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

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <04:00:56.319> It<04:00:56.479> is fee. It's not really a tax. It is fee.
• uh a better fee. uh a better fee.
• from salt, you know, fees.
• We deal with taxation, fees.
• We deal with taxation fees. Committee. We deal with taxation fees.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• clarifies that if the five-business-day requirement is not met, the governing body cannot collect fees
• I want to thank the sponsor, Senator Ingolia, for changing the impact and change from the permit fee
• to the addressing fee.
• But then when you go down to line 59, it says the court may also award reasonable attorney fees to the
• so we capped impact fees at 12.5% per year over a four-year period. ...impact fees at 12.5% per year

Summary: The committee first heard SB 1134, which would extend the use of qualified private providers in the building permit process to residential solar energy systems and certain single-trade inspections, and would allow computer-based plan review tools. The sponsor said the bill is intended to reduce long solar permitting delays and lower costs. A late amendment clarifying the word “application” was adopted, and after some discussion about local permitting problems and the need to work with municipalities, CS/SB 1134 was reported favorably, with Senator Pizzo voting no. The committee then took up SB 784, dealing with issuance of addresses and parcel identification numbers for plats. The bill sets a 14-day timeframe, and an amendment was adopted that would allow use of a private provider if the deadline is missed and would limit fee collection if verification is not completed. Members discussed whether the bill should include more flexibility and whether private providers are appropriate for this function, but the committee ultimately reported CS/SB 784 favorably. SB 1738, allowing counties that previously opted out of transportation concurrency to opt back in while maintaining current levels of service, was also reported favorably without significant opposition. Next, SB 1080 on local government land regulation was presented as a measure to speed up development permit and order approvals, limit repeated information requests, prevent hearing delays, and impose penalties for noncompliance. Local government testimony argued it would rush planning and weaken public input, while supporters called it common-sense streamlining. After debate, the bill was reported favorably, with several no votes. SB 1260, which clarifies county constitutional officer budget procedures and creates an appeal process for clerks and supervisors of elections similar to that used by sheriffs, was also reported favorably after members raised concerns about county budget timelines. Finally, the committee considered SB 420, as amended by a strike-all, which would prohibit counties and municipalities from adopting or funding DEI-related ordinances, programs, or policies, while carving out compliance with state and federal law and defining DEI-related terms. The amendment removed retroactivity and delayed the effective date, but members from both parties raised concerns about vague definitions, impacts on women- and minority-owned business programs, local commemorations, and the loss of attorney’s fees for prevailing counties. Public testimony was sharply divided, with many speakers opposing the bill as an attack on local control and inclusion, and a few supporting it as a merit-based standard. The amendment was adopted, but the bill drew extensive opposition in debate and was not yet reported in the portion of the transcript provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• It also repeals the exemption for disabled veterans from the annual vehicle registration fee.
• In this situation, it's a reversal from a fee exemption to a motor vehicle weight exemption.
• In this situation, it's a reversal from a fee exemption to a motor vehicle weight exemption.
• Can we say, because could there be disabled veterans who don't need the fee waiver?
• I believe that's how it's set up through OVS for the current fee exemption.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Public Safety heard testimony on several bills. HB 628 HD1, relating to education, would reinstate a prior law allowing veterans whose high school education was interrupted by wartime to receive a diploma. Testimony was generally supportive from the Office of Veterans Services, the Department of Education, the Hawaii Military Affairs Council, and an individual testifier, with one person in opposition. The committee later recommended passage of HB 628 HD1 as is, and the motion was adopted. The committee also heard HB 1158 HD1 and HB 1159 HD1, both relating to commercial harbors. HB 1158 HD1 concerns firefighting at commercial harbors and drew support from the Department of Transportation; the committee recommended passage as is and adopted the recommendation. HB 1159 HD1 would require masters or persons in charge of vessels to comply with a Harbor Master’s order to evacuate a commercial harbor during emergencies. Testimony included support from Hawaii Emergency Management Agency, the Department of Transportation, and comments from the Hawaii Harbor Users Group. Members raised concerns about small boat operators and safety, and the committee passed the bill with reservations. The committee then discussed HB 1262, relating to the Emergency and Budget Reserve Fund, and HB 1296, relating to the major disaster fund. Supporters of HB 1262 included the Climate Advisory Team and AARP Hawaii, while the Department of Budget and Finance cautioned about duplication of benefits with federal disaster aid and the need to preserve the fund’s primary purpose. Members questioned how the bill would interact with federal assistance and whether the fund could be used more broadly; no vote was taken, and the bill was deferred to decision-making. On HB 1296, HEMA and Budget and Finance opposed the measure, citing the need for flexibility in emergencies and concerns that added reporting requirements could hinder response efforts, while the Tax Foundation of Hawaii noted the major disaster fund is much smaller than the EBF. The committee likewise deferred HB 1296 to decision-making, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• At that time, we still had no counties assessing the fee. Is that still current?
• Is that still assessing the fee. Is that still current? current? current?
• missing fee that you after the fact. missing fee that you after the fact.
• So, I when they would implement the fee.
• DTS Honolulu for adopting and this fee DTS Honolulu for adopting and this fee and<01:04:08.319><

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 1783, which would expand public-private partnership options for charter school facilities. The Department of Education offered comments, the Charter School Commission and SFA supported the bill, and Hawaii Technology Academy, Hawaii Kids, Hawaii Children’s Action Network, HGA, Aloha Project, and several individuals testified in support, while UPW opposed it. Supporters said charter schools need faster and more flexible ways to address severe facility shortages and high costs, and SFA described the bill as a pilot model that could leverage developer partnerships and state contributions, citing Maryland as an example. Members asked whether the bill was limited to charter schools; DOE said the language could be read to include other public school facilities, but if focused only on charter schools, DOE was less concerned. The Charter School Commission also described an existing public-private preschool model through Parkway Village Preschool and PACTED. The committee then took up HB 1778, which would establish a CIP database for school facilities. SFA supported the bill, saying it would create a more disciplined, transparent basis for funding decisions by documenting facility condition, needed repairs, classification, and timing. DOE initially said it rested on its comments, then responded to questions by saying it already maintains deferred maintenance lists, uses systems such as Maximo, CPT, GIS, and finance software, and sends legislators project-status letters twice a year. DOE said it is working on improving its outward-facing dashboard and integrating its systems, but questioned whether the bill would add value beyond existing tools. Members emphasized the need for a publicly accessible, real-time transparency tool, while DOE said it was still evaluating its current systems and was not yet seeking funding for a new IT program. For HB 2344, creating an Independent Public School Realignment and Closure Commission, DOE said it wants to remain part of any consolidation process to keep students and education central, while SFA said the bill is timely and framed it as a restructuring response to changing conditions and possible federal funding cuts. SFA compared the proposal to the federal BRAC process for military base closures and said Hawaii has the same enrollment as in 1961 but many more schools, arguing that the state needs a more deliberate approach to school closures and land reuse. The Attorney General’s office raised technical concerns about several sections, including unclear references to administrative support, a governor-approval sequence, a possible conflict with existing statutes governing closed-school disposition, and a missing section number. Testimony on HB 2345, which would establish a geographic CIP district, began with DOE in opposition; DOE said the bill would duplicate existing work, add confusion by creating two agencies doing the same thing, and spend money inefficiently because district project coordinators and project lists already exist.

Transcript Highlights:

• They've already created fee structures.
• Um whether they need fees or they need.
• So this provides an opportunity to avoid that by paying a flat per-head fee.
• You don't uh pay a flat per head fee.
• The the third scenario that this fee.

Bills: SF0069, SF0070, SF0016, HB0078, HJ0002, HB0085, HB0086

Keywords: wastewater, stormwater, infrastructure, environmental quality, public data, data collection, funding, study, water development, irrigation, public works, agricultural supply, municipal water, grazing lands, subleasing, non-owned livestock, state lands, rental fees, agricultural policy, land management

Transcript Highlights:

• If you look at the other side on couriers, not only do they get to. charge a service fee, admin fee,
• Now, if anybody should be allowed to charge an administrative fee or an additional fee I think it would
• And the transaction fee...
• In discussions about the fee, you just like us politicians.
• We call it a fee and kind of get around.

Bills: SB 28, SB 687, SJR 34, SCR 9, SB 523, SB 62, SB 847, SB 706, SB 869, SB 890, SB 992

Keywords: lottery, gambling, internet gaming, mobile application, criminal offenses, SB 687, land surveyor, land surveying, surveying services, construction contract, anti-indemnity, indemnity, hold harmless, defense obligation, standard of care, professional negligence, civil practice and remedies code, local government code, governmental agency, public contracts

Summary: The meeting was a crucial session for discussing several important bills including SB992, which aims to establish a clear time frame for the Attorney General's approval on outside legal counsel for state agencies. Senator Nichols presented the bill, emphasizing its necessity for timely responses to ensure efficient legal processing. Another notable discussion centered around SB523, which seeks to allow parole and probation officers to use a business address on their driver's licenses for safety and security purposes. This bill passed favorably out of the committee, with public testimony supporting the need for such provisions due to the risks these officers face.

Transcript Highlights:

• So what is the filing fee for?
• The initial, I think it's $85 filing fee. Mr. Chair.
• There is a required filing fee; the initial, I think it's $85.
• So any settlements under... state including fees and receipts of any state including fees and receipts
• <01:34:03.159> type want to create a contingent fee type want to create a contingent fee type

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Do we have something similar to that within fee-for-service Medicaid?
• And if CMS doesn’t have an issue with us creating a different fee schedule around sedation dentistry,
• Back in the days of managed care, we would go to DHS and talk about the fee issue.
• A modest fee increase is all we asked for: 60% of the 50th percentile.
• The only state that pays less of a percentage of a dentist's normal fee is Texas.

Summary: The Administrative Rules Subcommittee of the Arkansas Legislative Council reviewed several agency rules and requests. The Insurance Department’s amendment to its holding company system rule was reviewed and approved, as were two State Board of Election Commissioners rules: one clarifying poll watcher conduct, vote challenges, and provisional voting, and another increasing pay for certified election monitors and defining training, observation, and report-writing compensation. The Arkansas Financial Education Commission also had its rule reviewed and approved after removing membership requirements tied to DEI language to comply with Act 938. The committee held over the Department of Education’s request to be excluded from reporting requirements for one month to allow further discussion about who should write or implement the rules. A major portion of the meeting focused on the Department of Human Services’ request to be excluded from reporting requirements for Acts 567, 568, 967, and 1025. DHS said CMS had raised comparability and other federal approval concerns, especially for the dental and diagnostic lab provisions, and that it might not be able to meet the acts’ effective dates. DHS described several possible paths forward, including broader benefit changes, waivers, or splitting the dental provisions so the pediatric rate increase could move separately from the special-needs adult cap increase. The Arkansas State Dental Association disputed DHS’s conclusion that the acts could not be implemented as written, argued that Act 1025 is workable, and urged DHS to continue pursuing implementation and preserve the September 1 effective date where possible. Public testimony also supported expanded dental access for adults with disabilities and special needs. After discussion, the committee voted not to exclude DHS from reporting requirements for those acts. The committee then reviewed the Division of Higher Education’s Act 781 report. The division said it has 32 rules in effect, asked to repeal three rules—two replaced by new rules and one no longer supported by authority or current law—and to continue the remaining 29 rules. The committee approved that request, with the repeals effective upon adjournment of the Legislative Council meeting on January 16, 2026. The meeting concluded with no questions on the remaining written rulemaking updates from prior and current sessions, which were filed without further action.

Transcript Highlights:

• For example, requiring the owner to live on the lot or imposing an impact fee of more than 50% of what
• , and especially why there's so much variability across the state in what you charge for a fee.
• Additional measures to avoid fee refunds: we have reasonable fees.
• We already have a fee model where we use the ICC for building valuations and then our project permit
• And then there’s a base hourly rate that we use to establish those permit fees.

Summary: The Local Government Committee met in work session and heard a series of presentations on SEPA, permitting reforms, and building code implementation. Department of Ecology staff gave an overview of the State Environmental Policy Act, explaining its role in state and local decision-making, common exemptions, planned actions, and recent housing-related statutory changes such as transit-oriented development exemptions and SEPA appeals protections for certain local ordinances. Committee members asked about repeated SEPA reviews, cultural and historic resource review, and how SEPA relates to NEPA; Ecology responded that repeated reviews usually occur when proposals change and that programmatic EISs can help front-load analysis. Seattle’s Department of Construction and Inspections described how recent SEPA exemptions reduced residential review volume and supported more housing permits, and said the city is considering raising thresholds further. The State Building Code Council provided an update on code adoption timelines and legislative tasks tied to the 2024 codes, including single-stair housing, multiplex housing, dwelling unit size, and temporary emergency shelter standards. Council staff said the content of the codes is largely set, but administrative timelines have been delayed, prompting a motion to postpone final adoption while pursuing ways to preserve the planned implementation schedule. Members asked about the timing of code changes and the impact on housing costs, and staff said the legislative topics remain on track for inclusion in the 2024 code package. Committee staff then reviewed recent permitting legislation, including SB 5290’s permit decision deadlines and fee-refund provisions, later bills limiting pre-application meetings and clarifying that building permits are excluded from those timelines, and project-specific changes affecting middle housing, ADUs, lot splits, passive house projects, self-certification, transit-oriented development, and parking requirements. Commerce’s Dave Anderson reported on SB 5290 implementation, including guidance on permit fees, studies on staffing and statewide permitting systems, grants to local governments, and the first annual performance report, which showed mixed results and highlighted the importance of digital tools, clear checklists, staff training, and coordination across departments. Local officials from Issaquah and Kitsap County described their own process improvements, including code updates, optional pre-application meetings, new staffing, reporting systems, and a phased “Two by Six” review model in Kitsap, while also noting challenges from staffing shortages, agency coordination, and the burden of implementing multiple new mandates.

Transcript Highlights:

• It is the most universal fee schedule that is out there.
• So there's one particular fee associated with removal of an injured extremity, but there's a totality
• But have the jury be deciding what the fee would be as they separate from the medical cost?
• Yeah, this bill does not touch the contingency fee arrangement.
• Contingency fees are a third to 40 percent, and they do.

Bills: SB1540, SB2225, SB2284, SB2382, SB2487, SB2514, SB2595, SB2876, SB2877, SB3031, SB2753

Keywords: election officials, confidentiality, personal information, government transparency, public safety, spirit beverages, alcoholic beverages, Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code, distribution, taxation, firearms, local regulation, archery equipment, weapons, voter registration, statewide list, county requirements, election integrity, computer services contracts, mental health

Summary: The Senate Committee on State Affairs heard Senate Bill 3031, which would expand aggravated assault to cover certain road-rage shootings involving a person in or traveling to or from a motor vehicle, when a firearm is discharged and causes injury, property damage, or fear of serious bodily injury. Senator Schwertner laid out the bill for the author, described it as closing a gap in the law, and there was no public testimony; the bill was left pending. The committee then heard Senate Bill 2514, a measure by Chairman Hughes aimed at creating a DPS unit to identify, investigate, and monitor hostile foreign influence operations and to require ethics training for state employees. Supportive invited testimony from Dr. Jacqueline Deal, Ambassador Kelly Curry, and Michael Lucci emphasized threats from the Chinese Communist Party, transnational repression, cyber intrusion, and state-level influence efforts, and argued Texas should take a leading role. Public testimony included opposition from speakers who raised concerns about free speech, privacy, and potential overbreadth. The bill was left pending after testimony closed. Finally, the committee took up Senate Bill 30 as pending business and discussed a committee substitute. Senator Schwertner explained that the substitute would limit admissible medical expense evidence to amounts paid or up to 300% of Medicare, clarify treatment of provider testimony and attorney-referred providers, remove a requirement that plaintiffs use available health insurance to mitigate damages, strike a unanimous-verdict requirement for non-economic damages, and delete a remittitur provision. Senators questioned the impact on sexual assault and child abuse survivors, the use of Medicare as a benchmark, and whether the bill would still allow fair compensation. After discussion, SB 30 was left pending and the committee recessed subject to the call of the chair.

Transcript Highlights:

• There are many different user fee programs that outline the relationship between the FDA and industry
• fee dollars to conduct post-marketing surveillance but the medical device user fee program does not
• allow that use of the user fee dollars.
• As you know, user fees are established by Congress.
• There are 100 employees who were fired from FDA's Tobacco Center. which is 100% funded by user fees.

Keywords: nominations, labor, health, veterans, Social Security, Elon Musk, transparency, government accountability

Summary: The meeting primarily focused on various executive nominations and their implications on labor and health affairs. Significant discussions surrounded the nomination of Mr. Sonderling as the Deputy Secretary of Labor, with members expressing concerns about workforce cuts affecting veterans and Social Security employees. There was also a debate led by a member regarding the authority and influence of private individuals, specifically citing Elon Musk's involvement in government decisions. Such discussions raised questions about transparency and accountability within governmental agencies, leading to a proposal for Mr. Musk to provide testimony before the committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• fees collected are at the emission fee level on June 30, 2025.
• and fees collected.
• ABOR sets those fees or approves the tuition and fees, but they don't directly collect it from the universities
• Just a real quick question about the ABOR fees: what is the total fee that ABOR collects?" "Mr.
• They were talking about ABOR retaining money from the universities’ tuition fees for their operating

Summary: The joint House and Senate Appropriations committees met to hear the FY 2027 budget package, beginning with the General Appropriations Act (HB 4154/SB 1847). Staff outlined the overall budget, including one-time fund transfers, lump-sum reductions, funding for state employee health insurance, school facilities, corrections, flood and wildfire relief, education and child care, and other ongoing and supplemental items. Members briefly discussed the absence of a requested $1.5 million for the oversight office, but the chair said no amendments would be taken in committee and that only limited technical changes were likely later in the process. Public testimony on the feed bill was largely supportive but focused on specific funding concerns. Testimony highlighted school safety funding, Alzheimer’s services, small business tax expensing provisions, disability oversight for group homes, county use of opioid settlement dollars, adult education/community college funding, victim notification funding, and ESA oversight. Several speakers praised the budget for funding DDD and other services, while others opposed or sought changes to items such as the COMIT group home monitoring program, Maricopa Community Colleges’ lack of operating aid, and a possible cut to the victim notification program. The chair repeatedly emphasized that changes to the negotiated budget would be difficult and should be routed through leadership. The committee then moved quickly through the remaining budget reconciliation bills. Staff summarized bills covering amusement and wagering, capital outlay, commerce, criminal justice, environment, health care, higher education, human services, and K-12 education. Notable provisions included continued wagering assessments, highway and building renewal funding, defense innovation and economic development changes, corrections and wrongful conviction provisions, groundwater and water banking measures, health insurance oversight and opioid settlement provisions, higher education funding and ABOR operating caps, SNAP and housing trust fund changes, and a 2% inflation increase for K-12 formula components. The K-12 bill also included a biometric school safety pilot and a child sexual abuse prevention pilot. No votes were taken in the portion provided, and the chair indicated the committee would continue through the remaining bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• or fees that they might need for the amenities that folks have lost.
• And the utilities also cover part of the attorneys' fees of the claimants.
• Plaintiffs' attorneys' fees are typically, or between 25% and 35%, are not unusual.
• over this period in attorneys' fees.
• And these legal fees take dollars away from the money survivors have to rebuild.

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Utilities and Energy held a hearing on the California Earthquake Authority’s SB 254 report and broader options for reforming California’s utility wildfire recovery system. The chair framed the discussion around the Palisades and Eaton fires, the scale of wildfire-related costs on utility bills, and the need to weigh trade-offs among survivors, ratepayers, utilities, insurers, and taxpayers. The first panel featured wildfire survivors William Abrams and Joy Chen, who described long delays in compensation, housing insecurity, and what they viewed as a system that protects utility shareholders more than victims. They urged greater transparency, clearer accountability for utility spending and safety performance, faster and fuller compensation for survivors, and reforms such as independent audits and better alignment of utility incentives with wildfire prevention and restitution. The second panel began with Tom Welsh of the California Earthquake Authority, who explained that the SB 254 report was intended as a broad inventory of policy pathways rather than recommendations. He described the report’s process, including stakeholder submissions, workstreams, and a convergence process, and outlined the current wildfire fund structure: utilities remain liable, the fund reimburses eligible claims after a covered wildfire, and the CPUC later determines prudency and possible reimbursement back to the fund. RAND’s Lloyd Dixon summarized compensation data, saying utilities paid about $38 billion between 2017 and 2024, with major shares going to injured parties, insurers, and public entities, while litigation costs and survivors’ own losses remain substantial. He noted that legal fees and delays reduce the amount survivors ultimately receive. Utility and public-interest witnesses offered differing views on the report’s pathways. PG&E’s Tyson Smith said the report shows inaction is the worst outcome and argued for community wildfire risk reduction, equitable allocation of catastrophe costs, and state-led resilience tools. LADWP’s Fernando Valero emphasized the vulnerability of municipal utilities and cities, and supported inverse condemnation reform, a state-sponsored liability insurance framework, damages and subrogation limits, and stronger insurance access. Consumer Attorneys of California’s John Fisk argued that IOU-caused fires are not natural disasters but the result of negligence and sometimes criminal conduct, and opposed reducing utility liability while supporting stronger oversight and audits. The Public Advocates Office’s Nathaniel Skinner focused on affordability, saying ratepayers already bear large and growing wildfire costs and warning against shifting more costs onto bills without measurable risk reduction and tighter accountability. Committee members then began questioning witnesses about what counts as measurable mitigation, how to define full and fair compensation, and how any fast-pay process should work.

Transcript Highlights:

• the cost of higher education has been increasing and it's important to note that while tuition and fees
• So they, they retain those fees even if the student is not accepted at the university. They do.
• But for, for other students, they, they do retain that application fee. Thank you.
• The only office that we had was in student life that was paid by student fees.
• We do have, um, 90% of our students are fully funded for tuition and fees at the same time.

Transcript Highlights:

• Switching gears a little bit, the MDH budget proposes a 54% increase in fees for our assisted living
• Switching gears a little bit, the MDH budget proposes a 54% increase in fees for our assisted living
• Excuse me, the MDH budget proposes a 54% increase in fees for our assisted living providers.
• <00:16:13.880> is cutting services or hiking up fees is cutting services or hiking up fees
• pharmacists in their dispensing fees pharmacists in their dispensing fees optimizes<00:48:48.000

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The House Committee on Human Services Finance and Policy met to approve prior minutes and then take public testimony on the governor’s budget recommendations for human services. The chair explained the hearing format and noted that DHS declined to testify. Much of the testimony focused on proposed reductions or caps affecting disability waiver services, nursing homes, and elderly waiver programs, as well as related fee and tax changes in the budget. Representatives of ARM argued that the governor’s proposal would cap inflationary adjustments at 2%, limit rate exceptions, cap billable days, and restrict individualized home supports, which they said would worsen workforce shortages, reduce wages for direct support professionals, and destabilize disability services. They said the package would cut about $600 million over four years and could lead to group home closures, higher turnover, and families losing access to local homes and services. Committee members asked about real-world impacts and future rate adjustments, and ARM responded that providers have already planned around expected 2026 rates, so a cap would create immediate budget and staffing problems. Long-Term Care Imperative testified against nursing home-related cuts, saying the budget would cap future rate increases, limit health insurance costs in rate setting, phase out closure-related agreements and incentives, and fail to fully fund the Nursing Home Workforce Standards Board. They estimated the nursing home provisions could amount to a $218 million cut over four years, or roughly $350 million when combined with other underfunding, and said every nursing home and bed in Minnesota would be affected. They also criticized the lack of an inflation factor in Elderly Waiver, a proposed 54% increase in assisted living fees, and possible changes to provider-assessed fine and penalty funds. Members asked about staffing and bed availability, and the testifiers said reduced funding would likely force more beds out of service. A later testifier, Dan Andre of the Minnesota Council of Health Plans, raised concerns about the DHS budget’s proposed increase in the HMO surcharge and about carving pharmacy and non-emergency medical transportation benefits out of managed care. He argued the tax increase would raise premiums for fully insured and Medicare supplement enrollees and that managed care coordination helps members access care and medications. The hearing also included one unrelated, disruptive testimony about the Minnesota Sex Offender Program and other agencies, which the chair redirected back to the human services budget. No votes or formal actions were taken beyond approving the minutes and receiving testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• is intended to offset registration fees is intended to offset the<00:37:36.400> regressivity<
• Somebody talked about giving people the option to pay that fee, the search charge, over time.
• the search charge over pay that that fee the search charge over time.<00:38:56.320> And<00:38
• Um, I was going to make that same point because the EV specific registration fee is meant to capture
• the lost gas tax that if we go towards a mileage based user fee or, you know, keep a public charging

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The working group approved the prior meeting minutes with one correction to reflect Laura Ziggler’s attendance. Staff then outlined the report due February 13, 2026, which must summarize the group’s activities and include findings and recommendations adopted by the group; the report will go to the governor and legislative transportation leaders. The chair emphasized that the group’s charge is broad and includes analyzing electricity used as vehicle fuel infrastructure opportunities and barriers, developing policy and funding recommendations for sustainable transportation funding, and reviewing other states’ laws and policies. Discussion focused heavily on how to replace declining gas tax revenue as more vehicles become electric. The chair framed the issue as a fairness and implementation challenge, noting that EVs are a growing share of the fleet and that the group should consider both policy and funding, not just one or the other. Members and guests raised several ideas already submitted, including a road user charge, changes to the EV charging tax, ending or modifying the EV surcharge, broadening the tax to publicly owned charging stations, reducing the charging level threshold to level 2, ending sales tax on electricity, addressing off-road use, and expanding the definition of auto parts to include charging equipment. Representative Elkins argued that charging based on electricity used at home is impractical for most vehicles, that public charging is already much more expensive than home charging, and that the current sales tax plus surcharge amounts to double taxation for public-charging users. He said a mileage-based user charge modeled on Utah’s approach is workable, could be phased in, and could preserve privacy by allowing a voluntary or alternative method for home charging estimates. Senator Howe responded that home electricity use can be estimated similarly to mileage deductions on taxes and said the state should tax all electricity used as fuel, regardless of charger level, if it can be identified. Other speakers echoed that all road users should pay a fair share and that the main challenge is implementation. Tony Kis of Quick Trip asked that a late letter be included in the record and urged clarification of the sales, use, excise tax, and collection rules to avoid double taxation and reduce administrative burden, noting the current monthly collection date and suggesting the group should streamline collection methods. No final policy decisions or votes were taken beyond approval of the minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• The grant funds are used for the cost of tuition, fees, required and recommended material, as well as
• The grant funds are used for the cost of tuition, fees, required and recommended material, as well as
• So sometimes you'll see, for example, that it's the last dollar and it covers up to tuition and fees,
• tuition and fees maximum established for the State Grant.
• The base component to North Star Promise is the tuition- and fee-free promise.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• methods for computing the impact fees methods for computing the impact fees and<06:12:04.520>
• <06:12:16.200> are fee um calculations impact fees are fee um calculations impact fees are
• impact fees may be assessed.
• But what it boils down to is a fee gets, when you have a new house, they’re going to have a small fee
• What it boils down to is a fee gets, when you have a new house, they’re going to have a small fee in

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• in mind, we created the Abandonment Grant Funding Program which would be funded by increases to all fees
• So one hundred percent of the fees would go to the Bureau's operations and 50% would go to the actual
• And even though individuals who've been buried, they've paid endowment fees, sometimes endowment fees
• LAFCOE fees and associated administrative costs, ensuring public entities have access to both endowment
• We support the reinsertion of the change of supervisor fee for psychological testing technicians, the

Keywords: 988, house, all