Transcript Highlights:

• , and the rationale is that, you know, given what's before us and what's happening in the Colorado River
• to really consider the importance of this, particularly now given what's going on in the Colorado River
• </c><00:08:38.159><c> and</c><00:08:38.479><c> the</c> happening in the Colorado River and the happening
• in the Colorado River and the fact<00:08:38.880><c> that</c><00:08:39.839><c> um</c><00:08:40.080><c
• </c> on in the Colorado River Basin. on in the Colorado River Basin.

Bills: SF0050, SF0068, SF0084, HB0087, HB0029, HB0061, HB0090

Keywords: groundwater, water resource management, state engineer, aquifer study, corrective controls, monitoring wells, public reporting, irrigation, water management, funding, maintenance projects, tax assessments, state law, water conservation, Colorado River, drought, water rights, voluntary program, interstate agreements, water development

Transcript Highlights:

• So, thank you. cycle, including data centers, carbon cycle, including data centers, carbon capture<00
• I'm the executive director of Powder River Basin Resource Council, and I'm accompanied by my colleague
• I'm the executive director<01:03:12.480><c> of</c><01:03:12.720><c> Powder</c><01:03:13.040><c> River
• </c><01:03:13.359><c> Basin</c><01:03:13.760><c> Resource</c> director of Powder River Basin Resource
• director of Powder River Basin Resource Council<01:03:14.559><c> and</c><01:03:14.799><c> I'm</c><01

Bills: SF0050, SF0068, SF0084, HB0087, HB0029, HB0061, HB0090

Keywords: groundwater, water resource management, state engineer, aquifer study, corrective controls, monitoring wells, public reporting, irrigation, water management, funding, maintenance projects, tax assessments, state law, water conservation, Colorado River, drought, water rights, voluntary program, interstate agreements, water development

Transcript Highlights:

• As already been mentioned, Carbon River Bridge is 105 years old this year and was permanently closed
• Access has been cut off to Mount Rainier National Park via the Carbon River Corridor, many Alpine Lakes
• The closing of the bridge means people don't have access to the Carbon River entrance of the park.
• I'd planned to do a bike-hike trip into the Carbon River Glacier.
• Through this work, we see clearly that access to the Carbon River area functions as a critical gateway

Bills: SB5987, SB6170

Keywords: SB 5987, SB5987, Fairfax Bridge, State Route 165, SR 165, Carbon River, WSDOT, Washington State Department of Transportation, emergency bridge replacement, infrastructure failure, transportation emergency, climate commitment account, climate investment account, clean energy, climate funding, greenhouse gas reduction, environmental justice, renewable energy, building electrification, industrial decarbonization

Summary: The Senate Transportation Committee began with a work session on the Fairfax Carbon River SR-165 Bridge closure and replacement. Wilkeson Mayor Jamie Pololi described the bridge as a long-standing state investment that was closed after years of documented deterioration, saying the closure severed access to Mount Rainier-area recreation, hurt local businesses and municipal revenue, and created emergency access problems for Fairfax and nearby communities. Pierce County’s Melissa Littleton and WSDOT’s Steve Rourke said the bridge is 105 years old, was weight-limited before closing, and is now being studied for replacement; WSDOT outlined seven alternatives, said greenfield options were ruled out, and explained that the project is in early geotechnical and pre-NEPA planning, with construction still estimated to take years. Senators asked about detour length, emergency response, historic-preservation issues, and whether the project could be accelerated; WSDOT said the bridge’s status and the need for a new alignment limit the usefulness of emergency authority, and that additional funding will be needed beyond the $7 million already spent from preservation funds. The committee then held a public hearing on SB 5987, which would declare the Fairfax Bridge closure an emergency, direct WSDOT to restore access across SR-165 as soon as possible, grant the transportation secretary limited emergency authorities, exempt the work from Executive Order 25-07 project labor agreement requirements, and make the act effective immediately. Supporters, including the mayor, local residents, recreation advocates, and trail groups, said the bill would recognize the closure as a public safety and access emergency and help restore access to public lands, businesses, and emergency routes. WSDOT testified in opposition to the bill’s practical effect, warning it could create false expectations because most delays are driven by federal NEPA and historic-preservation processes that the secretary cannot waive. The committee reported 606 people signed in support, one opposed, and two other. The committee also heard SB 6170, which would raise the dollar limits for work performed by state highway crews and for certain procurement thresholds that allow small, veteran-, minority-, and women-owned businesses to compete. The bill would increase the state-force limit from $60,000 to $100,000 in normal circumstances and from $100,000 to $160,000 in emergencies, with similar increases for related contracting thresholds; staff said the current limits have not been updated since 2005 and the bill has no fiscal impact. Senator King, the prime sponsor, said the change would better match inflation and help state workers do more routine and emergency work in-house. WFSE and WSDOT supported the bill, saying it would help maintenance crews keep up with rising costs while preserving opportunities for outside contractors; Senator Valdez asked whether it would affect minority- and women-owned contracting programs, and WSDOT said it did not expect an adverse impact but would monitor it. Public testimony was overwhelmingly supportive, with 55 signed in favor and none opposed.

Transcript Highlights:

• River after inspections found that one of the bridge's...
• The State Route 165 Fairfax Bridge across the Carbon River.
• WSDOT completed a planning study to address access across the Carbon River in December 2025.
• Through this work, we see clearly that access to the Carbon River area functions as a critical gateway
• River area of Mount Rainier National Park.

Bills: HB2550, HB2645, HB2109, HB2134, HB2323

Keywords: transit, community colleges, student transportation, free rides, public transportation, HB 2645, HB2645, Fairfax Bridge, State Route 165, SR 165, Carbon River, Washington State Department of Transportation, WSDOT, emergency infrastructure replacement, bridge collapse, bridge closure, transportation emergency, public safety, infrastructure repair, bridge replacement

Summary: The Transportation Committee held public hearings on House Bill 2550 and House Bill 2645, then later took executive action on House Bills 2109, 2134, and 2323. HB 2550 would require transit agencies receiving transit support grant funds to allow free transit for degree-seeking and certificate-seeking community and technical college students. Staff said the Department of Transportation saw no fiscal impact, while local government notes projected reduced fare revenue and added administrative costs, with an estimated $10 million to $12 million annual revenue loss. Rep. Jamila Taylor and student and transit advocates supported the bill as a way to reduce barriers to education, while the Washington State Transit Association said it supported the concept but raised implementation and eligibility concerns. Several students testified in favor, describing transit costs as a burden and saying free rides would improve access to school. HB 2645, as described in the substitute, would declare an emergency over the permanent closure of the Fairfax Bridge on State Route 165 and give WSDOT emergency authority to expedite replacement by waiving or suspending certain state requirements. Rep. Andrew Barkis said the bridge closure cut off residents and access to Mount Rainier and argued the situation warranted emergency action. Local officials, residents, recreation groups, and fire service representatives testified in support, emphasizing isolation, economic harm, and slower emergency response times. WSDOT acknowledged the closure’s impact and said it was moving forward with planning and design, but noted that much of the timeline is driven by federal requirements such as NEPA, historic preservation, and endangered species review; the agency said the bill would have limited effect on timelines. The committee then moved to executive session. In executive action, the committee adopted a technical substitute for HB 2109, which requires covered transport of tracked vehicles with mud or debris on public highways, and reported it out with a due pass recommendation by voice vote. It also adopted an amendment to HB 2134 updating which regional transportation planning organizations must include greenhouse gas and vehicle miles traveled reductions in regional plans, then passed the substitute bill on a 16-12 vote. Finally, the committee adopted amendments to HB 2323 creating the Blue Envelope Program for neurodiverse drivers during traffic stops, including broader terminology and a web-page/resource-sharing provision, and reported the substitute bill out unanimously by voice vote. The meeting ended with adjournment.

Bills: SB1041, SB1176, SB1197, SB1198, SB1199, SCM1004

Keywords: electronic monitoring, nursing care, assisted living, resident rights, privacy, consent, surveillance, stormwater, water storage, replenishment credits, groundwater, aquifer, Arizona Revised Statutes, irrigation rights, water duty, water allocation, management areas, Arizona beef council, beef promotion, agricultural marketing

Transcript Highlights:

• It emits carbon dioxide.
• , the low-carbon portfolio, or the...
• Say the carbon, the low-carbon portfolio, or the zero-carbon portfolio, or what it says is renewable.
• And that is intended to be an offset, a carbon emission offset equivalent to the carbon emissions being
• As far as carbon emission, you know, carbon-burning, you know, carbon-burning climate-killing fuels,

Bills: SB78, SB235, SB22, SB310

Keywords: nuclear energy, renewable energy, sustainability, carbon emissions, energy regulation, microgrid, zero carbon resources, Public Regulation Commission, energy generation, electric utilities, motor vehicle manufacturers, licensing, dealers, franchise agreements, consumer protection, water supply, sewage improvements, environment, funding, Mora County

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 78, which would classify nuclear energy as renewable energy. Senator Thornton and supporters argued that New Mexico needs dispatchable, baseload power and that nuclear should be added to the state’s renewable portfolio standard because wind and solar are intermittent and require extensive land, mining, and battery storage. Supporters also emphasized nuclear’s zero-carbon profile, the safety record of U.S. Navy reactors, the possibility of small modular reactors, and the fact that New Mexico already uses nuclear-generated electricity from out of state. Opponents, including Senator O’Malley and Senator Charlie, argued nuclear is not renewable because it relies on finite uranium and creates long-lived radioactive waste, and they raised concerns about uranium mining impacts, waste storage, and the bill’s lack of a limiting principle. The committee voted 5-4 to do not pass the bill, with Senators Cervantes, Hamblen, O’Malley, Lopez, and Charlie voting yes on the do-not-pass motion and Senators Ezell, Scott, and Thornton voting no; the chair then explained that the vote reflected disagreement over whether nuclear should be labeled renewable, not opposition to nuclear power itself. The committee then heard Senate Bill 235, the Microgrid Oversight Act, with a committee substitute. Sponsor Senator Steinborn said the substitute would restore existing renewable benchmarks for microgrids, require large microgrids to meet zero-carbon targets by 2045, add reporting and PRC oversight, and close a loophole that could let utilities buy microgrid power and shift costs to ratepayers. Supporters, including environmental groups and community advocates, said the bill was needed to regulate large data-center microgrids such as Project Jupiter in Doña Ana County, which they said could drive major emissions, ozone, and nitrogen oxide pollution, strain water supplies, and undermine state climate goals. They also argued the bill would protect ratepayers and ensure transparency and community benefits. Opponents, including Americans for Prosperity, the Chamber of Commerce, oil and gas associations, Xcel Energy, PNM, Consumer Energy Alliance, and economic development groups, argued the bill would impose unnecessary regulation on private microgrids, slow investment, raise costs, and reduce flexibility for reliability projects and industrial development. They said microgrids are already regulated for safety and interconnection, and that the bill could discourage projects in New Mexico. In response, Steinborn said the bill was necessary because current law leaves a loophole for large polluting microgrids and because several major projects are already planned or underway. The committee heard extensive public testimony on both sides, but the transcript ends before a final vote on SB 235 is taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• It emits carbon dioxide.
• Zero carbon emissions.
• , the low-carbon portfolio or the...
• Say the carbon, the low-carbon portfolio, or the zero-carbon portfolio, or what it says is renewable.
• And that is intended to be an offset, a carbon emission offset equivalent to the carbon emissions being

Bills: SB78, SB235, SB22, SB310

Keywords: nuclear energy, renewable energy, sustainability, carbon emissions, energy regulation, microgrid, zero carbon resources, Public Regulation Commission, energy generation, electric utilities, motor vehicle manufacturers, licensing, dealers, franchise agreements, consumer protection, water supply, sewage improvements, environment, funding, Mora County

Transcript Highlights:

• Bill 2116 appropriates $1 million from the State General Fund in fiscal year 2027 to the Colorado River
• Prest's question, one is for the Colorado River litigation and one is a protection fund, and that's for
• Just as a little background, the Colorado River system supplies water to seven states and Mexico.
• Buschatzky, as the representative for the state of Arizona in policy negotiations for the Colorado River
• Ben talked with you about the Colorado River Protection Fund deposit of $30 million.

Bills: HB2053, HB2116, HB2148

Keywords: stormwater, recharge mapping, water resources, groundwater, appropriation, Arizona, HB2116, Colorado River, litigation fund, water rights, Arizona water law, general fund appropriation, state budget, interstate water compact, Colorado River Compact, water litigation, A.R.S. 45-119, natural resources, water policy, river management

Transcript Highlights:

• The carbon intensity of electricity is included on page two of the bill report.
• also calculates a carbon intensity for the statewide average grid electricity.
• using a rate schedule or utility-specific carbon intensity.
• And they said, no, it's a carbon number. So I like the sports team analogy.
• New formulas are blending low-carbon cement into traditional...

Bills: SB6172, SB6246, SB5932

Keywords: Washington climate policy, greenhouse gas, GHG emissions, cap-and-invest, carbon market, emissions trading, allowances, covered entity, coal-fired power plant, coal plant, electric utility, electric generating facility, fossil fuels, natural gas, imported electricity, emissions leakage, air pollution, renewable energy transition, industrial emissions, railroad emissions

Summary: The Senate Environment, Energy & Technology Committee heard public testimony on three bills. SB 6246 would direct Ecology to recommend a long-term allowance allocation approach for emissions-intensive trade-exposed facilities under the Climate Commitment Act, require facility-specific emissions and decarbonization reporting, and condition future no-cost allowances on those submissions. Supporters said the bill preserves the CCA’s anti-leakage intent while improving accountability and planning for industrial decarbonization; opponents argued it adds burdens, may threaten competitiveness, and could worsen leakage or job losses. Ecology said it generally supports the bill’s approach but recommended streamlining duplicative reporting and noted the work would require significant agency resources. No vote was taken. SB 5932 would provide certainty for low-to-zero-carbon alternative jet fuel production by changing how electricity carbon intensity is calculated for SAF facilities under the Clean Fuels Program and by setting an earlier trigger date for SAF tax preferences, July 1, 2031, if the production threshold is not met first. The bill’s sponsor and industry witnesses from 12 and the City of Moses Lake said it would support investment in Washington’s first SAF facility and future expansion. Ecology and climate advocates opposed the Clean Fuels Program changes, saying they would weaken incentives for new renewable electricity and could increase pollution or create special treatment for one fuel, though Ecology said it had no position on the 2031 tax date. The committee heard extensive testimony but took no vote. SB 6172 would end remaining statutory preferences for a coal-fired generating plant after its scheduled closure date, including the cap-and-invest exemption, limits on additional state emission standards, and a sales tax exemption for coal used at the plant. The sponsor said the bill simply removes now-unneeded transition provisions and affirms Washington’s move away from coal. Environmental groups strongly supported the bill, while utility and business witnesses were generally neutral but raised concerns about possible allowance-market impacts and potential costs to ratepayers if the plant were ever called on in an emergency. The hearing closed without a vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• Wetlands are powerful carbon storage systems.

Bills: SB9

Keywords: wetlands protection, nontidal wetlands, Delaware, environmental sustainability, climate change, carbon sink, permitting process

Summary: The House Natural Resources and Energy Committee met and first considered SB 321 with Senate Amendment 1, the community solar utility billing bill. The sponsor explained that it would consolidate the two-bill system for community solar subscribers into one utility bill, with the utility forwarding the subscriber fee to the solar facility through an escrow mechanism so costs are not shifted to other ratepayers. Testimony from the solar industry, the Public Advocate, and environmental advocates supported the measure, emphasizing easier enrollment, fewer barriers for low-income customers, and guaranteed savings. The committee initially lacked enough members present to release the bill, but after a roll call vote it was released from committee. The committee then heard SB 9 with Senate Amendment 1, a wetlands protection bill creating a state non-tidal freshwater wetlands permitting program. The sponsor and DNREC described a framework of exemptions, general permits, and individual permits based on wetland type and value, with an advisory committee to develop regulations. Witnesses explained that “exceptional value” wetlands would include unique wetland communities and high-functioning wetlands, and that the bill was intended to preserve important habitat while allowing farming, drainage, and other exempt activities to continue. Some members raised concerns about flooding, land classification, and the balance of the advisory committee, while supporters said the bill was the product of broad stakeholder consensus and would protect wetlands without unduly harming agriculture or development. Public comment on SB 9 was strongly supportive from environmental groups, the Delaware Native Species Commission, the Home Builders Association, the Farm Bureau, The Nature Conservancy, and affordable housing advocates, who said the bill balanced conservation with practical land use concerns. After remote testimony, the committee took a roll call vote and SB 9 was released from committee. The meeting concluded with remarks thanking the chair for her service and instructions for members to sign the backers before adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Wetlands are powerful carbon storage systems.

Bills: SB9

Keywords: wetlands protection, nontidal wetlands, Delaware, environmental sustainability, climate change, carbon sink, permitting process

Summary: The House Natural Resources and Energy Committee met to consider two Senate bills. SB 321, with Senate Amendment 1, would change community solar billing so subscribers receive one consolidated utility bill instead of separate bills from the utility and the solar provider. Supporters said the bill would simplify enrollment and payment, improve customer retention—especially for low-income customers—and include safeguards such as guaranteed savings and an escrow mechanism to prevent cost shifts to other ratepayers. After public testimony from solar developers, the Public Advocate, the Sierra Club, and others, the committee initially lacked enough members present to release the bill, so the vote was circulated to absent members and the bill was later reported out for floor action. The committee then heard SB 9, with Senate Amendment 1, a long-negotiated wetlands protection bill. The sponsor and DNREC explained that it would create a state non-tidal wetlands program with exemptions for certain agricultural, conservation, and routine activities, general permits for some lower-impact projects, and individual permits for higher-value wetlands. Witnesses described the bill as a compromise among environmental, agricultural, development, and local government stakeholders, while some members raised questions about flooding, landowner impacts, wetland delineation, and the role of the regulatory advisory committee. Public testimony was broadly supportive from environmental groups, the Farm Bureau, builders, engineers, and affordable housing advocates. The committee then voted to release SB 9 from committee. At the end of the meeting, members offered thanks and remarks recognizing the chair’s service and leadership on environmental and energy issues. Both bills were ultimately released from committee and reported out.

Transcript Highlights:

• members, House Bill 2116 appropriates $1 million in the State Journal Fund for FY 27 to the Colorado River
• As you know, we've all been negotiating for the Colorado River Plan.
• There's only one district in this state that this does—Colorado River does not touch—and that's District

Bills: HB2003, HB2063, HB2111, HB2116, HB2210, HCM2007

Keywords: driver education, instruction permit, underage drivers, motorcycle licenses, traffic regulations, corrections oversight, appropriation, independent office, public safety, funding, driver license, examinations, motorcycle awareness, traffic laws, HB2116, Colorado River, litigation fund, water rights, Arizona water law, general fund appropriation

Transcript Highlights:

• That's why last year they essentially rescinded their carbon cash back, their version of carbon cash
• cash back uh their version their carbon cash back uh their version of<02:01:15.840><c> carbon</c><02
• But Canadian of carbon cash back.
• Finally, carbon cash back is based on an unproven theory that carbon taxes will reduce carbon emissions
• Finally, carbon cash back is based on an unproven theory that carbon taxes will reduce carbon emissions

Bills: HB1617

Keywords: carbon emissions, tax credit, fossil fuel, agriculture, food security, environmental tax, greenhouse gas, 910, house, all

Summary: The committees heard testimony on HB 1949, which would create a public dashboard for the green fee to improve transparency and accountability. Testimony from the Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission, the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development, and many community and conservation groups was generally supportive, with several speakers urging that the governor’s project recommendations remain largely intact and that community-driven projects continue to guide spending. One amendment was suggested to place the dashboard at the Department of Budget and Finance for fiscal expertise, while other testimony favored keeping it with the commission. Members asked about procurement, ETS involvement, recurring hosting costs, and whether the dashboard could be funded from green fee revenues; the commission said it could work with ETS and that green fee funds could reasonably be used. The committees then voted to pass HB 1949 with amendments. The committees also heard HB 2618, which would require the governor to submit a separate bill for amounts tied to any increase in the transient accommodations tax and, in later discussion, was expanded into a broader restructuring of future green fee allocations. Testimony from the Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission, Hawaii Reef and Ocean Coalition, and others supported the bill and emphasized the value of more predictable, dedicated funding for conservation and climate-related work. During decision-making, the chair described amendments creating several special funds under DLNR, including a watershed biodiversity and wildfire risk reduction fund, an aquatic resources conservation fund, a coastal restoration fund, a cesspool conversion revolving loan fund, and a green fee special fund for remaining revenues, with recommended amounts discussed for some of the funds. The committees voted to pass HB 2618 with amendments. The hearing then moved to HB 1644, a consumer protection measure for residential solar sales that would require compliance with consumer protection laws, licensing or contractor affiliation for sellers, and a standardized disclosure form. Testimony in support came from the Hawaii Green Infrastructure Authority, DCCA’s Office of Consumer Protection, Kauai Island Utility Cooperative, the Hawaii Solar Energy Association, and several solar companies and individuals. Supporters said the bill would address complaints about third-party sales practices and improve disclosure, especially around financing. The committee then began hearing HB 2243, which would require electric utilities to provide public, electronic customer bill impact analyses and annual reports to the Public Utilities Commission; the Division of Consumer Advocacy and the PUC offered comments supporting the measure’s intent.

Transcript Highlights:

• to establishing a green fertilizer incentive program to support the production and adoption of low-carbon
• I will first And adoption of low-carbon nitrogen fertilizer in Washington State.
• It is possible to reduce the carbon intensity of nitrogen-based fertilizer production by replacing natural
• fertilizer incentive grant program, the framework for it, to support adoption and production of low-carbon
• with Washington State climate goals, this bill promotes the use of fertilizers that have reduced carbon

Bills: SB5816, SB5971

Keywords: juice grapes, agriculture, commerce, state regulation, market access, green fertilizer, low-carbon, sustainability, incentive program, 904, all

Summary: The committee heard public testimony on Senate Bill 5816, which would add juice grapes to Washington’s Agricultural Marketing and Fair Practices Act so grape producers could form an accredited association to negotiate with processors. Staff explained the bill’s negotiation timelines and a modest fiscal note. Senator Torres said the measure was intended to help juice grape growers obtain fairer prices, and the sole testifier, a third-generation grower, described large price gaps between Washington and New York, limited buyer options, and little ability to negotiate before harvest. The public hearing closed with 47 people signed in pro and one con. The committee then heard Senate Bill 5971, which would create a green fertilizer incentive program for low-carbon nitrogen fertilizer production and use in Washington. Staff described the bill’s 80 percent emissions-reduction standard, rulemaking timeline, and fiscal note. Senator Benke and supporters from the Tri-Cities, Atlas Agro, NRDC, labor, ports, and agricultural groups argued the program could reduce greenhouse gas emissions, stabilize fertilizer supply and prices, support jobs, and help Washington compete for federal clean hydrogen tax credits. WSDA said the bill was implementable with consultation and that the Climate Commitment Act could be a funding source, while noting rulemaking costs. Testimony also included support from the League of Women Voters, the Washington State Potato Commission, and a potato farmer. The public hearing closed with 202 pro, 737 con, and one other comment. The work session focused on commercial shellfish fee increases adopted by the Department of Health. The department explained that fees had not been raised for many years, that general fund support had declined, and that the new structure is intended to move toward full cost recovery in phases, with the first year set at 50 percent of the increase and further rulemaking underway to examine impacts on small businesses. Shellfish growers and industry representatives strongly opposed the increases, saying the fee calculations were confusing, the increases were extreme for small farms and processors, and the department had not fully implemented recommendations from the Green Economics report, including possible efficiencies and shifting biotoxin testing costs to the state. Several testified that the new fees could force closures, consolidation, or reduced operations. Committee members questioned the size of the increases, the fee methodology, and whether the legislature had contributed to the problem by relying on general fund backfill in prior years.

Transcript Highlights:

• restored Santa Fe River in their lifetimes.
• I live on the Santa Fe River.
• I live on the Santa Fe River, and I'm also the president of Our Santa Fe River, Inc., which is a nonprofit
• The river supports not just the wildlife and the life of the river, but the community, and it's a world-class
• of my residency there on the river.

Bills: S0912, S1196, S1422, S1510, S7034

Keywords: battery collection, battery stewardship, environment, recycling, hazardous waste, waste management, regulation, environmental protection, facilities, hazardous materials, coral reefs, natural resource, climate change, coastal flooding, solar facilities, wastewater treatment, nutrient reduction, land conservation, water conservation, Florida Department of Environmental Protection

Summary: The Environment and Natural Resources Committee met with a quorum and took up several environmental bills and one appointment. SB 1422, as amended by a strike-all focused on coral reef protection and designating coral reefs as critical natural infrastructure, was reported favorably after support from Audubon Florida was noted. The committee then considered SPB 7034, a DEP rule ratification related to minimum flows and levels for the Lower Santa Fe and Ichetucknee Rivers and associated recovery strategy; witnesses from the Florida Springs Council and local river advocates criticized the plan as too delayed and too dependent on a single future water project, while committee members raised questions about funding and utility responsibility. Despite concerns, the committee approved the bill as a committee bill, with Senator Smith voting no. The committee next heard SB 1510, as amended, which made technical changes to DEP-related provisions including B-MAP notice and timing, septic system requirements in Florida Springs areas, biosolids, fees, land acquisition, and rulemaking procedures. The main public testimony came from the Florida Springs Council, which opposed the 60-day delay for B-MAP effectiveness as harmful to spring restoration, while DEP and others supported the measure. The bill was reported favorably. The committee also considered SB 1196, a targeted siting bill restricting new ash-producing incinerators or waste-to-energy facilities within two miles of large federally authorized water impoundment areas, with an amendment narrowing the practical effect to Miami-Dade and Broward counties. Supporters, including the City of Miramar, argued it would protect water resources and communities; opponents from the Florida Waste-to-Energy Coalition argued it would limit local waste-disposal options and could force more landfilling. The bill was reported favorably. Finally, the committee heard SB 912, the Safe Battery Collection and Recovery Act, which would require battery stewardship organizations and related recycling plans to keep batteries out of the waste stream. Industry and recycling representatives supported the bill, citing growing battery volumes and fire risks at recycling facilities. The committee also recommended confirmation of Gary Jennings to the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission. All measures were approved favorably except that Senator Smith voted against SPB 7034; the meeting then adjourned.

Bills: HF9

Keywords: energy policy, renewable energy standard, carbon-free standard, solar standard, hydroelectric, hydropower, electric utility, Public Utilities Commission, PUC, renewable portfolio standard, carbon capture and sequestration, CCS, greenhouse gas emissions, climate policy, nuclear power plant, certificate of need, fossil fuel plant demolition, utility compliance delay, beneficial electrification, sales tax exemption

Transcript Highlights:

• And so, and like I say, the Washburn project, because it's the intake that was built for the Red River

Bills: SB2015

Keywords: corrections, rehabilitation, prison budget, department of corrections, adult services, youth services, correctional facilities, Heart River correctional center, Missouri River correctional center, James River correctional center, minimum security facility, county jails, regional jails, deferred maintenance, capital construction, strategic investment and improvements fund, Bank of North Dakota, line of credit, tasers, body cameras

Summary: The Senate Appropriations Human Resources Division met with all members present and took up several bills, focusing most of the discussion on SB 1577 and SB 1619, along with a detailed review of the HHS budget bill draft. On SB 1577, Senator Magrum explained that the bill was being revised to focus on wastewater rather than raw water, possibly shifting the Washburn project to the Department of Water Resources so it could access matching funds, and potentially converting the bill into a line of credit if federal money is restored later. Members discussed whether to keep an emergency clause or instead use a date-based approach, and agreed the bill would likely be handled through the full committee and possibly reconsidered later. On SB 1619, Senator Davison said amendments were still being worked on, including changes requested by the Bank of North Dakota, and the committee planned to hold it for possible amendment before full committee consideration. The bulk of the meeting was a section-by-section review of the HHS appropriations bill draft. Members discussed one-time funding items such as technology projects, child care programs, housing programs, behavioral health facility grants, infant and toddler care provider support, juvenile justice diversion, medical housing, and other public health and human services projects. Several adjustments were noted, including reductions or changes to IMD-related funding, incarcerated-person treatment funding, the child welfare technology project, and the provider rate increase. The committee also discussed the FTE block grant structure at length, with staff explaining that the apparent increase in positions reflected budgeting mechanics, zero-dollar “phantom” positions, and positions approved previously but not counted in the FTE total. Members raised concerns about transparency and whether the bill should list FTE numbers, but staff said the block grant was intended to give the department flexibility while quarterly reporting would provide oversight. Other topics included Medicaid expansion funding and provider reimbursement rules, the move toward certifying human service centers as certified community behavioral health clinics, a moratorium on new ICF beds, and studies or reports on Medicaid, obesity, disability services, truancy, and behavioral health facility grants. The committee also discussed removing or revising broad intent language in Section 31 so the department would report findings rather than implement changes without further legislative action. No final votes were taken in the transcript; instead, members agreed to make a few technical adjustments, continue reviewing the bill, and likely revisit it the next day before moving it to conference committee.

Bills: SB2015

Keywords: corrections, rehabilitation, prison budget, department of corrections, adult services, youth services, correctional facilities, Heart River correctional center, Missouri River correctional center, James River correctional center, minimum security facility, county jails, regional jails, deferred maintenance, capital construction, strategic investment and improvements fund, Bank of North Dakota, line of credit, tasers, body cameras

Summary: The Senate Appropriations Human Resources Division met to finalize changes to the human services budget bill and related amendments. Members discussed several items, including a proposed $5 million appropriation for the Altru Hospital project to address inflationary costs, with the rest of the funding question left for conference committee. They also agreed to keep the 10-year operating requirement language for the project and remove a matching-funds provision that was no longer needed. The committee spent considerable time on the OASIS child welfare IT system. Donna Auckland explained that the project is still in the RFP stage, with vendor selection and contract negotiation likely taking months, and that the system will require 50-50 federal matching authority. Based on that testimony, the committee agreed to reduce the general fund amount from $14 million to $6 million and use a line of credit for the remaining authority, while preserving the federal match authority so the contract can be signed and the project can proceed. Members also approved a technical fix to add governor’s designee language for the Children’s Cabinet, which had been missed in another bill already on the governor’s desk. Keith reviewed updated long sheets showing additional budget adjustments, including provider inflation changes, a $50,000 Family Voices grant, reductions to CARES Act COVID funds, and moving the $5-per-day basic care rate increase from ongoing to one-time funding. No formal votes were recorded in the transcript, and the committee adjourned with plans to reconvene Monday if the final bill version was ready.

Bills: SB2015

Keywords: corrections, rehabilitation, prison budget, department of corrections, adult services, youth services, correctional facilities, Heart River correctional center, Missouri River correctional center, James River correctional center, minimum security facility, county jails, regional jails, deferred maintenance, capital construction, strategic investment and improvements fund, Bank of North Dakota, line of credit, tasers, body cameras

Summary: The committee first discussed a wastewater infrastructure bill, centered on whether state support should be provided as a grant or through the existing Clean Water State Revolving Fund as a low-interest loan program. Department of Environmental Quality official David Brushwine explained that the SRF already finances wastewater projects, can leverage federal funds with state bond proceeds, and could accommodate the Washburn, Lincoln, and Peasant projects if they are ready to proceed. Members noted that losing federal grant support would make projects harder for local residents to afford because costs would be recovered through utility rates or special assessments, but the projects would still be eligible for loans. Senator Magrum indicated he would likely concur with the budget after this discussion, and the bill was set aside for later consideration. The committee then turned to a proposed amendment for a four-plex housing project for people with disabilities or other special needs. Senator Mathern described Sections 7 and 8 as creating a design consultation appropriation and a revolving loan fund modeled on existing hospital and nursing home loan programs, while Section 9 would transfer $3.3 million from the state infrastructure fund. Members debated ownership, rent subsidies, repayment terms, and whether the state should finance the project directly or leave it to a private developer with Department of Human Services oversight. Concerns were raised that the state should not own the housing and that the proposal needed more work to be workable, but the committee ultimately reached consensus to adopt Sections 7 and 8 and leave out Section 9 for further conference committee discussion. The committee also reviewed provider inflation and long-term care rate issues, with members discussing whether to support a 2% and 1.5% inflation adjustment and how to handle the $5-per-day basic care rate. Staff explained that the $5 payment was already in the base budget, but members debated whether it should remain ongoing or be treated as one-time funding and paired with a study of rate rebasing. The committee agreed to have draft language prepared to remove the $5 from the base budget and add study language, then moved the bill forward for drafting.

Bills: SB2015

Keywords: corrections, rehabilitation, prison budget, department of corrections, adult services, youth services, correctional facilities, Heart River correctional center, Missouri River correctional center, James River correctional center, minimum security facility, county jails, regional jails, deferred maintenance, capital construction, strategic investment and improvements fund, Bank of North Dakota, line of credit, tasers, body cameras

Summary: The committee met to review revised long sheets and section-by-section language for a human services/health budget bill, with much of the discussion focused on how to present block grant funding and full-time equivalent (FTE) positions for behavioral health clinics and CCBHCs. Members debated whether to keep FTE counts in the budget at all, ultimately leaning toward removing or zeroing out the FTE references while keeping the dollar authority, and reducing the salaries-and-wages block grant by about $4.75 million. They also discussed public health federal authority, agreeing to remove about $60 million in unused federal spending authority tied to COVID-era funds, and clarified that if federal money later becomes available it could be requested through the Emergency Commission. A major topic was the provider inflation increase. The House version had 2% and 2%, while members debated alternatives and appeared to settle, at least for further work, on 2% in the first year and 1.5% in the second year, with staff asked to recalculate the fiscal impact. The committee also reviewed FMAP changes, noting a revised 2027 FMAP estimate and its effect on general fund and other funds, and discussed whether to adjust public health and other line items accordingly. Several members emphasized that many of these numbers are still tentative and will be refined before final action. The committee also touched on several policy items and capital-related provisions, including behavioral health services, Medicaid expansion, the moratorium on new ICF beds, and a proposed amendment for a medical homes/fourplex-related item that would show a $400,000 legislative investment with repayment from a developer. There was extended discussion of the All True hospital/facility proposal, with some members favoring leaving it in with a smaller initial commitment and others preferring to remove it and revisit later in conference committee. The meeting ended with staff asked to continue updating the bill language and members instructed to review remaining sections before the next meeting; no final votes were taken in the portion provided.