Transcript Highlights:

• If we can make things easier because government can get tied up in a lot of regulatory action, and we
• If we can make things easier because government can get tied up in a lot of regulatory action, and we
• We're going to go ahead and open the public hearing on House Bill 2454, reducing regulatory burdens on

Bills: HB2104, HB2348, HB2454

Keywords: aviation, wildland fires, funding, disaster relief, emergency response, timber sales, land sales, process efficiency, legislation, department language, regulatory burdens, small producers, infrastructure materials, economic growth, manufacturing, 904, all

Summary: The House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee held public hearings on three bills. HB 2104 would remove the sunset on the Aviation Assurance Funding Program, making permanent DNR’s ability to provide aerial wildfire response resources to local fire departments during initial attack. The prime sponsor, Rep. Tom Dent, and DNR testified that the program helps small rural departments request aircraft quickly, keeps fires small, reduces costs compared with state mobilization, and protects lives and property. DNR said the program supported 41 incidents in the last fire year, with about 160 flight hours and nearly a million gallons of retardant or water delivered; witnesses from local fire districts strongly supported the bill. The sign-in record showed 215 pro and 1 con, and the public hearing was closed. HB 2348, an agency-request bill from DNR, would streamline timber and land sale procedures by allowing more notice and advertising online instead of in print, letting DNR designate alternate sale locations, allowing re-offer of no-bid sales through individual and statewide lists, and clarifying appraisal and fair-market-value standards for certain land transfers. DNR said the bill would improve efficiency and save staff time and money, and the American Forest Resource Council and Washington Forest Protection Association supported it as a modernization and efficiency measure. Committee members asked about the scope of the bill and the meaning of “trust” lands, and DNR clarified it would not apply to all timber assets. The sign-in record showed 43 pro and 1 con, and the hearing was closed. HB 2454 would raise the threshold for when mineral extraction activity is considered a surface mine from more than three acres of disturbed area to more than seven acres, reducing the number of small gravel and aggregate operations subject to DNR surface mine reclamation permits. Rep. Andrew Engell said the bill would help small rural producers facing high permit costs and competition from larger corporations, while still leaving county regulation and other requirements in place. DNR opposed the bill, saying acreage alone does not determine site complexity and that the current permitting process helps evaluate environmental impacts, slope stability, groundwater, and reclamation plans; the agency said the bill could create adverse impacts and offered to discuss alternatives. A remote witness from a small aggregate business supported the bill as a way to help small sources remain competitive, and committee members discussed possible alternative approaches and asked DNR for follow-up on HEAL Act considerations. The sign-in record showed 143 pro and 3 con, and the committee adjourned after the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Both of these paths will ensure that residential customers and other business customers are not burdened
• So in our environment, we have a roughly a two-year regulatory proceeding that takes place when we file
• Probably a deeper conversation than I can share with you in my regulatory and rate role, but would be
• Chairman Wilmeth, Representative Cooper, the regulatory construct today would support that.
• If they were disconnected from the grid and self-supplied their energy, there wouldn't be a regulatory

Bills: HB2133, HB2592

Keywords: sexual material, consent, synthetic depiction, privacy, internet regulation, rights protection, artificial intelligence, government regulation, innovation, procurement, administrative burdens, 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• these tools to augment what they're doing today and give them something to be able to lower their burden
• Is there an opportunity to be able to lower the burden of work that's being done by that job opening?
• Utilizing existing staff and resources versus creating whole new regulatory bodies.
• And that's why locking in a regulatory regime and saying, here's how we're going to do this.
• It encourages modernization without creating new burdens for families or businesses.

Bills: HB2452, HB2592

Keywords: comprehensive plans, county governance, data centers, zoning, state regulations, land use, energy production, infrastructure, environmental impact, artificial intelligence, government regulation, innovation, procurement, administrative burdens, 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• In Yakima County, there was a nitrate concern with private dairies who then had to implement regulatory
• receive no-cost allowances for the majority of their greenhouse gas emissions to mitigate the cost burden
• To avoid this outcome, legislators allocated no-cost allowances to utilities to mitigate the cost burden
• Proven tools that lower energy burden over time. At its core, this bill is about fairness.
• In our region, data centers are not a burden on the grid. They are actually a stabilizing force.

Bills: HB2515, HB2343, HB2301, HB2272, HB2367

Keywords: energy facilities, large energy use, regulation, state oversight, infrastructure, water quality, game farms, public health, environmental protection, regulatory oversight, extended producer responsibility, paint waste management, environmental regulations, sustainability, recycling, ski areas, winter sports, terminology update, recreation, regulatory changes

Summary: The committee hearing covered three bills before moving into executive session later in the day. HB 2343 would require the Department of Fish and Wildlife to obtain water discharge permit coverage for publicly operated game farms, or an individual permit if needed, and to treat game farms with at least 5,000 birds as large CAFOs. Supporters, including Centralia officials, county public health staff, and residents, said the bill is needed because nitrate contamination from the WDFW pheasant farm has affected private wells and public health. WDFW testified that it had already voluntarily secured the permit the bill would require and said it would continue working with Ecology and local partners. HB 2301 would expand Washington’s paint stewardship program to cover additional paint-related products, including thinners, removers, additives, aerosols, and certain non-industrial coatings. The sponsor and industry supporters said the bill builds on a successful recycling program that already diverts large amounts of paint from landfills and could reduce costs for local hazardous waste systems. County and local solid waste officials generally supported the expansion but asked for clearer treatment of packaging, convenience standards, and compensation. Ecology supported the concept but raised implementation concerns, including the need for broader standards, reporting, and more time for rulemaking. A wood preservers group opposed including wood preservatives in the bill. HB 2515, in proposed substitute form, would regulate “emerging large energy use facilities,” mainly data centers and virtual currency mining facilities at 20 megawatts or more. The bill would require utilities to adopt tariffs or policies to ensure these facilities pay full costs, participate in demand response, and avoid shifting costs to other customers; it would also require reporting on energy and water use, set clean energy targets, create a new annual fee, and limit no-cost cap-and-invest allowances for utilities serving these facilities. Supporters said the bill protects ratepayers, improves transparency, and helps Washington meet climate goals. Opponents from utilities, business groups, ports, and labor warned it could raise costs, reduce competitiveness, create prescriptive rules, and threaten jobs and investment, while some public agencies and environmental groups supported the bill with requests for technical changes. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Bills: HB2272

Keywords: ski areas, winter sports, terminology update, recreation, regulatory changes, 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It is about creating a stable and predictable regulatory environment. that allows legitimate enterprises
• Today's regulatory framework for digital assets is insufficient, in my opinion.
• Perhaps most critically, this uncertain regulatory environment has left consumers and users of digital
• We need to create a regulatory framework that encourages responsible development of this technology,
• But it's equally important we avoid regulatory arbitrage.

Keywords: Digital Assets, Bitcoin, Stablecoins, Legislation, Bipartisan, Consumer Protection, Regulatory Framework, Financial Innovation, Testimony

Summary: The inaugural meeting of the Digital Assets Subcommittee brought a wave of excitement and anticipation regarding the future of digital assets, including Bitcoin and stablecoins. Chair Lummis expressed gratitude towards Senator Scott for establishing the subcommittee, indicating a commitment to promote responsible innovation while safeguarding consumers. Members discussed the necessity for a bipartisan legislative framework to regulate digital asset markets effectively while outlining the potential benefits such legislation could have on enhancing financial inclusion and streamlining payments. The meeting featured expert testimonies from key figures in the digital asset industry, highlighting the importance of creating clear regulatory guidance for digital assets to foster innovation without compromising consumer protections.

Transcript Highlights:

• This delay is called regulatory lag.
• This bill addresses regulatory lag by permitting the natural gas utility to defer costs in a regulatory
• Act and regulatory lag.
• regulatory lag in large measure.
• Regulatory certainty matters, and because this problem developed.

Bills: HB2766, HB2891, HB3334, HB3791, HB3911, HB4021, HB4041, HB4042, HB4384, HB4426

Keywords: inactive wells, oil and gas regulation, environmental protection, Railroad Commission of Texas, well plugging, Railroad Commission, penalties, violations, pipeline safety, civil penalties, criminal penalties, wildfire prevention, oil and gas, safety inspections, administrative penalties, excavation, notification, utilities, underground facilities, regulatory compliance

Transcript Highlights:

• on streamlining regulations and reducing unnecessary administrative burden.
• And so those opportunities exist in our regulatory code today.
• So this is going to be or hire a lawyer or go hire a regulatory expert.
• The Texas Regulatory Efficiency Office very closely resembles the Virginia Office of Regulatory Management
• burden that's on the state. local and national level.

Bills: HB10, HB 12, HB675, HB10, HB12

Keywords: regulatory reform, government efficiency, administrative law, rulemaking, agency deference, judicial review, de novo review, Texas Government Code, Administrative Procedure Act, state agencies, plain language, regulatory burden, regulatory reduction, cost-benefit analysis, fiscal note, public benefits and costs, contested case, rule challenge, Texas Regulatory Efficiency Office, advisory panel

Transcript Highlights:

• The tax would impose costly burdens on all...
• The county in which the burden transpired.
• That would be a burden for that person. Yeah, that's what we called a fee.
• Um, you know, we have a lot of these migrant burdens on these communities.
• So, it's going to put a burden on migrant workers in this state.

Bills: HB297

Keywords: cash transactions, money transmission, regulatory compliance, criminal penalties, Alabama Securities Commission, 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Would this extra work put a burden on the work that you're already trying to do?
• public, I am in opposition to this bill for the testimony you heard this morning, speaking of the burden
• that it's creating on our local food... ...you heard this morning, speaking of the burden that it's
• So I think we're just shifting burdens when the food banks... ...get a better life, and I think we're
• to prevent duplicative regulatory activities.

Bills: SB1017, SB1149, SB1162, SB1192, SB1249, SB1253, SB1331, SB1333, SB1334

Keywords: informed consent, surgical procedures, healthcare professionals, patient rights, regulatory compliance, child welfare, dependency hearings, foster care, court procedures, parental rights, healthcare compliance, behavioral health technicians, licensing, monitoring, administrative burdens, basic first aid, good samaritan, medical licensing exemption, Arizona medical board, A.R.S. 32-1421

Transcript Highlights:

• your way to target people you see as illegal or who think are illegal, you're not only putting the burden
• It only adds bureaucracy, burdens hospitals, and undermines trust between patients and providers.
• As you know, under our new leadership, our principal goal is to reduce administrative burdens on providers
• trying to accomplish, to ensure the department is not sending licensees to enforcement for low-level regulatory
• whether use of audiovisual technology is appropriate, the court must consider the inconvenience to or burden

Bills: SB1051, SB1114, SB1115, SB1122, SB1132, SB1162, SB1169, SB1171, SB1172, SB1173, SB1174, SB1175, SB1179, SB1188, SB1233, SB1236, SB1242, SB1316, SB1368

Keywords: SB1051, Arizona hospitals, immigration status, patient intake, admission forms, registration forms, health care reporting, uncompensated care, emergency department, lawfully present, undocumented immigrants, noncitizen patients, hospital funding, Arizona Department of Health Services, ADHS, border security, health care institutions, patient privacy, medical access, immigration policy

Transcript Highlights:

• Are they able to do this without too much burden, or will we need to look at another FTE?

Bills: HB3281, HB3320

Keywords: administrative procedures, guidance documents, transparency, public inspection, rulemaking, sunset laws, statutory entities, regulatory compliance, emergency provisions, board re-creation

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 3320, which would eliminate sunsets across agencies, boards, and commissions subject to the law. Representative Osborne presented the bill, there were no questions or debate, and the committee voted 11-0 to pass it forward. Next, House Bill 3281 was heard. Representative Hall said the bill would require guidance documents created or relied upon by state agencies to be published publicly. In response to questions, he explained that the bill is intended to increase transparency without banning guidance documents, and that publication would occur either on the Secretary of State’s website for agencies under the Administrative Procedures Act or on the agency’s own website for exempt agencies. Members also asked about possible staffing or workload impacts, but no specific estimate was provided. The committee discussed a recent example of an agency relying on an internal policy document that was not public. The bill then received a motion, second, and passed 12-0. After the bills, the chair gave instructions on reviewing a large batch of agency rules and packets under the Raines Act process. Members were asked to return their reviews promptly, ideally by Thursday, and to evaluate each rule for statutory authority, compliance with process, fiscal analysis, and methodology. The chair explained the preferred response format and said disapproval could be full or partial depending on the issue identified.

Transcript Highlights:

• That exemption has led to significant disparities in pricing and created regulatory uncertainty, a major
• As stated in Texas Utility Code 54.204(d), the regulatory commission decides these disputes when they
• They don't have rulemaking necessarily or ample regulatory power like the PUC, I imagine that.
• And so it's the type of regulatory issues that they have the expertise. and experience to review.
• Um, you're a regulatory lawyer; you value predictability.

Bills: HB3445, HB3448

Keywords: telecommunications, electric cooperative, rights-of-way, infrastructure, provider access, right-of-way, pole attachment, regulatory access, 1184, house, all

Bills: HB 10, HB 12, HB 147, HB 1522, HB 422, HB 675, HB 204, HB 748, HB 912

Keywords: regulatory reform, government efficiency, administrative law, rulemaking, agency deference, judicial review, de novo review, Texas Government Code, Administrative Procedure Act, state agencies, plain language, regulatory burden, regulatory reduction, cost-benefit analysis, fiscal note, public benefits and costs, contested case, rule challenge, Texas Regulatory Efficiency Office, advisory panel

Transcript Highlights:

• So, is this proposed new government regulatory office in Texas?
• If we have this new government regulatory office, would we need them anymore?
• It says that they're going to create a manual, a regulatory economic analyst manual.
• As an example, in Virginia they also created a similar office, the Office of Regulatory Management.
• This new Government Regulatory Office makes a recommendation... Can you speak up a little bit?

Bills: HB10, HB 12, HB147, HB1522, HB422, HB675, HB204, HB748, HB912

Keywords: regulatory reform, government efficiency, administrative law, rulemaking, agency deference, judicial review, de novo review, Texas Government Code, Administrative Procedure Act, state agencies, plain language, regulatory burden, regulatory reduction, cost-benefit analysis, fiscal note, public benefits and costs, contested case, rule challenge, Texas Regulatory Efficiency Office, advisory panel

Transcript Highlights:

• Shouldn't we be talking more about burden of proof?
• So, I guess I would really much prefer to have this bill talk about burden of proof in an appeal.
• Who has the burden to go forward with the evidence and who has the burden to persuade the court as to
• has the burden to go forward with the has the burden to go forward with the evidence<00:14:14.240><c>
• </c><00:14:15.360><c> to</c> evidence and who has the burden to evidence and who has the burden to persuade

Bills: HB0066, HJ0005, HB0010

Keywords: administrative law, judicial review, agency deference, Chevron deference, de novo review, state agencies, regulatory interpretation, statutory interpretation, separation of powers, individual liberty, administrative procedure, agency action, Wyoming Supreme Court, district court review, oil and gas inspector, regulatory challenge, anti-deference, law enforcement, memorial, Patrolman Rosa

Bills: HCR206

Keywords: data centers, electric utilities, Hawaii State Energy Office, renewable energy, environmental impact, regulatory safeguards, ratepayers, grid reliability, 912, senate, all

Summary: The Committee on Energy and Intergovernmental Affairs met in Room 016 for a scheduled decision-making session, but the chair announced that quorum was not present. As a result, no testimony was taken and no action was taken on the agenda items: HCR 43, HCR 154, HCR 165, and HCR 202 HD2. Because of the lack of quorum, decision-making on all listed measures was deferred. The chair announced the committee would reconvene on Tuesday, April 21, 2026, at 2:00 p.m. in Room 225.

Bills: HCR206

Keywords: data centers, electric utilities, Hawaii State Energy Office, renewable energy, environmental impact, regulatory safeguards, ratepayers, grid reliability, 912, senate, all

Summary: The committees met on several concurrent resolutions focused on energy, agriculture, water, and food security. Testimony on HCR 206 HD1 concerned the Hawaii State Energy Office and data centers, with comments submitted by the PUC, the Energy Office, and others; the measure was recommended for passage without amendment, though one committee deferred formal action until a later meeting because of quorum issues. HCR 31, recognizing 2026 as the International Year of Rangelands and Pastoralists in Hawaii, received strong support from the Hawaii Cattlemen’s Council, which emphasized managed grazing, groundwater infiltration, and food production; it was recommended and adopted as passed unamended. HCR 33, on the Pua Kōloa sewage project, was amended to add UH Hilo as a stakeholder and resource for research, monitoring, and technical assistance, then recommended for passage with amendments. The committees also heard and advanced a series of resolutions on environmental and land-use issues. HCR 36 establishing a sister-state relationship with Okayama, HCR 19 designating March as March for Water Month, HCR 162 creating an arts and data mapping task force, HCR 61 on reforestation investment, HCR 106 endorsing Waikiki as a world surfing reserve, and HCR 178 urging a Maui water set-aside were all recommended for passage as is and adopted. HCR 14, authorizing a perpetual non-exclusive easement for drainage purposes, was recommended for passage with technical, non-substantive amendments. HCR 179, addressing the Aha Moku Advisory Committee, was amended to create a working group with legislative, Aha Moku, DLNR, and OHA representation to report back for the 2027 session, and was recommended for passage with amendments. In the agriculture and environment hearing, HCR 117 on statewide food security drew testimony from a high school student and others stressing Hawaii’s vulnerability to supply disruptions and the need for local food resilience; it was passed as is. HCR 103, supporting expanded tree canopy and shade trees to reduce urban heat islands, also passed as is after a member noted storm damage concerns and suggested careful plant selection. HCR 180, urging the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity to explore co-locating renewable energy projects with agricultural reservoirs and irrigation infrastructure, received strong support from Molokai Clean Energy Hui and others describing the Kalaupapa Reservoir floating solar project and its community planning process; it was passed as is. HCR 144 HD2, calling for a comprehensive statewide food security strategy, was also recommended and adopted without amendment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Districts operate on a voluntary basis with their local communities, with no regulatory or taxing authority

Bills: HB2201, HB2154

Keywords: urban growth, city planning, county regulations, development standards, land use, land ownership, conservation districts, property rights, regulatory authority, environmental policy, 904, all

Summary: The Local Government Committee first held a work session on the Washington Zoning Atlas. Commerce staff explained that the atlas is a statewide, web-based zoning map built from local zoning codes with help from university planning students. It lets users compare zoning across jurisdictions, query where uses like residential, industrial, commercial, multifamily, or agriculture are allowed, and link back to local development codes. Members asked about using the atlas as a “single source of truth,” layering it with other state data such as transportation or public works projects, update frequency, and whether environmental sensitivity data could be added in the future. Commerce said the atlas is not a parcel-specific buildability tool, is being updated on an ongoing basis, and needs additional funding because the planned update source is not in the governor’s budget. The committee then heard House Bill 2201, which would require counties to align planning and development regulations within urban growth areas with the city’s regulations unless the city agrees otherwise or another law requires a different standard. The sponsor and several city representatives said mismatched county and city rules can undermine annexation planning, infrastructure investment, and long-term development coordination. Cities from Vancouver, Pasco, Ferndale, and Lynnwood described “donut holes,” infrastructure misalignment, and the need for better annexation pathways. The Association of Washington Cities and planning groups said the issue is real and merits more policy work, but the bill needs refinement. Counties, the Washington State Association of Counties, and other opponents said the bill is too broad, does not account for existing interlocal agreements, would add workload without funding, and fails to require timely annexation by cities. The sponsor said the bill needs more work and invited continued discussion. No vote was taken. The committee also heard House Bill 2154, which would prohibit conservation districts from buying or acquiring interests in agricultural land 20 acres or larger that is actively used for farming and would require districts to inventory certain land holdings. The sponsor argued that taxpayer-funded district purchases can drive up farmland prices and reduce opportunities for private farmers to expand. Conservation district representatives, the Washington Association of Conservation Districts, the Puget Sound Partnership, and several local districts opposed the bill, saying conservation districts use voluntary tools such as purchases, easements, leases, and donations to keep land in agricultural production, support beginning farmers, and preserve farmland from development. They said many district-owned parcels are donated rather than purchased, often leased back to farmers, and used for education, demonstration, and conservation. Testifiers emphasized that farmland conversion to development is the larger threat and that the bill would remove an important preservation tool. The hearing closed without action on the bill.

Bills: HB297, HB587

Keywords: cash transactions, money transmission, regulatory compliance, criminal penalties, Alabama Securities Commission, information technology, auditors, financial institutions, cybersecurity, certifications, state regulations, 1136, house, all