Transcript Highlights:

• Does that also impact the ratepayers when a local government requires you to move? Excuse me.
• But it does impact us and our ratepayers regardless whose right-of-way it is. Mr.
• because the ratepayer is also the taxpayer as well.
• And what does that do to the cost of the ratepayers? And finally, what's the resolution?
• Again, it comes on the taxpayer or the ratepayer, which is still the same person.

Summary: The Economic Infrastructure Subcommittee met with a quorum present and first heard HB 11 from Representative Robinson. The bill would address an unintended consequence in Florida’s municipal utility surcharge law by requiring the same water/utility rate for residents when a utility facility is physically located within one municipality but owned by another, rather than allowing the owning municipality to impose a 25% surcharge. The sponsor and several members described it as a fairness issue affecting residents who do not receive local tax support for the facility but still bear the surcharge. Public testimony included support from AARP and Miami-Dade County and opposition from North Miami Beach. The bill was reported favorably on an 18-0 vote. The committee then held a panel discussion on utility use of public rights-of-way and utility relocation. Panelists from FDOT, county government, gas, water, electric, and communications sectors described the permitting process, noting that FDOT uses a detailed utility accommodation manual and that local governments may use permits, franchise agreements, or ordinances depending on the utility type. They emphasized that utilities often must coordinate early with agencies using long-range work programs and project plans, and that the process differs by utility and jurisdiction. Communications witnesses discussed Chapter 337 and the 60-day local permitting shot clock, while others noted the role of Sunshine State One Call in locating facilities before excavation. A major focus was who pays for relocations when road or infrastructure projects require utilities to move. FDOT and several panelists said utilities generally bear the cost when they are in public right-of-way, with exceptions such as certain interstate/interchange projects and easement impacts. Utility representatives said relocations are often effectively new builds, can be costly, and are ultimately reflected in rates or customer costs. Members also asked about easements versus right-of-way, damage and disputes during construction, broadband workforce needs, and whether legislation could improve coordination. Panelists largely said the existing process works best when agencies, contractors, and utilities communicate early and continuously, and that more legislation may not be necessary compared with better planning, staffing, and use of technology.

Transcript Highlights:

• , and there is, I would call it, a small amount of ratepayer relief, but there is ratepayer relief month
• There are a lot of Maryland ratepayers.
• to our ratepayers. to our ratepayers.
• First of all, we need absolute ratepayer protection. We are all united in that.
• First of all, we need absolute ratepayer protection. We are all united in that.

Keywords: Senate streaming session for Monday, April 6, 2026, 960, senate, all

Summary: The Senate convened, received an invocation from Pastor Shannon Watkins of Souls One Outreach Cathedral in Cumberland, and welcomed several guests and student pages. The chamber also announced the week’s schedule for the final days of session, including likely double sessions later in the week and a possible Saturday hold. Administrative items included the reading of House messages, a favorable executive nominations report that was special ordered for Tuesday, and the introduction of several House bills and Senate bills on the calendar. The main floor debate centered on Senate Bill 841, the Utility Relief Reducing Energy Load Information for Every Family Act. Senators discussed energy affordability, ratepayer relief, utility costs, data center growth, in-state generation, and the role of programs such as RGGI, EmPower, and the RPS. Supporters said the bill provides a comprehensive short- and long-term response, including consumer transparency and low-income relief, while critics argued it did not go far enough and should have included stronger relief or pauses on renewable energy mandates. After debate and several explanations of vote, the Senate passed SB 841 by a constitutional majority, 38-affirmative votes. Earlier in the session, Senate Bill 213 on state procurement transparency and procedures also passed with 40 affirmative votes. After SB 841 passed, the Senate took up House Bill 1532, a conforming companion to the utility relief measure. The committee offered an amendment to align HB 1532 with SB 841, the amendment was adopted without objection, and the bill then passed on third reading. Senators who explained their votes largely echoed the same themes from the SB 841 debate, with some emphasizing the need for more relief and others stressing the bill’s broader policy changes and regional energy-market constraints.

Transcript Highlights:

• possible for our ratepayers. possible for our ratepayers.
• We do want to make sure that we're not harming other ratepayers as well.
• Just very broad, what is the cheapest path forward for our ratepayers?
• <00:28:07.520> as we're not harming other ratepayers as we're not harming other ratepayers
• forward for our ratepayers? forward for our ratepayers?

Bills: SB3326

Keywords: renewable energy, energy storage, cost reduction, public utilities commission, Hawaii energy policies, 910, house, all

Summary: The joint committees on Energy and Environmental Protection and Labor heard SB 3326, a bill concerning a study of separating transmission from generation in Hawaii’s electric system. Testimony was largely opposed. Life of the Land argued that true separation on an isolated island grid has not been shown to work anywhere and said the bill would waste taxpayer money. Hawaiian Electric and the Public Utilities Commission also opposed the measure, saying Hawaii already uses competitive bidding for new generation, that the bill would add cost, complexity, and reliability risks, and that a new study would duplicate prior work. In response to questions, the PUC explained its existing competitive bidding framework and said it had not seen an island system fully restructure in this way. The chair then amended the bill’s intent to require the PUC to open a proceeding for an independent, comprehensive analysis of the state’s energy pathways, including cost reduction, financial risk, state energy goals, and reliability, rather than narrowly focusing on separation. Both committees voted to pass SB 3326 SD2 with amendments, with the Energy committee adopting the recommendation unanimously and the Labor committee adopting it with one reservation and two no votes. The Energy and Environmental Protection Committee then took up SB 2497 SD2, which would require electric utilities other than cooperatives to provide transparent, publicly accessible customer bill impact analyses and annual reports to the PUC. The Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs and the PUC offered comments, with the PUC supporting the intent. Life of the Land said the proposed disclosure requirements would be too complex for most ratepayers to use meaningfully, while Hawaiian Electric said the bill could raise costs and slow projects, though it acknowledged some of the language changes and said much of the information is already available through existing planning and regulatory processes. Hawaii Clean Power Alliance and one individual testified in support. No vote was taken on SB 2497 SD2 during the excerpt. The committee also heard SB 3183 SD2, which would bar higher-income taxpayers from claiming the renewable energy technologies income tax credit for certain residential solar systems and would change refundability rules. The Department of Taxation, the Hawaii State Energy Office, and the Tax Foundation offered comments, while the Hawaii Solar Energy Association and numerous companies and individuals opposed the bill. Opponents raised concerns about impacts on financing models and the solar market. Members asked the Department of Taxation for data on how credits are claimed by homeowners versus third-party owners and on the refundability of the credit; the department said it did not have the information immediately available but would follow up. The chair indicated decision-making would likely be deferred to allow further review, and no vote was taken in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• However, section two, as mentioned, also allows the utilities to recover costs from ratepayers.
• In that scenario, ratepayers would remain responsible for the costs.
• However, section two, as mentioned, also allows the utilities to recover costs from ratepayers.
• In that scenario, ratepayers would remain responsible for the costs.
• So, this is absolutely aimed at trying to address that so that these costs don't hit these ratepayers

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

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

Transcript Highlights:

• But should the ratepayers be on the hook for that?
• But should the ratepayers be on the hook for that?
• But should the ratepayers be on the hook for that?
• But should the ratepayers be on the hook for that?
• But should the ratepayers be on the hook for that?

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It used to read “ratepayer savings”; now it reads “customer savings.”
• Um, I’m intrigued about replacing “ratepayer” with “customer.”
• Did they give you any justification for changing it from ratepayer to customer?
• I don't have it right in front of me what their reason for replacing ratepayer with customer was, to
• And again, this is part of rates because the ratepayers are paying for the energy efficiency cost, so

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The House convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and a quorum present. The journal was approved as corrected, several Senate files were given second reading, and House files 5099 through 5102 were introduced. The Rules and Legislative Administration report placed a large group of bills on the May 4 calendar with pre-filing requirements for amendments. The first major floor bill was House File 3426, the annual LCCMR bill appropriating about $102.036 million from the Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund for 108 projects, including a new community grants program. Members spoke in support, emphasizing natural resources, outdoor recreation, and added integrity safeguards; the bill passed 117-15. The House then passed House File 4151, a bipartisan occupational licensing bill for private detectives and protective agents. It ends partnership detective licenses and requires background checks for controlling officers and qualified representatives, while preventing licensure of people with disqualifying offenses from other states or federal law. The bill passed 133-0. After that, the chamber took up Senate File 4760, a public safety package incorporating multiple previously heard House bills and additional provisions. The package included items on recognizing Canadian protective orders, sextortion penalties, gift card fraud, firearm age restrictions, restitution, juvenile detention licensing, corrections data and terminology, chemical irritant disclosure, victims’ rights, BCA fraud statutes, and the private detective bill. Several amendments to Senate File 4760 were adopted, including one inserting House language, one changing the effective date for public-employer discretion provisions, one allowing the Office of the Legislative Auditor to request BCA fingerprints for federal tax information compliance, and one clarifying jail medication provisions. Another amendment, A3, drew a roll call after Representative Duran argued it would keep the current juvenile delinquency age and allow more time to build infrastructure; Representative Feist urged a no vote, citing opposition from other stakeholders. The transcript ends during discussion of that roll call, before the final outcome on A3 or the overall public safety package is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• Ratepayers should not be funding those activities. That's why H. 3400...
• Ratepayers should not be funding those activities.
• Again, ratepayers should not be paying for that.
• It's benefiting shareholders and it's not benefiting ratepayers.
• It's benefiting shareholders and it's not benefiting ratepayers.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on State Administration and Regulatory Oversight heard testimony on several bills. Senator Mike Moore supported S. 2185, which would delay implementation of the heavy-duty omnibus/advanced clean truck requirements while requiring the Commonwealth to purchase or lease electric medium- and heavy-duty vehicles starting in 2025; he argued the delay is needed because infrastructure, grid capacity, vehicle availability, and costs are not yet ready. The committee also heard strong support for S. 2156/H. 3318, which would require free menstrual products in public buildings, with advocates and students describing period poverty and the need to treat menstrual products like other basic restroom supplies. Senator John Keenan testified for S. 2158, a bill to let municipal light plants protect proprietary and competitively sensitive information from public disclosure while keeping board meetings and minutes open, saying it would help level the playing field against larger competitors. A major portion of the hearing focused on S. 2125/H. 3384, the language access and inclusion bill. Testimony from the AAPI Commission, Mass Speaks coalition members, Mass Appleseed, MLRI, ATASK, MAPC, the Boston Bar Association, Mass Advocates for Children, and others described barriers faced by limited-English-proficient residents in accessing MassHealth, DCF, courts, domestic violence services, schools, and other state services. Witnesses cited untranslated documents, inadequate interpretation, delays, and the burden placed on bilingual staff and children; several also pointed to recent federal moves toward English-only policy as making state action more urgent. Committee members asked questions about implementation, interpreter availability, and the role of technology and remote participation, and the chair noted the bill had been reported favorably in a prior session and intended to be again. The committee also heard testimony on time-zone legislation. Dr. Karin Johnson, representing sleep medicine interests, supported H. 3405 for permanent standard time and opposed S. 2157 for permanent daylight saving time, arguing that standard time better aligns with circadian rhythms and health, while permanent daylight saving time would worsen morning darkness and sleep disruption. Members questioned the strength of the scientific evidence and discussed school start times, geography, and whether Massachusetts should align with neighboring states. No votes were taken during the hearing, and testimony continued on additional bills as the session progressed.

Transcript Highlights:

• Ultimately, it's going to be paid for by ratepayers.
• We owe it to all P&M and gas ratepayers to ask the question.
• I have not seen one example where they have come in and it has benefited our constituents or ratepayers
• Is there another entity that you believe would better serve the ratepayers of New Mexico other than the
• So for me, protecting ratepayers and the fact that I think we need to look at it as a state, because

Bills: SM20, SM9, SJR6, HB124

Keywords: youth violence, violence prevention, violence intervention, community violence intervention, credible messengers, peer support, restorative justice, violence interrupters, juvenile justice, at-risk youth, high-risk youth, public safety, Department of Health, New Mexico, statewide summit, data collection, reporting, interagency coordination, community-based organizations, law enforcement

Transcript Highlights:

• It looks like over in rules, the standard was changed on the nonpayment of data centers from ratepayers
• And if ratepayers, as a result, are going to bear any substantial risk if large data centers don't pay
• What we're saying here is to try to mitigate that risk as much as possible so that our ratepayers, our
• It protects our residents, it protects our ratepayers, first and foremost.
• increase because they did not have the necessary safeguards for their residents and their ratepayers

Summary: The Senate convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, several introductions, and an announcement that there would be no conference that weekend. The chamber then took up a long special order calendar and passed a series of bills, often by substituting House companions. Early measures included trust law modernization to create a nonjudicial trustee discharge process, military affairs changes expanding leave and retirement-related provisions, a bill to prepare for the end of penny use by standardizing cash rounding, and a podiatric medicine bill regulating cellular or tissue-based products and informed consent. The Senate also approved veterans court expansion, RV park assessment clarification, alcohol-loss tax deduction authority, bail bond and pretrial release revisions, and a military-installation jurisdiction bill to allow juvenile cases on bases to be handled in state juvenile court under certain conditions. Most bills passed unanimously or near-unanimously, with the bail bond bill passing 36-1 after questions about charitable bail bonds and confirmation that existing law on return of charitable bail funds would remain unchanged. The chamber then paused for a lengthy farewell presentation honoring Senator Lori Berman, featuring a video, remarks from many senators, and Berman’s own closing speech reflecting on her 16 years of service, her legislative priorities, and her call for civility, bipartisanship, and continued support for issues such as school safety, Israel, anti-Semitism, and affordability. After the tribute, the Senate resumed and passed additional bills, including one expanding insurance coverage definitions for portable electronics and eyewear, a workforce and nursing education funding bill broadening support for health science programs, a recovery residences regulatory streamlining bill, a felony battery enhancement bill adding resisting an officer with violence as a qualifying prior offense, and a child welfare bill extending visitor thresholds in out-of-home placements, making the Step Into Success program permanent, and creating a best-practices program. The chamber also advanced a candidate qualification bill tightening party-affiliation requirements and adding a House provision on recent legal name changes; debate began on that measure as the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so how do we get the best investments, the best projects built, and the cheapest ones for ratepayers
• We have ratepayer advocates who come in and say, no, wait, that forecast of what they say they need to
• And does it help other ratepayers and not burden other ratepayers?
• As a municipal utility serving the ratepayers of Los Angeles, we are not CPUC jurisdictional.
• As a municipal utility serving the ratepayers of Los Angeles, we are not CPUC jurisdictional, but we

Summary: The committee first heard AB 1026 by Assembly Member Wilson, which would require investor-owned utilities to provide clearer front-end information and follow more consistent timelines for post-entitlement energization applications tied to housing projects. The author and supporters from the Housing Action Coalition and Mission Housing said utility delays can hold up approved housing, add costs, and create uncertainty, and they argued the bill would align utility processes with recent state efforts to streamline local permitting. PG&E and Southern California Edison opposed the bill, saying existing CPUC timelines and the ongoing energization rulemaking already address the issue, that the bill could be duplicative or premature, and that some proposed timelines were too short. The committee discussed the bill’s relationship to the CPUC’s September 2024 decision, and AB 1026 was ultimately approved on a 15-0 vote, with the consent calendar also passing. The second half of the hearing was the committee’s annual oversight hearing on electric reliability. Representatives from the CPUC, CEC, CAISO, and DWR reviewed lessons from the 2020 and 2022 heat emergencies, emphasizing that California has since added significant resources, improved planning, and created backstop programs such as the strategic reliability reserve. They said the summer 2025 outlook is cautiously optimistic, with no expected shortfalls under traditional planning conditions and a projected surplus, though wildfire and extreme heat remain risks. The agencies also described major changes in planning and operations, including more battery storage, updated resource adequacy rules, expanded transmission planning, and reforms to the interconnection queue. Members asked about data center load, Diablo Canyon’s future, the strategic reliability reserve, demand response, wildfire mitigation costs, affordability, and regional market expansion. Witnesses said data center demand is a major variable but can be managed through better forecasting, flexible service arrangements, and siting in areas with existing capacity; they also said firm clean resources remain valuable while planning continues around Diablo Canyon’s scheduled retirement. On affordability, they said the agencies try to balance reliability with least-cost procurement, and that new resources can lower market prices even as they require upfront investment. CAISO also highlighted the value of the Western Energy Imbalance Market and the planned day-ahead market, saying regional coordination improves both reliability and cost savings.

Transcript Highlights:

• Ratepayers have had to pay $1.8 billion in premiums for reinsurance and have never drawn on it.
• they purchase, and purchasing that reinsurance comes with... directly from being paid for by the ratepayers
• While selfishly for those of us as ratepayers, we passed a bill a few sessions ago that said you can't
• The levels of reinsurance that we've had to purchase. ...and those are being paid for with the ratepayer
• So while the ratepayers are continually paying more and more, the funding stacks for the insurers are

Bills: SB1468, SB1612, SB1789, SB2530, SB2571, SB2717, SB2967

Keywords: utility systems, Texas A&M, regents authority, construction, improvement, construction contracts, trust funds, property rights, mechanics lien, contractors, trustee liability, mechanic's lien, liability, attorney's fees, windstorm insurance, Texas Windstorm Insurance Association, insurance regulation, administrative penalties, coastal counties, catastrophe year

Transcript Highlights:

• I said that the ratepayers have been and will be overcharged about $880 million because of bad decisions
• We've been negotiating for a long time, and I thank CenterPoint today for announcing that the ratepayers
• They will return over $900 million to all ratepayers.
• So the ratepayers under CenterPoint will not be on the hook for the bad business decision.
• And finally, they came to the table, and again, I applaud them for doing the right thing by the ratepayers

Bills: SJR12, SCR39, SB27, SB29, SB241, SB406, SB414, SB464, SB568, SB578, SB609, SB660, SB689, SB693, SB785, SB857, SB879, SB921, SB922, SB955, SB985, SB993, SB996, SB1008, SB1035, SB1036, SB1059, SB1098, SB1120, SB1122, SB1147, SB1188, SB1197, SB1209, SB1227, SB1245, SB1267, SB1307, SB1321, SB1332, SB1386, SB1396, SB1453, SB1484, SB1494, SB1536, SB1537, SB1596, SB1610, SB1664, SB1741, SB1814, SB1822, SB1841, SB1948, SB2065, SB2155, SB2188, SB2230, SB2406, SB2407, SJR36, SJR12, SJR81, SJR50, SCR22, SCR12, SCR39, SB406, SB689, SB765, SB62, SB666, SB888, SB687, SB847, SB1248, SB504, SB857, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB241, SB304, SB1023, SB204, SB609, SB670, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB1539, SB447, SB1119, SB1505, SB1215, SB1302, SB583, SB673, SB681, SB1172, SB955, SB957, SB1120, SB541, SB266, SB1415, SB53, SB1352, SB785, SB1450, SB1502, SB1566, SB414, SB1062, SB711, SB746, SB1404, SB1448, SB507, SB1026, SB1349, SB1355, SB1433, SB1434, SB1596, SB1403, SB667, SB1059, SB1567, SB310, SB311, SB505, SB1209, SB1210, SB1470, SB264, SB1029, SB1358, SB1364, SB1569, SB1376, SB1228, SB519, SB1350, SB462, SB827, SB1585, SB1396, SB1484, SB1273, SB1741, SB927, SB1227, SB1229, SB1353, SB1464, SB1709, SB1729, SB1733, SB1744, SB1772, SB1841, SB2188, SB1147, SB879, SB1008, SB1536, SB2016, SB1453, SB1173, SB1163, SB996, SB27, SB568, SB1370, SB1321, SB1101, SB860, SB993, SB693, SB1610, SB1537, SB1332, SB1307, SB963, SB493, SB922, SB984, SB619, SB1098, SB1122, SB455, SB522, SB1057, SB1239, SB1254, SB1255, SB1259, SB1341, SB1664, SB1877, SB464, SB1277, SB32, SB732, SB660, SB731, SB921, SB268, SB1822, SB1188, SB1589, SB397, SB2230, SB1058, SB1036, SB1267, SB2112, SB1930, SB532, SB1035, SB2155, SB508, SB29, SB292, SB291, SB901, SB1333, SB1436, SB1494, SB964, SB779, SB1378, SB2312, SB1719, SB1386, SB287, SB2143, SB1245, SB261, SB1247, SB1948, SB2406, SB2407, SB1882, SB1197, SB1814, SB618, SB38, SB393, SB2065, SB1371, SB1394, SB1365, SB2243, SB2226, SB2039, SB1919, SB1895, SB1598, SB1493, SB1810, SB1791, SB1706, SB1644, SB1238, SB783, SB458, SB22, SB651, SB897, SB1809, SB1080, SB745, SB826, SB989, SB1320, SB1437, SB2320, SB2289, SB1171, SB664, SB1637, SB27, SB29, SB857, SB879, SB922, SB1098, SB1453, SB1536, SB1741, SB2188, SB2230, SB406, SB689, SJR12, SR358, SR361, SR362, SR368, SJR74, SJR76, SB2408, SB2409, SB2461, SB2462, SB2463, SB2464, SB2465, SB2466, SB2467, SB2468, SB2469, SB2470, SB2471, SB2472, SB2473, SB2474, SB2475, SB2476, SB2477, SB2478, SB2479, SB2480, SB2481, SB2482, SB2483, SB2484, SB2485, SB2486, SB2487, SB2488, SB2489, SB2490, SB2491, SB2492, SB2493, SB2494, SB2495, SB2496, SB2497, SB2498, SB2499, SB2500, SB2501, SB2502, SB2503, SB2504, SB2505, SB2506, SB2507, SB2508, SB2509, SB2510, SB2511, SB2512, SB2513, SB2514, SB2515, SB2516, SB2517, SB2518, SB2519, SB2520, SB2521, SB2522, SB2523, SB2524, SB2525, SB2526, SB2527, SB2528, SB2529, SB2530, SB2531, SB2532, SB2533, SB2534, SB2535, SB2536, SB2537, SB2538, SB2539, SB2540, SB2541, SB2542, SB2543, SB2544, SB2545, SB2546, SB2547, SB2548, SB2549, SB2550, SB2551, SB2552, SB2553, SB2554, SB2555, SB2556, SB2557, SB2558, SB2560, SB2561, SB2562, SB2563, SB2565, SB2566, SB2567, SB2568, SB2569, SB2570, SB2571, SB2572, SB2573, SB2574, SB2575, SB2576, SB2577, SB2578, SB2579, SB2580, SB2581, SB2582, SB2583, SB2584, SB2585, SB2586, SB2587, SB2588, SB2589, SB2590, SB2591, SB2592, SB2593, SB2594, SB2595, SB2596, SB2597, SB2598, SB2599, SB2600, SB2601, SB2602, SB2603, SB2604, SB2605, SB2606, SB2607, SB2608, SB2609, SB2610, SB2611, SB2612, SB2613, SB2614, SB2615, SB2616, SB2617, SB2618, SB2619, SB2620, SB2621, SB2622, SB2625, SB2626, SB2627, SB2628, SB2629, SB2630, SB2631, SB2632, SB2633, SB2634, SB2635, SB2636, SB2637, SB2638, SB2639, SB2640, SB2641, SB2642, SB2643, SB2644, SB2645, SB2646, SB2647, SB2648, SB2649, SB2650, SB2651, SB2652, SB2653, SB2654, SB2655, SB2656, SB2657, SB2658, SB2659, SB2660, SB2661, SB2662, SB2663, SB2664, SB2665, SB2666, SB2667, SB2668, SB2669, SB2670, SB2671, SB2672, SB2673, SB2674, SB2675, SB2676, SB2677, SB2678, SB2679, SB2680, SB2681, SB2682, SB2683, SB2684, SB2685, SB2686, SB2687, SB2688, SB2689, SB2690, SB2691, SB2692, SB2693, SB2694, SB2695, SB2696, SB2697, SB2698, SB2699, SB2700, SB2701, SB2702, SB2703, SB2704, SB2705, SB2706, SB2707, SB2708, SB2709, SB2710, SB2711, SB2712, SB2713, SB2714, SB2715, SB2716, SB2717, SB2718, SB2719, SB2720, SB2721, SB2723, SB2724, SB2725, SB2726, SB2727, SB2728, SB2729, SB2730, SB2731, SB2732, SB2733, SB2734, SB2735, SB2736, SB2737, SB2738, SB2739, SB2740, SB2741, SB2742, SB2743, SB2744, SB2745, SB2746, SB2747, SB2748, SB2749, SB2750, SB2751, SB2752, SB2753, SB2754, SB2755, SB2756, SB2757, SB2758, SB2759, SB2760, SB2761, SB2762, SB2763, SB2764, SB2765, SB2766, SB2767, SB2768, SB2769, SB2770, SB2771, SB2772, SB2773, SB2774, SB2775, SB2776, SB2777, SB2778, SB2779, SB2780, SB2781, SB2782, SB2783, SB2784, SB2785, SB2786, SB2787, SB2788, SB2789, SB2790, SB2791, SB2792, SB2793, SB2794, SB2795, SB2796, SB2797, SB2798, SB2799, SB2800, SB2967, SB3034, HJR1, HJR4, HB9, HB13, HB22, HB135, HB143, HB195, HB908, HB1392, SB861, SB1013, SJR74, SJR76, SB2408, SB2409, SB2461, SB2462, SB2463, SB2464, SB2465, SB2466, SB2467, SB2468, SB2469, SB2470, SB2471, SB2472, SB2473, SB2474, SB2475, SB2476, SB2477, SB2478, SB2479, SB2480, SB2481, SB2482, SB2483, SB2484, SB2485, SB2486, SB2487, SB2488, SB2489, SB2490, SB2491, SB2492, SB2493, SB2494, SB2495, SB2496, SB2497, SB2498, SB2499, SB2500, SB2501, SB2502, SB2503, SB2504, SB2505, SB2506, SB2507, SB2508, SB2509, SB2510, SB2511, SB2512, SB2513, SB2514, SB2515, SB2516, SB2517, SB2518, SB2519, SB2520, SB2521, SB2522, SB2523, SB2524, SB2525, SB2526, SB2527, SB2528, SB2529, SB2530, SB2531, SB2532, SB2533, SB2534, SB2535, SB2536, SB2537, SB2538, SB2539, SB2540, SB2541, SB2542, SB2543, SB2544, SB2545, SB2546, SB2547, SB2548, SB2549, SB2550, SB2551, SB2552, SB2553, SB2554, SB2555, SB2556, SB2557, SB2558, SB2560, SB2561, SB2562, SB2563, SB2565, SB2566, SB2567, SB2568, SB2569, SB2570, SB2571, SB2572, SB2573, SB2574, SB2575, SB2576, SB2577, SB2578, SB2579, SB2580, SB2581, SB2582, SB2583, SB2584, SB2585, SB2586, SB2587, SB2588, SB2589, SB2590, SB2591, SB2592, SB2593, SB2594, SB2595, SB2596, SB2597, SB2598, SB2599, SB2600, SB2601, SB2602, SB2603, SB2604, SB2605, SB2606, SB2607, SB2608, SB2609, SB2610, SB2611, SB2612, SB2613, SB2614, SB2615, SB2616, SB2617, SB2618, SB2619, SB2620, SB2621, SB2622, SB2625, SB2626, SB2627, SB2628, SB2629, SB2630, SB2631, SB2632, SB2633, SB2634, SB2635, SB2636, SB2637, SB2638, SB2639, SB2640, SB2641, SB2642, SB2643, SB2644, SB2645, SB2646, SB2647, SB2648, SB2649, SB2650, SB2651, SB2652, SB2653, SB2654, SB2655, SB2656, SB2657, SB2658, SB2659, SB2660, SB2661, SB2662, SB2663, SB2664, SB2665, SB2666, SB2667, SB2668, SB2669, SB2670, SB2671, SB2672, SB2673, SB2674, SB2675, SB2676, SB2677, SB2678, SB2679, SB2680, SB2681, SB2682, SB2683, SB2684, SB2685, SB2686, SB2687, SB2688, SB2689, SB2690, SB2691, SB2692, SB2693, SB2694, SB2695, SB2696, SB2697, SB2698, SB2699, SB2700, SB2701, SB2702, SB2703, SB2704, SB2705, SB2706, SB2707, SB2708, SB2709, SB2710, SB2711, SB2712, SB2713, SB2714, SB2715, SB2716, SB2717, SB2718, SB2719, SB2720, SB2721, SB2723, SB2724, SB2725, SB2726, SB2727, SB2728, SB2729, SB2730, SB2731, SB2732, SB2733, SB2734, SB2735, SB2736, SB2737, SB2738, SB2739, SB2740, SB2741, SB2742, SB2743, SB2744, SB2745, SB2746, SB2747, SB2748, SB2749, SB2750, SB2751, SB2752, SB2753, SB2754, SB2755, SB2756, SB2757, SB2758, SB2759, SB2760, SB2761, SB2762, SB2763, SB2764, SB2765, SB2766, SB2767, SB2768, SB2769, SB2770, SB2771, SB2772, SB2773, SB2774, SB2775, SB2776, SB2777, SB2778, SB2779, SB2780, SB2781, SB2782, SB2783, SB2784, SB2785, SB2786, SB2787, SB2788, SB2789, SB2790, SB2791, SB2792, SB2793, SB2794, SB2795, SB2796, SB2797, SB2798, SB2799, SB2800, SB2967, SB3034, HJR1, HJR4, HB9, HB13, HB22, HB135, HB143, HB195, HB908, HB1392, SB861, SB1013

Keywords: parental rights, education, constitutional amendment, school choice, child education, border security, southern border, federal immigration policy, illegal immigration, cartels, transnational cartels, fentanyl, drug trafficking, human trafficking, Operation Lone Star, Texas border, National Guard, state guard, border wall, border barriers

Transcript Highlights:

• In one case, the power plant was owned by ratepayers, and ratepayers are still paying for the stranded
• My concern is about the ratepayers and the taxpayers.
• So, you weren't using ratepayer resources to subsidize the soft costs of development.
• socialized against all ratepayers.
• That is projects that will be built and collected from ratepayers.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• centers consume significant amounts of power, and they can drive up the cost of electricity for ratepayers
• approved and reviewed by the Public Utility Commission, Utility Commission, guarantees that electric ratepayers
• It protects ratepayers, it protects our communities, and it protects our land, air, and water.
• It addresses electric rates, holding Vermont ratepayers harmless. It addresses water usage.
• Here we had an opportunity to protect Vermont ratepayers from electricity price increases, and we have

Keywords: 926, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The ratepayers ate the bill.
• The ratepayers ate the bill.
• People ought to be aware that the state is coming up with goals that could end up costing its ratepayers
• People ought to be aware that the state is coming up with goals that could end up costing its ratepayers
• Could end up costing its ratepayers a lot of money.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And that even goes... ...down to the residents, right, ratepayers.
• Does that mean that ratepayers would actually see a reduction in their rates?
• Ratepayers don't understand this stuff, and I think we have, we're losing that battle, the battle of
• But ratepayers, all they care about is what's this costing me. And we are doing a horrible job.
• What's going on, but the average ratepayer cannot.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• looking at this important issue, and we share your objectives to protect consumers and protect ratepayers
• I'm grateful for the thoughtful leadership and especially the ratepayer protections that are featured
• nearly 150,000 members across the state, and we're very concerned with undue burden on them as ratepayers
• the nation, and we'd love to work with the sponsors and the committee members on how to protect ratepayers
• To be clear, ratepayer protections matter.

Summary: The Committee on Regulated Industries heard and voted on several bills. SB 986 would prohibit smoking or vaping marijuana in public places and also restrict smoking in rooms and bars; the sponsor said it is intended to protect public health and outdoor spaces, while the Florida Restaurant and Lodging Association supported the goal but raised concerns about impacts on designated smoking areas, and cannabis advocates warned about unintended effects on patients and property rights. The committee reported SB 986 favorably. The committee also passed SB 678, which restores statutory authority for DBPR’s long-standing rule allowing alcohol distributors to deduct unsellable alcohol from monthly excise taxes; a strike-all amendment was adopted, including retroactive application to January 1, 2025, and the bill was reported favorably. SB 800, which increases penalties for repeat unlicensed engineering practice and creates an engineering student loan assistance program for engineers working for state agencies and water management districts, was amended and reported favorably as well. Members then considered SB 408 on vaccine advertising and liability. The sponsor argued the bill would address declining public trust in vaccines by allowing claims against manufacturers that advertise in Florida, while opponents said the measure is preempted by federal law, raises First Amendment concerns, and would create unnecessary litigation. After extensive testimony and debate, the committee reported SB 408 favorably. The committee also heard SB 484 on data centers, which would set PSC tariff requirements so large load customers pay their own costs, preserve local planning authority, and limit water permits for large data centers; testimony was mixed, with supporters emphasizing ratepayer protections and economic benefits and critics warning about overregulation and confidentiality limits. The bill was reported favorably. Finally, the committee approved SB 1118, which creates a time-limited public records exemption for certain data center development information held by local governments, after the sponsor said it was meant to prevent extended NDAs while still allowing local notice and input. SB 1050, requiring veterinarians to provide written prescriptions so pet owners can choose their pharmacy, was also reported favorably. The meeting ended after several members recorded votes on bills they had missed.

Transcript Highlights:

• Rebating funds back to the ratepayers is not a new concept.
• Rebating funds back to the ratepayers is not a new concept.
• You had mentioned the impact to ratepayers. What was that amount you said?
• Of the 540,000 electric ratepayers, does this include private, commercial— Of the 540,000 electric ratepayers
• The 500,000 number is just Eversource ratepayers.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 224, which would redirect most money from New Hampshire’s renewable energy fund back to electric ratepayers. The bill sponsor argued the measure would lower energy costs, noting recent utility rate increases and estimating annual savings of roughly $2.5 million to $7.3 million for ratepayers. Supporters said the fund has accumulated money that should be returned to customers rather than used for subsidies, and they emphasized that the state has already rebated similar funds from RGGI for years. Opponents, including Rep. Kat McGee, argued the renewable energy fund is a successful, nonlapsing dedicated fund that supports local clean-energy projects, energy resilience, emissions reductions, and private investment. McGee said the fiscal note overstated the benefit of rebates and understated the loss of investment, claiming the average annual rebate would amount to less than $10 per customer while the program has helped leverage significant private dollars and nearly 10,000 projects. She urged the committee to reject the bill as a poor deal for the state and ratepayers. Committee members questioned the fiscal note, the size of the rebate, whether the bill would set a precedent for other dedicated funds, and whether the program’s incentives amount to picking winners and losers. The Department of Energy testified neutrally, explaining how the renewable energy fund works, including renewable energy credits, alternative compliance payments, and the fund’s use for renewable energy initiatives. No vote was taken in the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• ratepayers.
• ratepayers.
• ratepayers.
• ratepayers.
• It's not going to be a balance with ratepayers.

Keywords: 916, all