Transcript Highlights:

• Madam Chair and members, HB 4056, as passed by the House, prohibits a public body from charging a fee
• HB 2946, municipalities, counties, development fees.
• It modifies development fees related to single-family and ADU developments, when they are charged, and
• It also allows a municipality to assess development fees on the development of ADUs, and it allows a
• It changes the fees that the finance authority can charge to process and consider these petitions.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The caucus reviewed a long list of House bills that had returned from the Senate with amendments, with members repeatedly noting that sponsors intended to concur on most items. Topics included public health and vaccination rules (HB 2086, HB 2248), state investment in gold and silver (HB 2140), property records and voter-registration privacy (HB 2327), municipal and county regulation of business property and development fees (HB 2460, HB 2946, HB 2999), legislative subpoenas (HB 2745), cold plunge regulation (HB 2439), nursing-facility complaint timelines and licensed health aide rules (HB 2195, HB 2189), court-ordered treatment review (HB 2923), Access/Medicaid reimbursement and prior authorization for diagnostic services (HB 2932), inmate mental health study committee language (HB 2673), prenatal development instruction in schools (HB 2830), public records requests by legislators (HB 4056), parents’ rights and social transitioning in schools (HB 2249), school district financial compliance and facilities contracting (HB 2481, HB 2482), Native American language proficiency for graduation (HB 2895), advanced math auto-enrollment (HB 2423), special education and military-family procedures (HB 2621), AI rules for state agencies (HB 2592), eviction record sealing (HB 2244), tax filing penalties (HB 2016), shade structures in HOAs (HB 2342), homelessness-related community restitution (HB 2028), medical records timelines (HB 2557), PFAS firefighting foam restrictions (HB 2641), family-court expert testimony and prisoner transition services (HB 2662, HB 2440), address confidentiality protections (HB 2594), guardianship notice attestation (HB 2661), utilities for high-load customers (HB 2756), and nuclear-ready community planning (HB 2456). The committee also briefly moved to Caucus Calendar 19 for additional bills on mobile food vendors, school board training, out-of-state travel and meeting transparency, and a medical-intervention nondiscrimination bill. Several bills drew substantive discussion or criticism. Members debated HB 2932 at length, with staff explaining that Access said the bill would have a high fiscal impact because it would require reimbursement for non-contracted lab services and eliminate prior authorization for a broad range of diagnostic services, potentially increasing costs substantially. HB 2249 also prompted concern from members who argued it could force teachers to out students and create civil liability for using preferred pronouns or failing to notify parents about social transitioning. HB 2830 was criticized as requiring prenatal-development instruction while barring discussion of sexual activity or reproduction. HB 2028, which allows community restitution instead of a $20 probation assessment for people who are indigent and experiencing homelessness, was questioned as potentially punitive. HB 2481 was discussed as a way to help, rather than punish, small rural school districts struggling with financial-record compliance. The caucus also noted that several of the measures were sponsored by Democrats, which was highlighted as notable during the meeting. No formal votes were taken in the transcript. The caucus chair repeatedly asked for questions, and in most cases there were none, after which the sponsor was understood to intend concurrence with the Senate amendments. The meeting ended with adjournment after the caucus moved through the remaining calendar items.

Transcript Highlights:

• I heard rumors that you were going to raise the fee to $1,700 or $1,800.
• new legislative liaison, do some research and really figure out those costs and then equate those to fees
• so we could charge a fee to recover some of those costs.
• Examiner and an in-house hearing examiner that we had to look for some ways to either charge a fee, which
• So, the thing with the fee is we would, if the fee goes forward, and I don't know that's the board's

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• 30-day notice via certified mail to the patient only if the debt, one, is not subject to interest, fees
• From the patient's perspective, they have the ability not to have excess interest and fees charged.
• I do like no excessive interest or fees charged. interest or fees charged.
• There will be some upfront costs to get it started, but that will be recouped very quickly by the fees
• For many tax dollars, this will all run off of the fees that they will charge, which are still going

Transcript Highlights:

• To review, your bill will not allow them to charge a fee for that review.
• It also will not allow the municipality to charge an impact fee for housing, having to put in sidewalks
• Senate Bill 2108 by Hughes relates to the inclusion of direct primary care fees as qualified medical
• Senate Bill 2122 by Zaffirini relates to the imposition of applicant fees.
• Senate Bill 2197 by Johnson relates to the filing fee for nomination by convention to State Affairs.

Bills: SCR8, SCR24, SCR25, SB1, SB65, SB315, SB371, SB372, SB379, SB400, SB402, SB406, SB427, SB487, SB502, SB509, SB535, SB610, SB707, SB740, SB761, SB840, SB875, SB893, SB918, SB925, SB965, SB987, SB990, SB995, SB1006, SB1018, SB1073, SB1106, SB1121, SB1194, SB1253, SB1300, SB1343, SB1362, SB1379, SB1447, SB1532, SB1555, SJR36, SJR12, SJR57, SCR25, SCR22, SCR12, SCR24, SCR8, SB565, SB372, SB765, SB62, SB666, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB847, SB1248, SB740, SB14, SB1006, SB504, SB925, SB1121, SB995, SB857, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB815, SB1379, SB1300, SB1497, SB1499, SB1498, SB65, SB241, SB304, SB402, SB621, SB1023, SB1024, SB1106, SB686, SB112, SB371, SB204, SB400, SB609, SB1447, SB670, SB502, SB427, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1555, SB1362, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB987, SB1539, SB893, SB447, SB875, SB406, SB509, SB985, SB965, SB1119, SB1505, SB24, SB1194, SB1253, SB1215, SB1532, SB1302, SB856, SB650, SB583, SB673, SB840, SB213, SB681, SB1172, SB1252, SB378, SB610, SB918, SB1343, SB608, SB487, SB955, SB957, SB988, SB990, SB1019, SB1021, SB1120, SB251, SB958, SB535, SB761, SB1, SB541, SB315, SB379, SB1018, SB1737, SB266, SB1415, SB1527, SB125, SB599, SB1330, SB53, SB916, SB896, SB1352, SB973, SB785, SB710, SB472, SB1450, SB1502, SB1566, SB414, SB1062, SB1547, SB961, SB1038, SB513, SB578, SB711, SB746, SB942, SB1404, SB1448, SB1738, SB108, SB8, SB318, SB507, SB533, SB689, SB1026, SB1349, SB1355, SB1433, SB1434, SB1596, SB1403, SB1198, SB1146, SB763, SB667

Keywords: central bank digital currency, CBDC, Federal Reserve, digital dollar, digital currency, cashless payments, financial privacy, cybersecurity, government surveillance, financial surveillance, money laundering, terrorism financing, illicit finance, banking policy, monetary policy, payments system, commercial banks, Texas Legislature, concurrent resolution, federal reserve digital currency

Transcript Highlights:

• You said the number... ...of entities or companies that would probably have to pay this fee.
• So, do you believe this, the amount of the fee is...
• Is the amount of the fee sufficient to pay for...? Actually, that's in the sub too.
• Yes, on page four, line 91, Section One states that for a resident, there is a fee of $500, and for a
• non-resident of the state, there is a fee of $700.

Bills: HB1, HB247, HB1

Keywords: DUI, driving under the influence, ignition interlock, interlock device, driver license suspension, restricted license, motor vehicle, alcohol offense, first offense, repeat offender, blood alcohol concentration, BAC, license revocation, Alabama State Law Enforcement Agency, ALEA, public safety, traffic safety, chemical dependency, substance abuse, court referral program

Transcript Highlights:

• These are the fees that corporations pay to use Wyoming's law through the Secretary of State's office
• Our fees are very low, and I think that we might be able to have some room to increase them, which would
• Okay, the next one is, I don't know why I'm doubling up here, but to increase the corporate filing fees
• These are the fees that corporations pay to use Wyoming's law through the Secretary of State's office
• <01:10:10.200> and obviously there can be print fees and obviously there can be print fees

Keywords: 916, all

Summary: The chairman opened by explaining that the committee would hear proposed interim topics and then rank them by written submissions rather than debating them one by one. The Public Service Commission presented two topics: an educational session on small water utilities, citing maintenance needs, water-quality compliance, and difficulty accessing capital, and a review of civil penalties for pipeline safety violations because Wyoming’s statutory penalties are far below federal levels and could affect compliance and funding. Members and outside presenters then outlined a range of additional topics. Representative Campbell proposed work on fire protection districts and EMS districts, focusing on financial stability, mill levies, and possible county authority to combine districts and levies. He also raised public records at meetings, corporate filing fees, and fraudulent corporate filings. The Community College Commission proposed updating annexation statutes so communities can join community college districts more easily, especially where current mill-levy rules create funding issues. Senator Crago supported the fraudulent corporate filings topic and noted related technology-based solutions and overlap with blockchain issues. Other proposals included CPA “Pathways” licensing changes to address a shortage of accountants, a review of public meetings and public records laws, continuation of the electricity study with emphasis on grid reliability and large-load capacity constraints, and a broader review of the public meetings and records act. Ashley Harpstreith of the Wyoming Association of Municipalities supported extending municipal audit deadlines and described a statewide shortage of auditors and CPAs. Healthy Wyoming proposed studying health coverage options for low-income working adults, including state-sponsored or cooperative models. Representative Chestek proposed making most nonpartisan county offices elected on a nonpartisan basis. No votes or final selections were taken in the portion provided; the committee mainly heard testimony and discussed whether topics should be assigned to this committee or another one.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think DCCA is funded through the fees that are generated from registration.
• <00:26:06.000> that<00:26:06.240> it division is funded by the fees that it division
• is funded by the fees that it collects.<00:26:07.120> Uh<00:26:07.360> and<00:26:07.840
• and taxes that go to our you know fees and taxes that go to our you know government<00:53:12.800>
• fees. Do are you familiar with that? fees. Do are you familiar with that?

Bills: HB2410, HB2235, HB1904, HB2201, HB2349, HB1972, HB2007, HB2385, HB2444, HB2391, HB2575

Keywords: Hawaii Technology Development Corporation, economic diversification, small business, innovation, manufacturing assistance, grants, technology programs, advanced manufacturing, military, community relations, economic development, defense-related programs, workforce development, local business readiness, in-state manufacturing, federal investment, space operations, orbital sustainability, aerospace, space traffic management

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several measures, beginning with HB 2410 relating to the Hawaii Technology Development Corporation. Testifiers from HTDC and the Hawaii Food Industry Association stood on written testimony, and members discussed the funding request, which was described as $1 million each for three programs, for a total of $3 million. The measure appeared to have broad support, with no opposition noted. The committee then took up HB 2235 HD1 on the military and community relations office, where Lori Moore of MACC asked for additional funding to support local businesses and education-to-career initiatives statewide. Members asked about the amount, and the request was identified as $1.3 million total. HB 904 on space operations followed, with three supporters and one opponent, though no substantive testimony was captured beyond the vote counts. HB 2201 on state enterprise zones drew testimony from Georgia Skinner of DBEDT’s Creative Industries division, who said the measure would build on a well-run enterprise zone program and help make Hawaii’s film industry more competitive. Tom Yamashita of the Tax Foundation also provided comments. The committee then considered HB 2349 relating to DCCA and DBEDT coordination; DCCA explained it already provides links and information to DBEDT programs, while DBEDT argued that direct data sharing would allow more proactive outreach. Members raised privacy and cost concerns, and DBEDT said it would consider opt-in collection and acknowledged system changes and possible funding needs. The committee also heard two tax credit bills. HB 1972 HD1, on a caregiver tax credit, received strong support from AARP, the Hawaii Public Health Institute, the Hawaii Children’s Action Network, and others, who described caregivers as an “invisible workforce” and argued the credit would help families keep loved ones at home and reduce financial strain. The Tax Foundation suggested a grant or subsidy program might be more efficient than a tax credit and raised concerns about debarment provisions. HB 20007 HD1, on the household and dependent care services tax credit, also drew strong support from public health and family advocacy groups, who said Hawaii families face some of the nation’s highest child care costs and that the bill would better reflect current expenses; the Tax Foundation again raised technical concerns about complexity and debarment. Members asked about fiscal impacts, and testimony indicated the current credit costs about $6 million, with the bill expected to increase that amount. The committee then moved on to HB 2385 HD1 on housing, where the Deputy Attorney General began presenting written comments on whether the bill limits county authority.

Transcript Highlights:

• went through a process of seeing a backlog when there was some spring cleaning, if you will, done on fees
• allow the town to use prior compliance to the conditions of their permit or any sort of outstanding fees
• allow the town to use prior compliance to the conditions of their permit or any sort of outstanding fees
• that they still. compliance to the conditions of their permit or any sort of outstanding fees that they
• H. 2273, an act authorizing the town of Sudbury to establish a fee for checkout bags.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Municipalities and Regional Government held its first hearing of the year and took testimony on a large slate of home rule petitions and related local bills. Early testimony focused on H. 2314 for the Dukes County Regional Lockup Fund, with supporters from Martha’s Vineyard saying the island’s lockup is essential to local policing and that the fund would be supported by town assessments rather than state money. The committee also heard support for S. 21, a Nantucket bill to amend the Nantucket Planning and Economic Development Commission, and for several local governance measures including Akushnet’s charter change to remove a two-year waiting period for former officials taking appointed paid positions, Rochester’s governance reform bill defining the town administrator’s role, Berkeley’s proposal to convert the treasurer-collector position to an appointed office, Hanson’s permitting enforcement bill, and a Wellfleet bill authorizing a lease for the food pantry. A major portion of the hearing centered on S. 21 for Nantucket, with witnesses sharply divided. Supporters argued the commission needs broader representation, more transparency, and a structure that better reflects town meeting votes, citing repeated town meeting approvals and frustration with delays in bringing reforms forward. Opponents, including current commission members and staff, said the existing commission is already working on its own reform proposal, that the bill was advanced without sufficient collaboration, and that elected seats and term limits would narrow participation and complicate the commission’s advisory role. Committee members questioned both sides about the town meeting process, the commission’s responsibilities, and the timing of competing proposals. The committee also heard testimony in favor of a bill allowing the Cotuit Fire District to pursue source-water protection projects on private property with owner consent, citing concerns about aquifer contamination and rising treatment needs, and in support of legislation requiring AEDs, with a Norfolk County register of deeds describing the low cost and life-saving value of the devices. Another witness spoke in favor of a regional commission proposal for Middlesex County, arguing that local communities need stronger regional planning tools to address development and environmental pressures. No votes were taken on the bills during the hearing; the chair later read many additional bills into the record and then adjourned the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• put on state reforestation areas, points to Article 7 of the Public Lands Law, which Establishes a fee
• Is that how much the fee would be for a solar developer to put solar panels on the state reforestation
• So is that—that's a very old fee.
• Will that be the fee that a solar company will be paying the State of New York for developing a solar
• We can get more information on that, but my understanding is the initial filing fee stands as it is.

Keywords: 993, senate, all

Summary: The Senate opened with the Pledge of Allegiance, approved the prior day’s journal, and then recognized several guest groups, including the Shenendehowa High School girls varsity cross country team and tennis champion Jolie Chichak, as well as the Downsville Central School Student Council. Senator Tedisco introduced the Shenendehowa athletes, highlighting their state and federation championships and strong academic records, and Senator Oberacker introduced the Downsville students. The chamber extended courtesies to the guests. The Senate then moved through the calendar, passing a series of bills and resolutions. Among the measures approved were a bill designating Overdose Awareness Day, a real property tax bill, a public authorities bill, several education-related bills, a private housing finance bill, a workers’ compensation bill, and a labor law bill. Some items were laid aside before later being taken up, including the cannabis bill and the environmental conservation bill. Votes were largely unanimous or near-unanimous, with a few recorded negatives on certain bills. The most extensive debate centered on Calendar 261, Senator May’s environmental conservation bill concerning renewable energy installations and transmission on state reforestation lands. Senator Walczyk and others questioned whether the bill would allow solar, wind, battery storage, tree cutting, herbicide use, and reduced environmental review, while supporters argued the bill was mainly about transmission corridors, climate goals, and preserving flexibility for DEC oversight and mitigation. After debate, the bill was restored to the non-controversial calendar and passed 42-13. The Senate also passed Calendar 353, Senator Ramos’s labor law bill addressing class action wage recovery and statutory damages. Supporters said it would clarify the law so workers can recover full wages in class actions, while opponents warned it could encourage litigation against small businesses over technical payroll errors. The bill passed 47-8. The Senate then completed the calendar and adjourned until March 4, 2026, with intervening days as legislative days.

Transcript Highlights:

• The intent was that everybody would pay that fee with regards to House Bill 1998. program, but the way
• Of that group, only two licensed types were able to contribute to... the funding through the fee, based
• One additional fee, not two? Because I thought they only paid two.
• No, it's a standard. $15 fee, but we're expanding the basket. OK, thank you. Yes, ma'am.
• I just think it's interesting that a one-time fee of making sure that your staff—I mean, we made all

Bills: SB1117, SB1373, SB672, SB1986, SB1098, SB626, SB1784, SB2480, SB2487, SB437, SB660

Keywords: dentistry, botulinum toxin, aesthetic treatments, dental regulation, training, medical staff privileges, hospital administration, healthcare regulation, Texas Health and Safety Code, consistency in privileges, SB 672, Texas hospital emergency operations plan, hospital diversion, emergency department, cyberattack, cyber security, power outage, electrical outage, patient diversion, hospital preparedness

Transcript Highlights:

• Certain fees and charges by a landlord, for the Committee on Trade, Workforce, and Economic Development
• HB 4309 by Busey, relating to the filing fee for a nomination by convention, referred to the Committee
• HB 4313 by Bella Montgomery, relating to the authority of a political subdivision to impose a fee to
• HB 4363 by Money, relating to battery energy storage facilities and authorizing fees, for the Committee
• HB 4364 by Money, relating to collective re-amendments and transfer fees. ...of enhancing border security

Bills: HJR4, HJR6, HB195, HB 13, HB143, HB135

Keywords: occupation tax, securities, financial regulation, tax exemption, legislative amendment, capital gains tax, realized gains, unrealized gains, investment income, asset sale, capital assets, wealth tax, estate tax, trust tax, tax limitation, constitutional amendment, Texas Constitution, Article VIII, property tax, sales tax

Transcript Highlights:

• This is the amendment related to the additional fees.
• For starters, this amendment would require a fee bill, and we did not have an accompanying fee bill for
• The amendment additionally does not provide a fee bill.
• , the hospital is paying a fee and the midwives that are paying a fee, we would then loop in other individuals
• We are back. the hospital is paying a fee and the midwives that are paying a fee, we would then loop

Bills: S0036, S0620, S0796, S0934, S1080, S1096, S1366, S1536, S1548, S1580, S1588, S1620, S1756, S7034, S7044

Keywords: nursing title, advanced practice registered nurse, advertising, professional standards, disciplinary action, candidate qualifying, federal office, election integrity, regulatory compliance, political candidacy, veterinary medicine, telehealth, veterinary professional associate, animal health, public safety, access to veterinary services, payment bond exemption, Habitat for Humanity, Florida Forever Act, land acquisition

Summary: The committee first took up SB 354, the “Blue Ribbon Projects” bill, which creates a framework for large planned communities on at least 15,000 contiguous acres with 60% reserved area and a streamlined local review process. Senator McLean presented the bill and a strike-all amendment, and members raised concerns about local control, conservation enforceability, data centers, concurrency, multi-county projects, and whether reserve lands could later be converted. Audubon Florida and 1,000 Friends of Florida opposed the bill, arguing the conservation protections were not permanent enough and that the reserve areas could be changed later; small-county representatives also worried about tax-base impacts. Supporters argued the bill would better manage growth, preserve green space, and provide a more orderly alternative to sprawl. After debate, the committee voted to report the bill favorably. The committee then approved SB 620 on candidate qualifying, which requires candidates for federal, state, county, district, judiciary, school, and school board offices to disclose any non-U.S. citizenship. Amendments added disclosure about whether federal candidates intend to trade stock if elected and adjusted 2026 congressional qualifying procedures in the event of redistricting, including a new qualifying window and petition rules. The bill was reported favorably after brief support from a member of the public and discussion about candidate vetting. The committee also reported favorably CS/CS/CS/SB 1452, a Department of Financial Services bill with amendments addressing My Safe Florida Home notices, condo pilot eligibility, firefighter hiring, unclaimed property, and related financial-services provisions. Next, the committee approved CS/CS/SB 1620, a school board members’ bill of rights. A substitute amendment narrowed the bill to access to records, fiscal transparency, and nondisclosure agreements, while preserving board members’ rights to timely documents, budget information, and public comment, and setting deadlines for records requests. Superintendents and a school board member testified in support, saying the bill clarifies roles and prevents board members from being frozen out. The committee also passed CS/HB 245, which replaces the term “child pornography” with “child sexual abuse material”; one senator supported the terminology change but warned about preserving legal precedent and avoiding appellate issues. The committee then reported favorably SB 1548, an update to the Live Local affordable housing law expanding eligible sites and clarifying setbacks, airport proximity, and fair-housing protections. Finally, the committee took up the veterinary medicine bill creating veterinary professional associates. The bill allows trained master’s-level VPAs to perform limited veterinary services under a veterinarian’s supervision, and an amendment tightened the standard to immediate supervision on premises. Supporters said the measure would expand access to care, especially in rural areas with vet shortages, while opponents argued it added unnecessary regulation. After testimony from veterinary educators and others, the bill continued with support expressed by committee members, including praise for the direct-supervision amendment.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have to pay fees to be able to, for an industry, to take responsibility.
• You said the fee's going to follow that directly, or what's the fee going to be?
• So it would be like a license fee.
• You pay a license fee for gaming fish to be able to fund them to regulate them.
• So is it a set fee, or is it based on a percentage of the usage? It's percentage.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Regulation Commission Act, creating the utility oversight fund, changing distribution of collected fees
• and penalties, and providing for the enforcement of fees by the Public Regulation Commission.
• Regulation Commission Act, creating the utility oversight fund, changing distribution of collected fees
• Changing distribution of collected fees and penalties, providing for the enforcement of fees by the Public
• and Duncan, an act relating to labor, requiring the Health Care Authority to set a minimum Medicaid fee

Bills: HB1

Keywords: feed bill, legislative appropriations, legislative branch, New Mexico Legislature, general fund, legislative council service, legislative finance committee, legislative education study committee, house chief clerk, senate chief clerk, per diem, mileage, session expenses, interim committees, district staff, capitol complex, capital outlay data system, legislative processing system, redistricting, census redistricting

Transcript Highlights:

• that there is reason to believe that in the lower-market communities that are more reliant on impact fees
• to fund that in the lower-market communities that are more reliant on impact fees to fund infrastructure
• and that may lose them from the changes in the in need of impact fees and that may lose them from the
• I would emphasize here that I think those infrastructure fees should be focused in those lower-market
• , it might not be on road or vehicle throughput the way you would conventionally think of an impact fee

Summary: The Senate Housing Committee heard a series of work-session presentations focused on transit-oriented development, commercial-to-residential redevelopment, building code implementation, housing market trends, and the Covenant Homeownership Program. The first presentation, from the Urban Institute, reviewed research on HB 1491 and TOD feasibility, arguing that Washington has made major progress but faces diverging conditions across transit areas. The presenter said rising construction costs, higher interest rates, and lower rents in some markets have made many projects less feasible, and recommended targeted infrastructure funding for lower-market communities, adjustments to MFTE and affordability requirements by local market conditions, more support for very low-income housing in high-market transit areas, minimum density standards near stations, expanded public land/joint development tools, and better tracking of TOD outcomes over time. Committee members asked about AMI calculations, immigration’s effect on construction labor, developer input, and whether a tracking mechanism had been removed from the bill. The Department of Commerce then outlined implementation of HB 1491 and demonstrated the new Washington Zoning Atlas, which is live and intended to help visualize zoning, overlays, and station-area conditions. Commerce said local governments will designate station areas, update zoning and MFTE policies, and handle anti-displacement measures, with Vancouver and Spokane first to implement and Puget Sound following later. Staff described a timeline for updated MFTE guidance, station-area implementation guidance, a TOD model ordinance, and later rulemaking on variances. The committee also heard from the Lieutenant Governor’s office on a report about converting commercial properties to housing, which found substantial potential for redevelopment on vacant or underused commercial land, especially near transit, but noted barriers such as ground-floor retail mandates, affordability requirements, infrastructure costs, private covenants, and slow implementation. The office urged by-right residential use on commercial land and faster rollout of new housing laws. The State Building Code Council updated the committee on its three-year code cycle and several legislatively directed actions, including minimum dwelling size, emergency shelters, and especially single-exit stairs and multiplex housing. Council staff said those code changes are nearing completion and will provide prescriptive solutions, while noting that elevator size and requirements were not changed and would require separate legislative direction if the committee wanted to revisit them. Members discussed the cost impacts of building and energy codes and the council said it is required to consider economic impacts and is increasingly looking at performance-based approaches. Later, the Washington Center for Real Estate Research presented its annual housing report, showing that higher mortgage rates have sharply reduced affordability, flattened house prices in many cities, and slowed single-family permitting and completions, while multifamily construction has recently cooled after a prior surge. Finally, the Washington State Housing Finance Commission reported strong first-year results for the Covenant Homeownership Program, which provides zero-interest down payment assistance to eligible first-time buyers with family ties to Washington before 1968; the program assisted 547 homebuyers in its first fiscal year, with more than $60 million loaned, and the agency said participation has continued to grow after income-limit changes enacted in 2025.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm going to use Medicare fee-for-service data. That's the only source of data we have.
• , but not defendant's attorney's fees.
• In Med-Mal cases, the percent of attorney's fees is most often a third.
• I don't think capping plaintiff's fees, or plaintiff's percentage, is the way to go.
• We did have Senate Bill 176, which was proposed to cap attorney fees in medical malpractice.

Transcript Highlights:

• often involves adherence to local regulations and standards regarding right-of-way usage, including fees
• is to file the application with the appropriate agency, including all necessary documentation and fees
• has its own specific rules regarding placement of utility within the right-of-way, including permit fees
• anyway, those revenues were absorbed in the communication services tax, and because of that, permit fees
• anyway, those revenues were absorbed in the communication services tax, and because of that, permit fees

Summary: The Economic Infrastructure Subcommittee met with a quorum present and first heard HB 11 from Representative Robinson. The bill would address an unintended consequence in Florida’s municipal utility surcharge law by requiring the same water/utility rate for residents when a utility facility is physically located within one municipality but owned by another, rather than allowing the owning municipality to impose a 25% surcharge. The sponsor and several members described it as a fairness issue affecting residents who do not receive local tax support for the facility but still bear the surcharge. Public testimony included support from AARP and Miami-Dade County and opposition from North Miami Beach. The bill was reported favorably on an 18-0 vote. The committee then held a panel discussion on utility use of public rights-of-way and utility relocation. Panelists from FDOT, county government, gas, water, electric, and communications sectors described the permitting process, noting that FDOT uses a detailed utility accommodation manual and that local governments may use permits, franchise agreements, or ordinances depending on the utility type. They emphasized that utilities often must coordinate early with agencies using long-range work programs and project plans, and that the process differs by utility and jurisdiction. Communications witnesses discussed Chapter 337 and the 60-day local permitting shot clock, while others noted the role of Sunshine State One Call in locating facilities before excavation. A major focus was who pays for relocations when road or infrastructure projects require utilities to move. FDOT and several panelists said utilities generally bear the cost when they are in public right-of-way, with exceptions such as certain interstate/interchange projects and easement impacts. Utility representatives said relocations are often effectively new builds, can be costly, and are ultimately reflected in rates or customer costs. Members also asked about easements versus right-of-way, damage and disputes during construction, broadband workforce needs, and whether legislation could improve coordination. Panelists largely said the existing process works best when agencies, contractors, and utilities communicate early and continuously, and that more legislation may not be necessary compared with better planning, staffing, and use of technology.

Transcript Highlights:

• Development Act, which is designed to provide our veteran-owned and military spouse-owned businesses with fee
• costs and administrative hurdles don't stand in the way, SB 1182 addresses those barriers by reducing fees
• Department of Veterans Affairs and creates a verification letter process that businesses use to claim the fee
• The amendment broadens the fee waiver to apply not just to relocations, but also to eligible existing
• criteria for veteran- and military-spouse-owned businesses and continues to provide a Department of State fee

Summary: The Senate Committee on Military, Veterans Affairs, Space, and Domestic Security met with a quorum present and considered two bills. SB 1594, by Senator Gates, would require veterans’ benefits accessed on behalf of foster youth to be preserved for the minor’s future use, specifically for post-secondary education or aftercare services when the youth leaves foster care rather than being used to reimburse care costs. The bill had no amendments, received one supportive appearance from Victoria Zep, and was reported favorably by roll call vote. The committee then took up SB 1182, by Senator Jones, which creates the Florida Veterans and Military Spouses Business Development Act to provide fee relief and tax incentives for veteran-owned and military spouse-owned businesses. A strike-all amendment was adopted that added limited information-sharing between agencies, changed verification procedures, converted part of the tax benefit into a capped $100,000 annual exemption for five years, broadened fee waivers to some existing businesses, and kept annual reporting requirements. The amended bill was then reported favorably. The committee also held a confirmation hearing for three appointees: Matthew Bacchano, Tim Thomas, and Belinda Kaiser. No one requested separate votes, and the committee recommended confirmation of all three by a single roll call vote. At the end of the meeting, members offered extended praise and thanks to Chair Wright for his long service and leadership, and the chair announced the meeting was adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• this basically giving the county commission the right obligation to promote a resolution to issue a $2 fee
• if... to promote a resolution to issue a $2 fee if you don't...
• Section on the amendment baseline, lines 11 and 12 on page one, provides for the registration issuing fee
• Um, as a matter of fact, even our own county pondered the idea of adding as much as a $10 fee in a work
• So the $2 fee is brought by the sheriff, and this is where I'll end.

Bills: SB314

Keywords: motor vehicle fees, Shelby County, law enforcement funding, registration fees, county commission, 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• HB72 is a distinctive tag for firefighters, and we're raising their own fee from $1 to $10, and also
• The Department of Revenue determined the amount that added the fee, whatever you call it.
• So, who did the initial designation of the fee legislation? Okay, that's what I was trying to...
• That was the major catch when we saw that it accidentally levied two additional $10 fees instead of just
• No, actually, it’s an additional $9, taking it from $1 to $10, so it’ll be an additional $9 fee.

Bills: HB30, HB35, HB72, HB89, HB30, HB35

Keywords: elections, post-election audit, election audit, risk-limiting audit, ballot audit, election integrity, voter confidence, Secretary of State, judge of probate, canvassing board, poll watchers, ballot containers, manual tally, recount, county election, statewide election, general election, absentee ballots, provisional ballots, election transparency