Video & Transcript Research : 'fee phaseout'
Page 102 of 425
MN
Minnesota 2025 1st Special Session
Conference Committee on S.F. 1832 - Jobs and Labor Omnibus - 05/18/25
Transcript Highlights:
- This leadership agreement required the construction code licensing fees to be part of the bill, and so
- This item includes only the DLI fee increases that are not related to manufactured homes, and it does
- This item includes only the DLI fee increases that are not related to manufactured homes, and it does
- This item includes only the DLI fee increases that are not related to manufactured homes, and it does
- <00:12:59.320>
increases <00:13:00.000>that includes only the DLI fee increases that
TX
Texas 89th Regular
Trade, Workforce & Economic Development Apr 23rd, 2025
Trade, Workforce & Economic Development
Transcript Highlights:
- , nor does it require a recording fee in the county clerk's office to negate the fraudulent deed that
- They can actually initiate it on their own and avoid a lot of legal fees, hardship, and headaches.
- The prices are higher, the fees are hidden, and the tickets take forever.
- Eliminate hidden fees, and then also open up and offer more choice for customers.
- And then also, there are the fees on top of it.
Bills:
HB2226, HB2269, HB2343, HB2760, HB3621, HB4079, HB4204, HB4518, HB4531, HB4555, HB4850, HB4876, HB4903, HB4996, HB5122
Keywords:
construction trust funds, Property Code, Chapter 162, construction payments, mechanics lien, contractors, subcontractors, laborers, material suppliers, materialmen, real property improvement, assignment of payment rights, unpaid trust funds, trust fund beneficiaries, construction industry, payment protection, Texas construction law, property owners association, landscaping, grass maintenance
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- Pursuant to the statute, the fees collected by the two permits were to be split equally: half of the
- During the last biennium fiscal year 22-23, $6.08 million was generated from these permit fees.
- And does your bill address these fees, because this goes on in Harris County too?
- There's a $1.25 toll, and then there's a $50 fee. Right, it does not address the...
- It's their fault anyway, but if I had my way, I would strip their fee-making authority.
Bills:
HB1589, HB2208, HB2297, HB2560, HB2725, HB3080, HB4417, HB4473, HB4520, HB4662, HB4888, HB4905, HB4906
Keywords:
HB 1589, toll road, toll project, toll project entity, voter approval, local control, county election, commissioners court, Transportation Code, Chapter 372, road construction, highway funding, infrastructure, public referendum, ballot measure, transportation policy, Texas toll roads, regional mobility, toll collection, vehicle registration
FL
Florida 2025 Regular Session
March 4, 2025 - 04:00 PM
Transcript Highlights:
- So I'll start with the student fees.
- I believe you're referring to the distance learning fee one at FAU.
- the fee itself has to be attributable to the development and delivery of the course.
- fee—that that did exceed the amount.
- That can range from student fees to contracts to personnel.
Summary:
The Higher Education Budget Subcommittee met to hear a presentation from the Florida Auditor General’s office on recent operational audits of four universities and to discuss how audit findings are handled. The Auditor General explained that financial audits occur annually and operational audits at least every three years, with universities required to respond in writing to findings; the office generally follows up in the next audit cycle, though it can audit sooner if needed. Members asked about accountability, whether findings are referred to other bodies, and how internal university audit functions interact with the state audit process. The chair emphasized the committee’s oversight role in ensuring public funds are used appropriately.
The audit findings highlighted issues at New College of Florida, Florida A&M University, the University of Florida, and Florida Atlantic University. At New College, auditors cited invoice/payment errors, delinquent student account collection delays, prohibited extra compensation, exceeding state remuneration limits for certain employees, weak purchasing card controls, construction management cost documentation issues, and subcontractor licensing documentation gaps. At FAMU, auditors found investment accounting classification issues, delayed bank reconciliations, late vendor payments, and incomplete annual employee evaluations. At UF, auditors reported concerns over a $6.4 million consulting contract, event and catering spending, president’s office hiring and salary practices, bonus and relocation payments, continued high compensation after the president transitioned to another role, travel expenses including charter flights, and remote work agreements. At FAU, auditors found distance learning fee revenue exceeded allowable costs by about $2.8 million, carry forward funds were underreported by about $77 million, and credit card controls needed improvement.
Members pressed the Auditor General on whether overpayments were refunded, whether any findings involved statutory violations, and what enforcement exists beyond the audit report. The auditor said some issues were corrected by the universities, such as New College recovering excess compensation from foundation funds, but others would be revisited in future audits; if potential fraud were identified, it would be referred to the state attorney’s office. The chair closed by noting that accountability for public spending rests with the Legislature and the committee, and the meeting adjourned without any vote or formal action beyond receiving the presentation.
WY
Transcript Highlights:
- HB 157 overrides that attorney fees.
- Without fee recovery, only is expensive.
- Um this bill provides for attorneys fees Um this bill provides for attorneys fees and<00:19:58.000
- Um I know you the attorney's fees.
- Firefighter unions are not fees.
Keywords:
education, cell phones, smart devices, school policy, student conduct, school property, rental fees, youth activities, education policy, Wyoming legislature, teacher licensure, teacher mobility, interstate compact, education compact, licensure reciprocity, reciprocal certification, teacher certification, professional teaching standards board, out-of-state teachers, military spouse
HI
Transcript Highlights:
- So, as I said, it’s simply placing a fee on fossil fuels.
- Last, as I mentioned, visitors pay the fee. They don’t receive anything.
- As I said, it’s simply placing a fee on fossil fuels.
- Last, as I mentioned, visitors pay the fee. They don’t receive anything.
- <01:43:31.440>
they I mentioned visitors pay the fee they I mentioned visitors pay the fee
MS
Mississippi 2026 Regular Session
MS Senate Floor - 5 March, 2026; 10:00 AM
Mississippi Senate Floor Meeting
Transcript Highlights:
- , charge those fees."
- > for interchange fee or processing fee for interchange fee or processing fee for credit<01:08:43.240
- or interchange fees. or interchange fees.
- they have those fees, charge those fees. they have those fees, charge those fees.
- there's been a fee appealed. there's been a fee appealed.
Summary:
The Senate convened with a quorum, opened with an invocation by Dr. Ryan Wade and the Pledge of Allegiance, and then handled routine business by dispensing with the reading of the journal and committee reports. Several guests were recognized, including Leadership Jackson County, Farm Bureau members, a doctor of the day, adult educators, and other visitors in the gallery. Senator Brumfield also announced support efforts for Senator Warren Barnett, asking members to contribute to him through Ms. Anita Jackson.
The chamber then considered a series of House bills, most of them taken up with strike-all amendments and passed by use of the morning roll call. Measures included HB 1390 on personal services funding allocations, HB 1571 on ARPA funds and unexpended balances, HB 1655 on the State Aid Road Construction director’s personnel status, HB 1650 on dormant state accounts and pooled investments, HB 1651 on state agencies using other agencies’ facilities and charging 50% of fair market value, HB 1345 on administrative forfeiture of illegal cigarette and vaping products, HB 1386 on allowing sidewalks as an eligible use of municipal infrastructure funds, HB 671 on alcoholic beverage delivery responsibility ending when retailers transfer possession to delivery services, and HB 1385 on eliminating paper-original homestead exemption submissions. Members asked questions on several bills, especially about whether the fairgrounds language in HB 1651 would affect youth livestock shows and whether HB 1386 or other measures would change county revenue; sponsors generally said the bills were intended to address state-agency use, municipal reporting, or administrative efficiency rather than alter those programs.
The Senate also advanced HB 898, creating a sales tax diversion study committee to review misallocated municipal sales tax revenues, assess impacts, examine technology and oversight, and recommend reforms by the 2027 session; Senator Hill questioned whether counties should be included, but the sponsor said that would be a separate policy decision. Later, the Senate reconsidered HB 1265, the Mississippi Debt Management Services Act extended repealer, adopted an amendment to remove the repealer instead of extending it, and then passed the bill. The body also took up SB 2632, the local governments disaster recovery emergency loan program, and voted not to concur and to invite conference. Finally, HB 1142 on bench warrant notices was called up; the sponsor explained a strike-all that would replace certified mail with personal service or electronic transmission and include a reverse repealer for further conference work.
MA
Massachusetts 2025-2026 Regular Session
Joint Committee on Cannabis Policy Jun 21st, 2026 at 10:30 am
Joint Committee on Cannabis Policy
Transcript Highlights:
- This bill would lower that license fee to $1,000 and waive it.
- High fees, outdated and unnecessary regulations continue to limit access.
- So beyond just the license fee, there are other fees that go into the agent registration process, including
- I want that grant money to be utilized towards building my business, not paying stupid fees.
- We deal with fees, background checks, trainings, reports.
Summary:
The Joint Committee on Cannabis Policy held its first hearing of the 194th session to take public testimony on 21 cannabis-related bills. Chairs Donahue and Gómez outlined hearing procedures and noted that written testimony would also be accepted. Much of the hearing focused on the Cannabis Control Commission (CCC), with Senator Mike Moore urging support for S. 90 to create an inspector general unit within the CCC. He argued the commission has suffered from dysfunction, workplace harassment allegations, delayed governance reforms, missed fee collections, and high legal costs, and said stronger legislative oversight is needed. Committee members largely agreed the CCC needs reform, though some expressed hope that new leadership would improve operations.
A major theme was market structure and business viability. Representative Tyler testified for H. 183 to raise adult-use purchase limits from one ounce to two ounces, saying the change would reduce confusion and help retailers compete with neighboring states. Senator Payano supported S. 100, which would require a study of cannabis supply and demand to guide cultivation licensing, warning that oversupply is driving down prices and threatening cultivators. The Massachusetts Cannabis Coalition, represented by Ryan Dominguez, backed a package of bills aimed at increasing revenue, reducing regulatory burdens, attracting investment, and stabilizing the market, including higher purchase limits, simpler badge and testing rules, and a phased increase in the retail license cap. Attorneys Kevin Conroy and Mike Ross also supported raising the cap, arguing that the industry lacks capital and that more investment and exit opportunities are needed for provisional and distressed licensees.
The most contentious issue was whether to raise the retail license cap from three to six. Supporters, including several business owners and industry advocates such as Peyton Shubrick, Tito Jackson, Armani White, Sean Burt, and others, said the current cap traps owners in declining businesses, prevents exits, and limits access to capital. They argued that many social equity and economic empowerment operators are struggling, that oversupply has pushed prices down, and that allowing more ownership could help businesses scale or sell. Opponents, including Senator Liz Miranda and several social equity operators, warned that lifting the cap now would let larger operators and multi-state companies dominate the market and harm equity-owned businesses. Miranda’s S. 88 would instead strengthen enforcement of ownership limits through audits, whistleblower protections, an anonymous tip line, and greater transparency. Another major topic was worker and consumer safety: Laura Bruno, Danny Carson, Al Vega, and others supported H. 194 after the death of Lorna McMurray, arguing for a CCC workplace and consumer safety department, better ventilation and PPE standards, stronger testing oversight, and retaliation protections for workers. The hearing ended without votes, with members thanking testifiers and indicating the committee would continue reviewing the bills.
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 2 on Resources, Environmental Protection and Energy Apr 16th, 2026
Transcript Highlights:
- So many of our Corps members go out and do these wonderful conservation projects and charge a fee for
- So every year we do an assessment of what our fees are, and we adjust accordingly.
- “Fee-for-service reimbursement.
- or a fee with a similar structure, where the primary recipients of fire prevention services...
- The other is reinstating the SRA fee to help cover these costs.
Summary:
The subcommittee heard overviews and budget proposals from the California Conservation Corps (CCC) and Cal Fire, with no votes taken and all items held open for a future hearing. On the CCC side, Director J.P. Patton highlighted the program’s 50th anniversary, its role in conservation, disaster response, and workforce development, and described proposals for the Greenwood Residential Center, a seven-day wildfire readiness schedule for Cal Fire hand crews, deferred maintenance, vehicle replacement, and Proposition 4 funding for local corps and tribal workforce projects. Members praised the program and asked about funding sources, recruitment, retention, follow-up with alumni, and the use of fee-for-service reimbursements; the LAO suggested the Legislature consider lower-cost alternatives for some proposals, including fewer new corps members or delaying Greenwood’s opening.
Discussion then focused on Cal Fire’s wildfire readiness and staffing. Cal Fire officials described the need to align CCC hand crews with Cal Fire’s year-round fire operations, noting staffing gaps in the current model and the decline in incarcerated hand crews, which they attributed to broader criminal justice reforms and eligibility changes. Members asked about the role of goats and other grazing animals in fuel reduction, and staff said grazing can help with prevention but cannot replace hand crews for suppression. Cal Fire also presented its department overview, emphasizing its expanded workforce, year-round operations, use of technology, partnerships with federal and local agencies, and concerns about federal reorganization and reimbursement for work on federal lands.
The committee also heard proposals to make defensible space inspections permanent and to increase fixed-wing pilot and mechanic contracts. Cal Fire said permanent staffing is needed to maintain roughly 250,000 annual defensible space inspections and meet AB 38 and future Zone Zero-related workload, while the LAO suggested possible modifications such as more GGRF support, a reinstated SRA fee, or one-time funding. On aviation, Cal Fire said year-round fire conditions and a larger, more complex fleet require more pilots and mechanics, and the LAO supported the proposal as addressing near-term health and safety needs. Members questioned contract costs, the value of owning versus contracting aircraft services, and how effective aircraft are in extreme wind conditions; Cal Fire said aircraft are highly effective in initial attack but limited when winds and fire behavior are severe. No actions were taken on any item.
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Assembly Select Committee on Regulatory Authority Nov 6th, 2025
Transcript Highlights:
- In some cases, depending on local water purveyor fees for mandatory residential fire sprinklers, that
- But when it pertains to affordable housing development, there's a fee per ton of contaminated soil.
- There is a fee per ton of contaminated soil if it meets the characteristics of hazardous waste.
- The fee itself is equitable across all fee payers.
- And that's something that we have been clarifying through fee workshops.
Summary:
The Assembly Select Committee on Regulatory Authority held its first hearing to examine how California’s regulatory framework affects housing production, affordability, and timelines. Chair Pacheco and Assemblymember Haney framed the discussion around the state’s housing shortage and the need to reduce costs while maintaining environmental, safety, and community protections. The first panel featured housing experts and industry representatives who argued that state regulations, code complexity, utility constraints, and agency review processes add substantial cost and delay to development. Bill Fulton described overlapping state and local land-use authorities and the tension among housing, coastal protection, climate, and wildfire goals. CBIA’s Chris Ochoa and California Apartment Association representative Bob Raymer said building codes, energy mandates, and agency processes have materially increased per-home costs, and they urged more centralized affordability analysis and greater scrutiny of regulatory impacts. The Bay Area Council’s Louis Marante called for a statewide cost target for housing and stronger timelines and accountability for state agency reviews.
The second panel brought in state agencies to explain their roles. HCD said its housing element enforcement, streamlining laws, and technical assistance have helped increase production, shorten entitlement timelines, and improve compliance by local governments. CARB said SB 375 is a planning law that does not directly regulate land use, and argued that regional housing assumptions in sustainable communities strategies are not being fully implemented on the ground. The Coastal Commission said it works with local governments to balance coastal protection, sea-level-rise risk, and housing, and noted recent guidance and pilot efforts to streamline housing approvals in the coastal zone. The Energy Commission said its building energy standards are designed to be cost-effective and save consumers money over time, though they can add some design and documentation complexity. Fish and Wildlife and DTSC both emphasized early engagement and collaboration to reduce delays while protecting natural resources and public health; DTSC said it is refining vapor intrusion guidance and using brownfield grants to support redevelopment.
The State Water Resources Control Board said it uses general orders and basin planning to provide predictable permitting while balancing water quality, water rights, and housing needs, and noted billions in grants and loans for water infrastructure and site remediation that can support housing affordability. In response to questions from Assemblymember Haney, several agencies described ongoing coordination across departments, including regular meetings among HCD, CARB, the Coastal Commission, and transportation agencies, as well as broader interagency efforts to reduce redundancies and identify pinch points in project delivery. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken during the hearing; the main outcome was informational testimony and discussion of possible future reforms to improve coordination, predictability, and affordability in state regulatory processes.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- Why are we, why are we imposing a fee and giving a grant?
- Department of Agriculture, and then the actual producer would also be paid. a fee.
- And the second fee was to incentivize the producer.
- , the fees in the bill or what their recommendations were.
- Can we, what is an acre fee?
Bills:
HB294
MN
Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session
Legislative Commission on Pensions and Retirement - 03/18/25
Minnesota Senate Floor Meeting
Transcript Highlights:
- , what does net of fees mean again?
- and taken the fees out.
- We're able to receive fees that are exceptionally low.
- public markets book our overall fee public markets book our overall fee structure<00:14:16.120><
- I want to point out again these are net of all investment management fees.
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 4 on Climate Crisis, Resources, Energy, and Transportation May 13th, 2026
Transcript Highlights:
- Chair, that you mentioned tying fees to inflation.
- The main fee, the registration fee, and the CHP fee, those are tied to inflation.
- Chair, that you mentioned tying fees to inflation.
- The main fee, the registration fee, and the C.G. as they noted earlier, the main fee, the registration
- fee, and the CHP fee, those are tied to inflation.
Summary:
The committee first heard a DMV budget presentation on the state-to-state verification system required for Real ID compliance and the Digital Experience Platform (DXP) modernization project. DMV officials said the state-to-state system is a pointer-based exchange used when a person applies for a license in another state, with only limited identifying data shared initially and the full driver history sent only after a qualified request. Members raised concerns about privacy, possible misuse by other states or federal actors, notification to Californians, hacking, and whether California could detect or stop abusive access. DMV said it can monitor requests, see patterns of access, work with AAMVA and legal counsel, and seek to block or challenge misuse; LAO said California is in a difficult position and should consider guardrails rather than opt out. On DXP, DMV said the project is on its revised schedule and budget, occupational licensing is complete, vehicle registration is expected by the end of calendar year 2026, and the full system should be finished by fiscal year 2028-29, with phased rollout and reappropriated funding to keep costs controlled.
The committee then heard from the California High-Speed Rail Office of Inspector General on a trailer bill and AB 1608. The Inspector General said current law does not clearly authorize public reports or establish a framework for retaining and disclosing work papers, and the proposed trailer bill would create that framework while also adding authority to hire needed classifications and purchase goods and services. He also said the office needs a clearer statutory definition of “proposed agreements” and notice when the High-Speed Rail Authority is reviewing them, so the office can review contracts and related agreements effectively. LAO raised no concerns with the trailer bill language, and Finance said any amendments would come in the May revision.
Members debated the scope of confidentiality in the Inspector General proposal, especially whether reports could be held confidential when they identify weaknesses in fraud controls, security, or other vulnerabilities. The Inspector General said confidentiality would be temporary, tied to articulating the risk, reassessing it every 120 days, and releasing the report once the risk is no longer substantial; he also said the office had already published reports at its discretion and had found at least one procurement violation involving an amendment that added services not in the original contract. Several members pressed for stronger transparency and suggested time limits or broader disclosure, while others argued the bill would improve oversight and make the Inspector General’s authority clearer. No votes were taken during the discussion, and the item was left for further work on the trailer bill and AB 1608 language.
NH
Transcript Highlights:
- this out of the fees that they collect.
- It establishes a new $120 fee.
- That bill, however, did not really state where that fee revenue goes.
- And that fee is what, $120 per parcel that they're talking about.
- And that fee is what, And that fee is what, $120<00:37:11.520>
per <00:37:11.839>parcel
TX
Texas 89th 2nd C.S.
S/C on Telecommunications & Broadband Mar 31st, 2025
S/C on Telecommunications & Broadband
Transcript Highlights:
- Some broadband providers report application fees up to $250 per pole.
- Fee that serve more as a barrier to entry than a meaningful administrative cost.
- taxpayers, ratepayers and rural Texans who are tired of seeing their broadband dollars drained by fees
- Their, their any study fees need to be, uh, recovered. All of that must take place.
- The increased pole rental fees by the time we pay all the legal to go with 5 different entities.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- Our fee store sells these products. to the producers at no tax on it at all.
- That local fee may not we may not need a full time employee to do that.
- I guess I had a question regarding the comptroller's administrative fee.
- What does it cost for you all to, I guess, administer that 2% fee?
- So therefore. you translate that to the fee.
Keywords:
sales tax, use tax, local tax, municipal tax, county tax, tax sourcing, place of business, principal business location, small business, retailer, marketplace seller, economic development agreement, Chapter 321, Chapter 323, Tax Code, Texas Comptroller, local sales and use tax, tax jurisdiction, order consummation, ship-to location
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- the ability of certain water districts in Hidalgo, Cameron, and Willacy County to impose excessive fees
- The region has, in some cases, used arbitrary fee schedules and overly strict construction requirements
- to extract fees from developers far beyond the actual cost.
- It prohibits water districts from imposing pipeline construction fees on developers greater than the
- Senate Bill 612, relating to the authority of certain conservation reclamation districts to impose fees
Bills:
HJR98, HJR99, HB29, HB136, HB142, HB166, HB353, HB1399, HB2000, SJR59, SCR19, SB128, SB261, SB317, SB383, SB393, SB397, SB466, SB517, SB571, SB612, SB705, SB715, SB731, SB748, SB801, SB867, SB913, SB945, SB946, SB986, SB1013, SB1071, SB1086, SB1087, SB1117, SB1181, SB1250, SB1263, SB1285, SB1444, SB1483, SB1528, SB1553, SB1556, SB1608, SB1723, SB1858, SB1946, SB1957, SB1986, SB1999, SB2043, SB2056, SB2082, SB2105, SB2133, SB2138, SB2177, SB2203, SB2221, SB2311, SB2334, SB2337, SB2340, SB2373, SB2417, SB2446, SB2452, SB2477, SB2532, SB2565, SB2587, SB2615, SB2622, SB2633, SB2637, SB2681, SB2713, SB2717, SB2781, SB2782, SB2835, SB2841, SB2857, SB2891, SB2943, SB2994, SB2995, SB3016, SB3047, SB3057, SB3059, SJR3, SB5, SB72, SB509, SB616, SB963, SB985, SB1143, SB1172, SB1267, SB1271, SB1273, SB1759, SB1786, SB2361, SB1025, SB1080, SB1245, SB1355, SB1422, SB1, SB260, SB1506, SB1637, HJR98, HJR99, HJR2, HJR1, HB1109, HB1392, HB22, HB3093, HB517, HB1130, HB142, HB1689, HB2018, HB136, HB2884, HB1393, HB2730, HB1399, HB1244, HB467, HB331, HB2559, HB29, HB26, HB166, HB353, HB2000, HB2756, HB3248, HB3513, HB3204, HB3135, HB3012, HB2763, HB2523, HB2457, HB2415, HB2198, HB2143, HB1708, HB1672, HB767, HB1327, HB2723, HB451, HB140, HB109, HB3096, HCR6, HCR12, HCR29, HCR50, HCR55, HCR56, HCR58, HCR70, HCR71, HCR74, HCR78, HCR80, HCR107, HCR116, HCR117, SJR36, SJR50, SJR63, SJR59, SCR12, SCR39, SCR48, SCR19, SB2023, SB1957, SB2615, SB2138, SB3016, SB1999, SB62, SB666, SB847, SB284, SB854, SB1073, SB810, SB1505, SB583, SB507, SB1434, SB1772, SB2016, SB1163, SB1122, SB731, SB397, SB508, SB1436, SB287, SB261, SB1882, SB393, SB1791, SB209, SB2429, SB511, SB2309, SB510, SB1085, SB1975, SB2717, SB1262, SB636, SB2056, SB884, SB517, SB1200, SB1845, SB2681, SB2458, SB801, SB3014, SB3013, SB758, SB1013, SB2797, SB2076, SB2876, SB715, SB1640, SB2538, SB1449, SB1181, SB1359, SB410, SB1234, SB2926, SB2972, SB2841, SB1856, SB1528, SB1373, SB672, SB2891, SB1854, SB317, SB2539, SB2532, SB1250, SB2082, SB2203, SB1285, SB1454, SB2520, SB1237, SB1586, SB2819, SB629, SB2342, SB2903, SB2477, SB3029, SB375, SB777, SB2367, SB2703, SB2608, SB2965, SB2521, SB2165, SB2501, SB2452, SB2835, SB1602, SB1704, SB1723, SB1858, SB1946, SB2009, SB2177, SB2460, SB2785, SB2373, SB867, SB1608, SB640, SB1698, SB383, SB705, SB748, SB1117, SB2340, SB2680, SB2994, SB2747, SB1950, SB913, SB1071, SB1086, SB1087, SB1483, SB1444, SB1553, SB1556, SB1703, SB2133, SB2297, SB2298, SB2622, SB2955, SB3059, SB2782, SB2781, SB2637, SB2633, SB2337, SB2334, SB1861, SB2043, SB1367, SB946, SB945, SB2857, SB128, SB571, SB1263, SB3058, SB612, SB2221, SB2587, SB2044, SB2363, SB2713, SB2311, SB1986, SB2565, SB2943, SB1888, SB2417, SB3048, SB3052, SB3053, SB3036, SB3057, SB3056, SB3043, SB3037, SB3050, SB3063, SB3047, SB3035, SB2446, SB466, SB2611, SB2794, SB2105, SB2017, SB1790, SB1778, SB1730, SB2995, SB2847, SB205, SB2619, SB1903, SB203, SB3061, SB1581, SB2600, SB2799, SB2790, SB2688, SB2515, SB1230, SB876, SB2522, SB2639, SB2137, SB2519, SB2403, SB2459, SB3051, SB2655, SB2251, SB2764, SB2878, SB1884, SB111, SB582, SB2617, SB1835, SB2751, SB2959, HB206, HB1238, HB1089, HB2890, HB9, HB2081, HB4215, HB2970, SB2063, SB1400, SB2058, SB2260, SB2928, SB1310
Keywords:
Article V, federal government, fiscal restraints, constitutional amendment, term limits, animal feed, tax exemption, ad valorem taxation, retail, water audit, water loss, water loss mitigation plan, municipally owned utility, municipal utility, water conservation, Texas Water Development Board, TCEQ, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, water leakage, leak detection
TX
Texas 89th 2nd C.S.
Delivery of Government Efficiency May 7th, 2025
Delivery of Government Efficiency
Transcript Highlights:
- The current fee for, uh, fee for service model within the code has led to fragmented billing and unpredictable
- To give more detail, the program ensures that a single payment covers all fees related to a surgical
- They're buying this bundle package and they're not going to be surprised with these big additional fees
- that they have to now pay a la carte separately anyway, right now, this bill is all those fees would
- You know, your, your pre-operation and your, your, uh, the pharmacy and anesthesiologist, doctor's fees
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- members, Senate Bill 1760 relates to guardianships for persons who are incapacitated, changing the fee
- Generally, the bill would set a fee of $45 for filing a guardianship case transferred from another county
- members, Senate Bill 1760 relates to guardianships for persons who are incapacitated, changing the fee
- Generally, the bill would set a fee of $45 for filing a guardianship case transferred from another county
- Property owners can often face expensive legal fees just to clear these fraudulent claims.
Keywords:
probate court, statutory judge, reimbursement, court costs, court proceedings, judicial assignments, judge assignment, cost reimbursement, judicial expenses, estate management, statutory requirement, court expenses, estates, inheritance, representative duties, court authority, personal representative, real property, deed fraud, title fraud
Summary:
The committee heard several probate, family law, judicial, property, and contract-related bills. Senate Bill 1335, relating to decedents’ estates, would remove outdated references to a clerk’s certificate, allow courts to remove personal representatives on their own motion with notice by qualified delivery method, and add independent administrators to provisions that referenced only independent executors; an estate-planning attorney testified in support, and the bill was left pending. Senate Bill 1760, concerning guardianship transfer fees and procedures, was described as setting a $45 filing fee for transferred guardianship cases and clarifying completion and dismissal procedures; it received no testimony and was left pending. Senate Bill 2127 would shorten the eligibility period for retired judges to serve as visiting judges from eight years to six, restrict practice in their assigned region for two years, and require conflict-related certification; it also was left pending without testimony. Senate Bill 302 would shift the cost of a traveling probate judge to the requesting estate or parties rather than the county; one witness registered in favor, no one testified, and the bill was left pending.
The committee then considered a committee substitute for Senate Bill 252, which would clarify the parental presumption in conservatorship cases, require non-parents seeking relief against a parent to file an affidavit showing significant impairment to the child if relief is denied, require courts to state specific findings when overcoming the presumption, confirm the clear-and-convincing standard, and clarify that agreed prior orders do not defeat the presumption. The substitute was explained as consensus language from a work group, public testimony was reopened, and the bill was left pending. Senate Bill 1734, on deed fraud, would create a streamlined ex parte process for property owners to have fraudulent deeds declared void, modeled on the fraudulent lien statute; county clerk and title association representatives testified that it would provide a low-cost self-help remedy for a growing problem, and the bill was left pending subject to the chair. Senate Bill 1975 would prevent Texas contractors from being forced to litigate disputes in foreign jurisdictions and require disputes to be handled in the county where the project is located; it was presented as a repeat of a previously vetoed bill and was left pending.
Finally, the committee took up a substitute for Senate Bill 1940, concerning transfer-on-death style beneficiary designations for manufactured homes. The substitute would allow one or more beneficiaries instead of only one, transfer the interest to surviving designated beneficiaries who survive by 120 hours, extend the application period for transfer to 365 days, void the designation if not timely filed, and require mailing by certified or registered mail with return receipt requested. The substitute was adopted without objection. The committee then recessed subject to the call of the chair.
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Assembly Banking and Finance Committee Mar 3rd, 2025
Banking and Finance
Transcript Highlights:
- According to the Department's last 2024 rules proposal, the anticipated application fee will be around
- And this does not include the investigative fees or the fee for the license itself.
- This application fee, along with all other associated licensure fees, is unusually high for this department
- In fact, it is four times higher than the next closest application fee.
- reference, even the largest financial institutions operating in the state pay only a $5,000 application fee