speakers from Opportunity Arizona, the Arizona Board of Regents, health care, and local government argued that the package would reduce support for education, housing, SNAP, health care access, and rural communities while preserving tax benefits for data centers and wealthy taxpayers. A mayor from Globe described severe flood damage and asked for state help for a flood relief fund, while a motorcycle safety advocate questioned a proposed transfer from the motorcycle safety fund. Committee members debated whether the budget’s effects should be described as speculative or as likely consequences of the broad cuts, and several exchanges became contentious over comparisons to the Great Recession and references to federal tax policy. The meeting ended with continued public testimony and no final vote taken in the portion provided, though leadership had earlier said the committee planned a mass roll-call vote on all the bills at the end.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're currently working on our first project with funding from NRCS, which requires a 25% match from

Summary: The joint appropriations committee met on April 28 to review the FY 2027 budget package, including the general appropriations feed bills (HB 4138 and SB 1831) and related budget reconciliation measures. Staff described the budget as including about $17.96 billion in general fund appropriations, a one-time transfer of state monies to increase revenues, a 5% lump-sum reduction to most agencies’ discretionary general fund budgets, and several one-time restorations or continuations for items such as school facilities, child care, child safety, corrections stipends, and public safety operating costs. Members spent much of the meeting debating how the across-the-board cuts would be implemented, which programs might be affected, and how fund sweeps from prior-year appropriations and special funds would work, including questions about universities, public safety, rural hospitals, transportation grants, the Corporation Commission, and health insurance costs for state employees and troopers. A major point of discussion was the impact on universities and higher education. Arizona Board of Regents representatives said the proposed reductions and fund sweeps would affect already obligated dollars, research, staffing, and student aid programs, and could force difficult decisions about programs such as the Promise Program, Teachers Academy, and other pass-through funds. Committee members also raised concerns about whether the cuts could lead to tuition increases or reductions in services, while majority members emphasized that agencies and the executive branch should decide how to absorb the reductions. Another major topic was health care and the state employee health plan: staff explained that the budget includes a $228 million general fund infusion to stabilize the plan, while a separate reconciliation bill would raise employee premiums over three years. Members also discussed whether the budget’s changes to AHCCCS/Access and hospital eligibility rules could increase costs for hospitals and reduce coverage. Public testimony largely opposed the budget. Speakers from Opportunity Arizona, the Arizona Board of Regents, and local governments argued that the proposal would shift costs onto working families, reduce support for education, housing, SNAP, health care, and rural infrastructure, and protect tax benefits for data centers and higher-income taxpayers. A mayor from Globe asked for state help after severe flooding damaged roads, water lines, and homes, while a motorcycle safety advocate asked the committee to review a DPS motorcycle safety fund appropriation. Committee members and staff repeatedly clarified that some items discussed were one-time appropriations not continued into FY 2027, that some fund sweeps were from unspent or unencumbered balances, and that the committee planned to take a mass roll-call vote on the budget bills at the end of the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• using conservation practices that include healthy soil, organic, climate-smart, regenerative, and NRCS
• organic, climate, smart,<01:40:06.719> regenerative,<01:40:07.280> and<01:40:07.520> NRCS
• <01:40:08.320> equipped ...smart, regenerative, and NRCS-equipped practices.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• comply with Act 854 of 2025 regarding diagnostic mammography and to comply with standards set by the NRC

Summary: The Administrative Rules Subcommittee met to review a long agenda of agency rule changes, beginning with housekeeping on the order of business and then taking up rules from multiple state agencies. Early items included Department of Energy and Environment rules on landfill post-closure trust fund spending thresholds and liquefied petroleum gas standards, DFA’s odometer disclosure rule allowing electronic signatures and disclosures, and several Department of Health rules covering ionizing radiation, mobile home and recreational parks, lead-based paint, counseling licensure, hearing instrument dispensers, athletic training, dental specialties and compacts, nursing, pharmacy, physician assistants, medical compacts, speech-language pathology and audiology, radiologic technology, massage therapy, community health workers, doula certification, and cosmetology/body art. Most of these were described as technical updates, conformity with recent acts, federal standards, or compact participation, and nearly all were approved without objection after brief questions and, in many cases, no public comment. The committee also reviewed Department of Labor and Licensing rules on minimum wage/independent contractor standards, boiler rules, motor vehicle commission requirements for ATV/LSV dealers, professional wrestling regulation, appraiser qualifications, and military recruiting and retention programs. Testimony generally emphasized that the rules implemented recent legislation, updated fees or licensing standards, or streamlined existing processes. Members asked a few questions about fee structures, the rationale for regulating professional wrestling, and how the National Guard’s public-private partnership and incentive programs would work; the department said the recruiting incentives would be funded from existing appropriations and were intended to improve retention and force strength. These rules were also approved without objection. The most extensive discussion came on the Department of Education’s Arkansas Children’s Educational Freedom Account Program rule. The department said the revisions, based on Act 920 of 2025, were intended to add guardrails, clarify allowable expenses, and speed approval of core educational purchases. Changes included defining core educational expenses, limiting certain sports-related spending, adding an intentional misuse standard, restricting phone purchases except for disability-related needs, setting a $1,000 threshold for additional review of technology purchases, capping carryover funds at $8,500, and creating a reconsideration process for denied expenses. Members raised concerns about safeguards, appeals, sports equipment, provider credentialing, rural vendor access, and whether the department would be flexible or overly restrictive. The department said it would review every request, provide written explanations for denials, allow appeals up to the State Board, and refer suspected fraud to prosecutors if necessary. After hearing from 13 members of the public, the committee continued to discuss the rule, but the transcript ends before any final vote on the EFA rule is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• A former NRCS employee that worked up here in the Big Horn Basin, you know, when he started 40 years

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Prime farmland has an explicit definition that NRCS, Natural Resources Conservation Service, I guess,

Summary: The committee met at the Coteau Freedom Mine in Mercer County, approved the June 2 minutes, and heard an overview of the mine from Coteau Properties president Andrew Hawbaker. He described the Freedom Mine as the largest lignite mine in the United States, supplying coal to Dakota Gasification, Antelope Valley Station, and Leland Olds Station. He emphasized the mine’s scale, safety record, reclamation work, workforce needs, community involvement, and economic impact, including payroll, taxes, royalties, scholarships, and local hiring. Members asked about how long land stays in production, how quickly it returns to agriculture after reclamation, labor shortages, and how mining affects groundwater and water wells. Hawbaker said most tracts are mined for about three to five years, reclamation is coordinated with landowners, and the company continues to struggle to find electricians, welders, mechanics, operators, and engineers. The committee then heard from Public Service Commission Chairman Randy Christman on coal mining reclamation and permitting. He reviewed North Dakota’s coal mining history, the state’s reclamation laws, federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act primacy, bonding, permit renewals and revisions, prohibited mining areas, inspection and enforcement, and contemporaneous reclamation requirements. Christman stressed that North Dakota’s program is professional and thorough, with frequent inspections, financial assurance, and a 10-year revegetation monitoring period before bond release. He also discussed federal coal ownership issues that can delay mine plans, the treatment of prime farmland, and how reclamation differs for wind and pipelines. In response to questions, he said one challenge is sometimes releasing land too soon before long-term compaction issues are fully understood, and he noted that data centers do not currently have a comparable reclamation model because they typically own the land. In the afternoon, the committee received an update from Lignite Energy Council president Jonathan Fortner on the lignite industry. He said North Dakota’s lignite sector supports five commercial power plants, four mines, about 12,000 direct and indirect jobs, and more than $5.5 billion in economic activity, while helping keep the state’s electricity rates among the lowest in the nation. Fortner reviewed coal severance and conversion tax revenues, the lignite research fund, federal regulatory rollbacks, carbon capture policy, and the industry’s legal costs fighting federal rules. He also highlighted a study on large-load development, saying new data centers and critical mineral processing facilities could create major local tax revenue and help justify new baseload generation. Members asked whether new gas pipelines would crowd out coal plant development and whether the economic study included jobs and broader local impacts; Fortner said the industry sees room for both and that the study did include construction, operations, jobs, and tax effects.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we're well behind where we should be compared to the NRC standards.

Bills: HB246, HB796, HB 1056, HB1544, HB1846, HB2001, HB2618, HB2625, HB2869, HB2898, HB3069, HB3114, HB3157, HB3228, HJR98, HB246

Keywords: federal directives, state authority, Tenth Amendment, government enforcement, local governance, gold standard, legal tender, currency, transactional currency, financial transactions, electronic payment systems, state finance, regulatory compliance, electric trucks, charging infrastructure, advisory council, transportation, sustainability, criminal penalties, official information

Transcript Highlights:

• Having been built by USDA NRCS, the local governmental entities are responsible for future. upkeep and

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Natural Resource Conservation Service, or NRCS, is an agency within the USDA there to help farmers with

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing covered a broad set of environmental and water-related bills, with much of the testimony focused on blue economy and circular economy proposals, drought management, drinking water safety, flood resilience, and water infrastructure funding. Supporters of bills such as H. 987 and H. 988 described grant programs for blue economy workforce development, research, small businesses, and public education about a circular economy. Other speakers backed measures on coastal erosion research, recreational boating dredging, cranberry water-right transfers, sand mining oversight, and a voucher program for home water filtration in PFAS-impacted communities. Several elected officials and advocates also urged passage of bills to require private well testing, improve school drinking water safety, and address sand mining pollution and PFAS contamination. Water supply and drought issues drew extensive testimony. Senator Eldridge and others supported legislation to let the state, through DEP and the drought management task force, impose regional water-use restrictions during droughts and make the task force permanent in statute. Advocates from watershed groups, farms, and environmental organizations said the current town-by-town approach is inconsistent and ineffective, and they described drought impacts on rivers, farms, private wells, and wildfire risk. A related bill on private wells was supported as a way to help homeowners test and remediate contaminated wells, especially in rural areas without public water. The committee also heard testimony on a bill to allow the Lynnfield Water District to join the MWRA, with local officials saying the move would help address PFAS and other contamination and improve supply reliability. Another major panel supported a water infrastructure funding bill, arguing that aging drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater systems need major new investment, including support for PFAS treatment, sewer rate relief, biosolids research, and regional interconnections. Members asked about costs, funding sources, and the relationship to existing revolving loan funds; witnesses said the bill would need to be paired with future bond funding and new revenue ideas. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the chairs repeatedly invited written testimony and noted the large number of speakers.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, I’d like to see the NRC approve more custom or cookie-cutter designs of various plants, and I’d like
• like<00:59:44.640> to<00:59:44.880> see<00:59:45.119> the<00:59:45.440> NRC
• Um, I'd like to see the NRC direction.
• Um, I'd like to see the NRC approve<00:59:47.200> more<00:59:48.160> uh<00:59:49.040>

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I said, 'Jim Schmidt, 33-year employee of USDA NRCS and Water Resources,' and we hit it off great.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I said, 'Jim Schmidt, 33-year employee of USDA NRCS and Water Resources,' and we hit it off great.

Summary: The Water Topics Overview Committee met with a quorum and received updates from the Department of Water Resources and the State Water Commission, followed by presentations from Deloitte on two legislative studies required by House Bill 1020. Director Reese Haas reviewed major project and budget updates, including the Northwest Area Water Supply and Southwest Pipeline projects, Resources Trust Fund balances, carryover spending, project prioritization, bid conditions, regional water system coverage, and department process improvements. Members also discussed how the commission prioritizes projects, maintenance expectations, and the impact of limited municipal water supply funding. No formal committee action was taken during the DWR update; the commission’s municipal funding decisions were described as pending its April 8 meeting. Deloitte then presented the cost-share policy study, which found that under current policy and forecasted revenues, North Dakota faces an estimated $1.3 billion shortfall over 14 years, with a near-term gap of about $1.8 billion through 2031. The firm outlined seven recommended options, including tighter definitions and a 25% cost share for eligible replacement projects, caps and financing strategies for the Mouse River and Red River Valley projects, aligning cost share with commission priority guidance, delaying lower-priority projects, using available lines of credit, and adjusting reimbursement timing for revolving loan funds. Committee members questioned inflation assumptions, affordability, user fees, and the use of legacy fund earnings for bonding, but no decisions were made. In the governance and finance study, Deloitte said final recommendations are still being refined, with a final report due May 29. The study examined the Southwest Pipeline, NAWS, and Red River Valley systems using governance and finance criteria such as decision authority, transparency, affordability, risk, and access to funding. For Southwest, Deloitte outlined options ranging from improved state-authority coordination to transferring ownership to the Southwest Water Authority; for NAWS, options focused on strengthening the authority’s role and potentially transitioning operations and maintenance; and for Red River, options ranged from enhanced facilitation to formal state oversight or state ownership. Members asked follow-up questions about ownership transfer, capital repayment streams, and why NAWS was not considered for transfer, and Deloitte said NAWS’s limited organizational maturity made that option less viable in the near term.