Transcript Highlights:

• This is just pay the fine, is that correct? Mr.
• Chairman and Representative Shepherd, this is just about paying the fees.
• Is this just about paying the fee or paying the fines? Representative Sauter. Mr.
• They don't pay their traffic... People don't insure their vehicle.
• I can pay their ticket. I guarantee you, law enforcement's hoping that does not happen.

Summary: The committee heard House Bill 927 from Representative Mark Sauter, who described it as a public safety measure aimed at addressing unpaid traffic infractions and improving accountability on Idaho roads. He said the bill responds to a growing backlog of unpaid traffic fines, estimated at about $23 million across roughly 125,000 cases, and would reinstate driver’s license suspension for unpaid traffic infractions after a notice period and implementation delay. He emphasized that the bill includes protections such as payment plans, limited driving privileges for work and medical emergencies, and a carve-out for non-traffic matters like parking violations. Committee members asked about reciprocity with other states, probation and collection practices, and whether the bill would apply to parking tickets or other non-traffic fees. Sauter said the bill is limited to Idaho’s own traffic infractions and does not address out-of-state reciprocity. Matthew Condi of AAA testified in support, saying the bill balances mercy with accountability and supports public safety by encouraging payment of fines while preserving essential driving privileges. He also noted the bill would help Idaho do its part under interstate compact obligations. Representative Nicholson moved to send House Bill 927 to the floor with a do-pass recommendation. After brief discussion and comments from members, including support for stronger enforcement of traffic laws, the committee voted unanimously to advance the bill. The motion carried and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• In Missouri, we don't force people into one way of paying.
• I know people who go in and pay cash for stuff like that all the time.
• This is going to be the fee if you want to pay with a credit card.
• Obviously, we have pay at the pump.
• Louis to pay for your parking.

Summary: The committee heard House Bill 3256, sponsored by Rep. Lisa Dernel, which would require businesses to accept U.S. cash and prohibit cashless-only establishments, with exceptions such as unattended fuel pumps, card security deposits, and businesses that convert cash to a no-fee prepaid card for on-site use. Dernel argued the bill protects seniors, veterans, children, and unbanked or underbanked consumers who may be excluded by cashless policies, and said cash is legal tender and important for privacy and access. She also said she would remove an outdated subsection referencing banks or credit unions. Members raised concerns about whether the bill improperly limits business discretion, whether cashless policies can improve safety and reduce costs, and whether the bill’s definitions were too broad or unclear. Questions focused on what counts as a “retail establishment,” whether the bill would apply to schools, doctors, apps, and event venues, and who would be liable for violations. One member noted possible conflict with existing Missouri law on legal tender and suggested the bill may need clearer definitions and revisions. Testimony was mixed. The Missouri Petroleum and Convenience Association supported the bill, saying cashless trends and credit card fees hurt gas stations and convenience stores, though they asked for practical exceptions. The Missouri Chamber of Commerce and Industry opposed the bill, arguing businesses should decide their own payment policies, especially for safety and operational reasons, and objected to the proposed Class D misdemeanor penalty, which they said is harsher than penalties in other states. Additional witnesses from consumer and advocacy groups spoke in favor, emphasizing consumer choice and the continued need for cash. No final vote was taken in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• You pay for all those things.
• a small fee, but the state is paying that enrollment.
• And again, I know we pay significantly for those programs.
• So parents do pay for those things.
• They are paying their tax dollars, and they're paying to participate in these programs.

Keywords: 989, all

Summary: The House Revenue and Taxation Committee heard House Bill 934, the Idaho Parenthood Choice Tax Credit clarification bill, presented by Rep. Jason Monks and Sen. Lori Den Hartog. Monks said the bill was not intended to expand the school choice tax credit passed last year, but to clarify disputed administrative issues, including age eligibility, tutoring for academic instruction, purchases from multiple vendors for homeschool materials, one-time advance payments, use of the state refund account, and whether students participating in non-academic activities or IDLA courses remain eligible. Den Hartog explained the IDLA language was meant to ensure the state does not pay twice for the same student and to address questions that arose during the recent application period. Rep. Raymond questioned why the non-academic activity/IDLA language was included in a technical corrections bill rather than handled separately, and Idaho School Boards Association deputy director Quinn Perry testified in opposition to that provision. Perry argued that allowing tax-credit recipients to participate in public school extracurriculars and athletics without generating ADA for districts would amount to double dipping and could increase costs for schools. In response, Monks said the language reflected the original intent and that parents already pay substantial fees for extracurricular participation, while also noting the tax credit can produce net savings to the state. After debate, Rep. Ehlers and Rep. Shirts spoke in favor of the bill as a needed clarification, while Rep. Birch objected that the bill did not reduce the $50 million tax credit cap in line with cuts to public school funding. The committee voted to send House Bill 934 to the floor with a due pass recommendation; the motion passed on voice vote with several members requesting to be recorded as voting no.

Transcript Highlights:

• I don't pay my deductible. I mean, that's the way it should work.
• You agree to pay him $1,000.
• But my responsibility was to pay them back if I got it. Correct.
• Why wouldn't we just direct them to pay the entire sum and direct me to pay it back to the insurance
• So now I'm not, I don't have the ability to pay... Okay.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• When we go to pay a $126 annual fee.
• Um, is it to say we're paying our fair share or we feel like as EV owners we're paying more than our
• Don't have to do that no more, but sales tax we pay, property tax we pay.
• Don't have to do that no more, but sales tax we pay, property tax we pay.
• Uh, and you property tax we pay.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Budget Review Subcommittee on Transportation met with a quorum, approved the June 3, 2026 minutes, and then heard a presentation from Mike Proctor of Evolve Kentucky on electric vehicles and charging infrastructure. Proctor described Evolve Kentucky as a nonprofit formed in 2016 to promote EV adoption and charger deployment, said the group has helped place more than 135 chargers at 65 locations, and reported that Kentucky EV registrations have grown rapidly but still represent about 1% of the state’s roughly 3 million vehicles. He also outlined the group’s view that EV drivers and charger operators already contribute to state revenue through annual vehicle fees, charger taxes, utility taxes, and related business taxes, and cited figures showing rising revenue collections as EV adoption increases. A major theme of the presentation was that EV owners are paying their “fair share” rather than being overcharged. Proctor said the current $126 annual EV fee is roughly comparable to the fuel tax a typical gasoline vehicle would pay, and noted that public charging can add additional tax burdens for drivers who cannot charge at home, such as those living in apartments or condos. He also argued that EVs provide broader benefits, including lower noise and air pollution, grid-stabilizing nighttime charging, tourism spending at destination chargers, and reduced road wear for passenger EVs compared with much heavier vehicles. Members questioned Proctor about whether EV owners are paying more than their fair share, how the fee compares with gasoline taxes, and whether apartment and condo residents are disproportionately affected because they rely on public chargers. Proctor responded that the fee was intended to bring EV owners into parity with gas vehicles, not to overcharge them, and said some public chargers are free while others are used by drivers who cannot charge at home. No additional votes or formal actions were taken beyond the minutes approval.

Transcript Highlights:

• If that gets eroded easily, in my case my tenant stopped paying, so I had to pay that mortgage and pay
• Okay, so they escrow everything so that they can pay your taxes, so that they can pay your insurance.
• Okay, so they escrow everything so that they can pay your taxes, so that they can pay your insurance.
• Then I could pay a car rent, a record for RAF. So I can't pay that rent.
• Those are clients that don't pay rent. Those housing units are clients that don't pay rent.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Municipalities and Regional Government held a long public hearing focused mainly on two sets of issues: proposals to amend or repeal the MBTA Communities Act, and bills to allow local rent stabilization. Committee chairs opened by explaining the hearing would be tightly managed because of the very large number of speakers, with testimony limited to two minutes per person and written testimony still accepted by email. Members and witnesses were called in a mix of in-person and virtual order throughout the hearing. On the MBTA Communities Act, several legislators and local officials argued the law is too rigid and should be revised to account for local conditions. Speakers from small, rural, or infrastructure-limited communities such as Hanson, Halifax, Marshfield, Winthrop, Dracut, Carver, Rehoboth, and others said the law’s one-size-fits-all approach does not fit towns with limited water, sewer, transit access, or buildable land. Some filed bills would repeal the law, exempt certain communities, or create appeals processes based on infrastructure, environmental, or historical constraints. Supporters of the law’s changes emphasized local control and the need to avoid forcing development where communities believe it is impractical or inconsistent with town character. A large portion of the hearing was devoted to rent stabilization legislation, especially S. 1447 and related House bills. Supporters included legislators, city councilors, tenant advocates, labor leaders, housing nonprofits, public health organizations, and residents who described sharp rent increases, displacement, homelessness risk, and the strain on working families, seniors, students, and people with disabilities. They argued local-option rent stabilization would let municipalities cap excessive increases and prevent no-fault evictions while preserving flexibility for local conditions. Opponents, including small landlords and property owners, said rent control would discourage investment, worsen housing quality, burden responsible owners, and drive small landlords out of the market. Some witnesses also supported a Cape Cod/Island transfer fee bill and a suburban infrastructure fund, arguing those would provide local revenue for housing or roads. No votes or formal committee actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• And we pay, or the Senate pays, $86,000 to be a member of that.
• the health and welfare pay for it, or did the legislative services pay for it?
• the health and welfare pay for it, or did the legislative services pay for it?
• the health and welfare pay for it, or did the legislative services pay for it?
• into and they have to pay into because this organization... ...organization that every state pays into

Keywords: 989, all

Summary: The House State Affairs Committee first approved a motion to hold RS 3355 at the sponsor’s request, then took up House Bill 598, which would require candidates to maintain separate campaign bank accounts and certify to the Secretary of State when they loan themselves money and deposit it into those accounts. Representative McCann said the bill was aimed at transparency and that the Secretary of State’s office was neutral. After brief questions, the committee voted to send HB 598 to the floor with a do-pass recommendation. The committee then introduced RS 33374, which would clarify legislative residency requirements by requiring actual physical presence in a district for 120 days before filing, rather than relying only on voter registration. The sponsor said the measure was intended to better establish intent and residency, and members discussed how residency challenges would be handled through the Secretary of State. The committee voted to introduce the RS. Next, the committee introduced two RSs from Representative Vanderrata: one to streamline telephone service discontinuance by aligning state approval with federal FCC action, and another to broaden the definition of broadband to include satellite and wireless service. It also introduced RS 33270, which would prohibit logos, models, or slogans in the executive budget document except for the state seal and governor’s official logo. The committee then considered RS 33295, a broad proposal to prohibit state funds from being used for memberships, dues, and fees for many organizations, with exemptions for legal requirements, licensing, testing, and law-enforcement information sharing; members raised concerns about breadth, possible effects on agency training and interstate standards groups, and the lack of a penalty provision, and the RS was returned to sponsor for lack of a motion. Finally, the committee introduced and sent to second reading RS 33302, a resolution encouraging Idahoans to observe March 1, 2026, as a day of fasting and prayer for the state’s needs, and passed House Bill 501, which requires paid signature gatherers on certain petitions to wear badges identifying who is paying them. The chair announced that Monday’s agenda would include rules review for the Public Utilities Commission and State Police.

Transcript Highlights:

• Families have been able to close bank accounts, pay bills, pay mortuaries, pay everything they need to
• pay, and do what they needed to do.
• As a food truck business owner, we already have to pay Arizona state taxes, then pay each incorporated
• They will collect what you didn’t pay. You said they can’t go after you if you don’t pay.
• You get money now, you pay a fee, you pay it back later. That's a loan.

Bills: HB2118, HB2181, HB2308, HB2309, HB2402, HB2476, HB2682, HB2698, HB2875, HB2877, HB2903, HB2910

Keywords: mobile food vendors, licensure, food safety, statewide regulations, health standards, zoning, temporary vendors, HB2181, death certificate, death certificates, vital records, funeral establishment, funeral home, human remains, medical certification of death, death registration, state registrar, local registrar, county medical examiner, alternate medical examiner

Transcript Highlights:

• I still had a mortgage to pay. And there is no way.
• Don't pay your electric bill.
• I pay federal taxes on my campaign staff.
• There's plenty of jobs out there that will pay more.
• There's plenty of jobs out there that will pay more.

Summary: The committee first took up HB 455, a local bill for the City of Lake Wales that would allow open containers in a downtown arts district. The sponsor said the city had invested heavily in the area and wanted to support business growth. An amendment clarified that the allowance was intended for cups, not bottles taken from restaurants, and the bill was then adopted favorably without opposition. Members then heard HB 1049 on building permit requirements, which would remove permits for certain work under $7,500 and for battery or backup power systems, while also preempting local governments from adding extra permitting rules. Two amendments were adopted: one clarifying modular homes on RV lots, and another addressing contractor “splitting” of projects to avoid the threshold and requiring five years of record retention. County and local-government groups raised concerns about inspections and permitting, while several business and advocacy groups supported the bill. It passed favorably. HB 1175, dealing with safety design standards for office surgery suites, was presented as a measure directing the Florida Building Commission and State Fire Marshal to establish new standards to improve safety and efficiency. There was no amendment or public testimony, and it passed favorably. The committee then spent extensive time on HB 221, which would let workers waive the state minimum wage for certain work-based learning, internship, or pre-apprenticeship positions for up to nine months, later narrowed by amendment to 252 days, or 126 days for minors with parental consent, and defining the program as structured learning. Supporters framed it as a way to expand apprenticeships and help small businesses offer training opportunities; opponents argued it would create free or subminimum labor, invite abuse and coercion, and raise constitutional concerns. Despite strong opposition testimony from labor, civil rights, and policy groups, the bill passed favorably after debate. The committee also heard HB 4035, a Palm Beach County local bill requiring applicants for a certificate of competency to pass the licensing exam before applying to the Construction Industry Licensing Board. The sponsor said it would streamline and modernize the process, and members discussed it briefly in support. The transcript ends before the final action on that bill is fully shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• They pay 2.1%.
• They pay 2.1%.
• So you owe everything that you would pay at 7.5% of your gross receipts. that you would pay at 7.5% of
• pay taxes as written in the tax code?
• I barely make enough money for basic needs, to eat, and pay my bills.

Summary: The committee held its first meeting and heard four bills. HB 2286 would create an alternative route to social worker licensure by removing the exam requirement for advanced social workers and allowing enhanced supervision with supervisor attestation in place of the exam for independent clinical social workers. The sponsor and several social workers testified that the exam is a poor measure of clinical competence and can be a barrier to licensure, while opponents warned that removing the exam could affect public protection and Washington’s participation in the social work compact. Members asked follow-up questions about the compact, the exam format, and accreditation requirements, but no action was taken. HB 2363 would allow music therapy license applicants to practice under supervision for up to six months while waiting for exam verification. The sponsor described it as a technical fix to the new licensure system, and testimony from music therapists, educators, and a patient supported the bill as a way to avoid delays in hiring newly trained therapists while maintaining supervision and patient safety. The bill drew strong support in written testimony and no opposition in the hearing. HB 2324 would change tuition waiver rules for children of eligible veterans and National Guard members by giving eligible children eight years from the date of a parent’s disability determination to use the waiver when that determination occurs after the child turns 18. The sponsor said the bill is meant to align state law with federal dependency education benefits and prevent families from losing access because disability determinations can take years. The committee asked for clarification on how the new timing would work, and the hearing closed without a vote. HB 2098 would eliminate the cap on the advanced computing surcharge, expand Washington College Grant eligibility up to 100% of state median family income, and reduce resident undergraduate tuition by 10% for three years starting in 2027-28. Supporters, including students, labor, and advocacy groups, said the bill would improve affordability and access to higher education by asking large tech companies to pay more. Opponents from business and university groups argued the surcharge would be economically harmful, that the state already has substantial WEA funding, and that the bill would reduce tuition revenue without adequately backfilling institutional budgets. The committee heard extensive testimony and members raised questions about the surcharge cap, WEA spending, and the compacted funding structure, but no final action was taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• So rather than pay a have to file.
• </c> would have proposed, they don't pay would have proposed, they don't pay anything<00:16:38.320><c
• </c> only 1,500 bucks for the time you pay only 1,500 bucks for the time you pay for<00:16:47.199><c>
• filing fee and and what you pay amount filing fee and and what you pay in<00:16:50.560><c> the</c><00
• </c> have been paying into group two. have been paying into group two.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The committee first adopted amendment 2026-2021S to correct a drafting issue in the budget language so that the $2.5 million appropriation for Medicaid per diem rate stabilization at county nursing homes can be spent during the biennium rather than lapsing at the end of the fiscal year. Senator Lang explained that the funds are matched with federal dollars for a total of $5 million and are intended to prevent rate reductions that could shift costs to county property taxpayers. The amendment was adopted unanimously by both chambers, and the committee proceeded on the bill as amended by the Senate. The main discussion then focused on HB 155 and a proposed amendment to the business enterprise tax. The House proposal would lower the BET rate in stages when combined business tax revenues exceed certain thresholds, while the Senate opposed an immediate rate reduction and argued that tax changes should be handled in a budget year. Senators emphasized that raising the filing threshold to $375,000 had already removed about 3,500 small businesses from filing requirements, and they preferred further relief through threshold changes rather than rate cuts. House members argued that the trigger-based reduction was a reasonable, tested mechanism and would provide future tax relief without taking effect unless revenues rose enough. Members debated whether the trigger could be distorted by one-time revenue spikes, such as the recent tax amnesty receipts and prior federal repatriation-related revenue, and Representative Sweeney said he was willing to adjust the effective date or carve out amnesty revenue. The committee did not reach agreement on the BET reduction, and the chair called a break and then continued the meeting later with a new proposal to delay the trigger’s effective date to January 1, 2028. Senator Lang rejected that version but offered a counterproposal to raise the filing threshold to $400,000, and the parties ultimately agreed to continue discussions and reconvene later. The meeting also took up HB 1102, concerning the research and development tax credit and state park fees. The House position was to support the R&D tax credit but remove the park-fee provisions, citing testimony from the Department of Natural and Cultural Resources that it did not need the increase and concerns about discouraging tourism, especially at border parks. Supporters of the park-fee language argued that the department had not raised rates in years, could set its own rates, and should be able to charge nonresidents more while keeping New Hampshire residents’ fees lower. The discussion remained unresolved, with members debating the likely effect on tourism and fairness to residents versus the need for additional revenue.

Transcript Highlights:

• I don't pay my deductible. I mean, that's the way it should work.
• party's insurance pays, and a lawsuit persists in the future.
• You're on the side of the road, you agree to pay him $1,000.
• Why wouldn’t we just direct them to pay the entire sum and direct me to pay it back to the insurance
• So now I’m not, I don’t have the ability to pay—” “Okay.

Summary: The Insurance Committee first established a quorum and then went into executive session, where it voted House Bill 1615 and House Bill 2071 “do pass” with 11 ayes and no opposition on each bill, with one member present on the roll call. After returning to public session, the committee opened a hearing on House Bill 1647, sponsored by Representative Overcast, which was described as a fairness measure intended to prevent double recovery when insurance payments have already satisfied part of a claim. The sponsor and supporters said the bill was aimed at property damage claims and intercompany arbitration between insurers, though several members questioned whether the bill’s language was actually limited to property damage or instead reached broader collateral source issues and evidence rules. Committee members, especially Representatives Butts, Zimmerman, and Castile, pressed the sponsor on how the bill would work in practice, whether it would reduce a plaintiff’s recovery or instead affect insurer subrogation rights, and why arbitration was being addressed in an evidentiary statute. Supporters from the Missouri Insurance Coalition and other industry groups said the bill would clarify offset rules, preserve voluntary insurer-to-insurer arbitration, and prevent inconsistent court treatment of prior payments. Opponents, including attorney Blake Heath, argued the bill was drafted too broadly, did not stay confined to property damage, and was placed in the wrong statutory section because these issues are usually handled through insurer subrogation rather than in a lawsuit by the injured party. Additional support came from the Missouri State Medical Association, Associated Industries of Missouri, and the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies, though some supporters also acknowledged the bill might need narrowing if the intent was property damage only. No vote was taken on House Bill 1647 during the hearing, and the committee adjourned after testimony concluded.

Transcript Highlights:

• We knew that something had to be done. pay as you go benefit. Dollars in, pay as you go benefit.
• They were already paying 3/4%. trust. They were already paying 3/4%.
• So Medicare agrees to pay for certain things, about 96% of certain costs Medicare will pay for.
• </c><00:48:50.480><c> more</c> they could pay and they could pay more they could pay and they could pay
• </c> we'll pay that full amount, the $1,15. we'll pay that full amount, the $1,15.

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00:35 Attendance Roll Call: 00:00:55 Approval of Minutes: 00:02:56 Deferred Compensation Authority Update: 00:03:12 Retiree Health Update - TRS: 00:15:58 Retiree Health Update - KPPA: 00:56:13 Adjournment: 01:20:33, 958, all

Summary: The Public Pension Oversight Board received updates from the Kentucky Public Employees Deferred Compensation Authority and the Teachers Retirement System. Chris Biddle reported that deferred compensation assets had grown to about $4.787 billion with roughly 88,000 participants, crediting auto-enrollment, targeted marketing around pay raises, and retiree-focused services. He said the board’s self-directed brokerage account, authorized by last year’s legislation, is being designed around a $40,000 account-balance threshold with up to 25% transferable into the brokerage window, tentatively for July 1 of the coming year. He also described the free financial planning program, which has been used by about 3,300 to 3,500 participants with an 87% return rate, and noted that the plan is currently in a fee holiday; members asked about the fee structure and whether the CFP service is provided through Nationwide, which Biddle confirmed. Board members praised the deferred compensation program’s growth and asked for the legislation referenced by Biddle. He said the plan’s annual fees are capped, with a $1 monthly fee plus other charges up to a $225 cap, for a maximum of $237 per year absent a managed account. He also said the program is seeking unified payroll access to expand participation, especially among teachers, and that prior lineup changes saved about $6 million annually in participant fees. Bo Barnes of TRS then addressed retired teachers’ health insurance, first clarifying a prior question about declining federal contributions to the retirement annuity trust. He explained that federally funded school positions generated contributions that rose from $72 million in 2019 to $109 million in 2022, then fell to $85 million this year, with a projection of $80 million over the next three years; if those dollars do not come from federal sources, they would have to be replaced through the SEEK formula. Barnes then reviewed TRS health coverage, explaining that the statutory contract guarantees access to group coverage but not fixed premium levels, and that TRS administers two retiree plans: KEHP for retirees under 65 or otherwise not Medicare-eligible, and MEHP for retirees 65 and older or Medicare-eligible. Barnes said TRS completed RFPs for the 2026 plan year, retaining Express Scripts for prescription drugs and switching the Medicare Advantage medical provider from UnitedHealthcare to Humana, while keeping plan design, provider access, out-of-pocket costs, and benefits materially unchanged. He noted a modest hearing-aid improvement of $500 per ear beginning in 2026. He also reported that the TRS Board approved the maximum state contribution for KEHP at $1,044.96, up from $930.76, an 18% increase that he said would require about $15 million to $16 million more annually, while the MEHP premium would drop from $210 to $200 per month because of the new contract. Using the 2024 valuation, he said the KEHP increase would slightly reduce the health trust funded ratio from 80.4% to 80.1% and raise unfunded liability from $4.036 billion to $4.051 billion. Barnes closed by reviewing the 2010 shared-responsibility reforms that shifted retiree health costs away from a pay-as-you-go model, including phased employee and district contributions and Commonwealth stabilization funding. No votes were taken beyond approval of the minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• If we could get people in other states to help pay for electricity, pay those taxes, that's a positive
• </c> taxes they pay. taxes they pay.
• </c><01:36:11.840><c> That's</c> pays tax on that production. That's pays tax on that production.
• </c> for three years then it starts to pay for three years then it starts to pay the<02:42:07.840><c>
• We'd have to have some to pay it."

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And then 30 days later, oh, bad faith, you failed to pay properly.
• month and not have to pay out at the end of the day.
• I want you to pay this $100,000.
• That's what the insurance company agreed to pay.
• You know, they have to pay for their own security.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Pay raise is an average of 3%.
• That's just the pay raise amount.
• We used $14 million from an account to pay for... $14 million from an account to pay for that so the
• We went back up $9 million for the pay raises.
• For every dollar increase in the base, the employer would pay 80% of that, and the employee would pay

Keywords: 994, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I had no problem with the pay raise.
• And so I think the pay raise—I have no problem with the pay raise—but moving to the future in terms of
• paying for it because we don't go back.
• And so Dow pays an hourly wage, we pay study time, and we pay on-the-job training.
• Study time and we pay on-the-job training.

Bills: HB12, HB42, HB205, HB222, HB324, HB325, HB350, HB416, HB482, HB610, HB749, HB797, HB807, HB821, HB979, HB992, HB1193

Keywords: survivor benefits, law enforcement, reserve officer, auxiliary officer, public safety, phased retirement, Teachers Retirement System, faculty retention, administrative fees, public postsecondary education, Medicaid, dental coverage, healthcare access, medical necessity, Louisiana Department of Health, judicial salaries, judges, judiciary compensation, cost of living adjustment, COLA

Transcript Highlights:

• Does that owner then pay its due diligence?
• How we're going from one group pays for everything to another group pays for everything.
• They're not paying a fee. We as users are paying those fees when we pay our bills.
• because we're paying too less.
• I had to pay tuition, right? So not only did I not get paid, but I had to pay tuition.

Summary: The committee first took up HB 703 on utility relocation, as amended by a strike-all. The sponsor said the bill would require government authorities that order communication service providers to move infrastructure to pay the relocation costs, clarify expedited timelines, and align the House bill with the Senate version. Supporters argued the communication services tax should help cover these costs, while cities and counties warned the bill would shift major unfunded costs to local governments and taxpayers, especially in fiscally constrained counties. After public testimony from local government and industry representatives and debate over fairness, coordination, and the tax’s intended use, the committee adopted the strike-all and then passed the bill favorably on a roll call vote. The committee then heard and passed CS/HB 379, a securities package updating Chapter 517. The bill and conforming amendment made several technical and policy changes, including expanding certain exemptions, updating foreign jurisdiction and exchange considerations, revising merger-and-acquisition broker rules, aligning fingerprinting requirements with FBI standards, and adding protections related to financial exploitation of specified adults. Industry and Office of Financial Regulation witnesses supported the measure, and the committee adopted the amendment and reported the bill favorably without opposition. Next, the committee passed CS/HB 867 establishing the Coastal Link Commuter Rail Service Act to create a legal framework for commuter rail operations along Florida’s coastal corridor and to help Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach counties secure insurance and indemnification for service on the Florida East Coast Railway right-of-way. The Florida Chamber supported the bill, and it was reported favorably without debate. The committee also passed CS/HB 1161, which revises Florida’s deepfake law to require covered platforms to remove altered sexual depictions and copies upon request by the victim; the bill drew emotional testimony from a student victim and broad support from members, and a severability amendment was adopted before the bill passed unanimously. The committee then passed CS/HB 453 on pool and spa contractors, which updates Chapter 489 terminology and scope-of-practice rules and, through amendment, limits certain equipment to commercially available products. Finally, the committee passed HB 955 requiring all private employers to use E-Verify for new hires, removing the small-employer exemption. Supporters framed it as workforce integrity and rule-of-law legislation, while opponents warned about labor shortages, burdens on small businesses, and impacts on immigrant workers. After debate, the bill passed 19-3. The committee then began hearing CS/HB 541 on minimum wage requirements, which would allow voluntary waivers of minimum wage for certain internships, pre-apprenticeships, and on-the-job training; the sponsor presented an amendment limiting the duration and clarifying minor waivers, and the committee heard both support from small business groups and opposition from labor, immigrant, and worker advocates before the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• They're paying the fuel tax.
• They don't have to pay any taxes anymore. to pay taxes.
• you're asking to pay again.
• They didn't have to pay any of that tax. Everybody else had to pay the tax. Thank you, Mr.
• They didn't have to pay any of that tax. Everybody else had to pay the tax.

Bills: HB214, HB217, HB514, HB593, HB618, HB732, HB908, HB961, HB1010

Keywords: property tax, blighted properties, urban rehabilitation, tax exemption, local government, financial incentives, blighted property, derelict property, property tax exemption, local redevelopment plans, rehabilitation standards, ad valorem tax, community development, senior citizens, homestead exemption, Louisiana Constitution, motor vehicles, local fees, transaction fees, funding

Transcript Highlights:

• If they don't stay, is there a penalty for them to pay us back?
• Those operators must pay the costs.
• Medicaid enrollees do not currently pay premiums.
• is that a private pay, someone who's paying privately for their insurance, is getting between 10 and
• It ups my insurance so that I can pay... ...get a surtax.

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 7, the Apprenticeship Assistance Act, which would keep apprenticeship trust fund distributions at $2.5 million rather than reducing them and remove a reference to the tobacco settlement permanent fund. Labor, construction, business, and environmental groups testified in support, emphasizing workforce development, retention of workers in New Mexico, and expansion of apprenticeship opportunities. The bill was moved and adopted without opposition. Members then considered House Bill 66, as amended, to increase funding for health professional loan repayment and related workforce supports. The amendment struck an appropriation because the funding was already included in House Bill 2. Testimony from health care providers, chambers of commerce, social workers, and physical therapy advocates supported the bill as a way to address provider shortages and improve recruitment and retention. After questions about eligibility, repayment terms, and overlap with similar Senate bills, the committee voted to do pass the bill as amended. House Bill 96, creating a working group to study a possible New Mexico Space Commission, was also amended to strike an appropriation. Support came from the chamber, Virgin Galactic, and aerospace advocates, who said a commission could help coordinate economic development and workforce efforts in the space sector. Members asked about other states’ commissions, workforce pathways, and the working group’s timeline, and the sponsor agreed to add clearer dissolution language later. The committee then passed the bill as amended. The committee then took up House Bill 80, a committee substitute to redirect more of the oil and gas conservation tax to the reclamation fund for orphan well plugging and site remediation. Supporters from industry, environmental groups, tribal advocates, and chambers said the bill would better align the tax with its original purpose and provide stable funding for cleanup, while an opponent argued the bill shifts costs from industry to the public and should instead raise the tax or bonding requirements. After discussion of backlog, phase-in timing, and procurement reforms, the committee voted do pass. The committee also heard House Bill 4, as amended, which phases in a larger share of premium surtax revenue to the Health Care Affordability Fund over three years. Supporters said it would sustain BeWell enrollment and affordability programs, while opponents questioned the burden on private payers and the size of the general fund impact. The committee adopted the substitute and then passed it on a 10-7 vote. Finally, the committee approved House Bill 65, as amended, creating a Foster Care Plus pilot project for children in CYFD custody, with testimony both supporting the need for better services and cautioning that implementation should respect tribal law, cultural practices, and family reunification. The committee also tabled House Bill 68 at the sponsor’s request. The transcript then began discussion of House Bill 88, which would make minor changes to the land grant assistance fund, including capturing reverted payments that currently go back to the general fund.