Transcript Highlights:

• $100 Covenant Home Ownership Program assessment, a $2.50 growth management planning and review fund surcharge
• , and a $183 surcharge related to housing must be charged for each document recorded, though there are
• from the Covenant Home Ownership Program assessment, the growth management planning and review fund surcharge
• , and the surcharge related to housing.

Summary: The committee first heard HB 2517, which would give regional transit authorities, especially Sound Transit, more flexible permitting tools for high-capacity transit projects. Staff and the bill sponsor said the goal is to let permit applications and technical reviews proceed concurrently with property acquisition and land use decisions, reducing delay and uncertainty for large transit projects. Sound Transit testified that the bill could save as much as nine months, while a city representative from Bothell asked for an amendment requiring notice to property owners before permits are advanced on land not yet owned or controlled by the agency. The committee then took testimony on HB 2313, concerning publicly owned grocery stores in underserved areas. The bill would let cities acquire land, build or rehabilitate stores, seek capital grants, and create tax increment financing areas for grocery access projects, with annual reporting requirements. Supporters, including the sponsor, Food Lifeline, and Northwest Harvest, argued that grocery closures and food deserts are real problems and that local governments need tools to fill gaps when private grocers leave. Opponents, including grocery industry groups and several students, warned that public stores could undercut private grocers, burden taxpayers, and create operational and property-rights concerns; some testimony also questioned the need for government ownership and the use of tax increment financing. A proposed substitute removed eminent domain and tax increment financing provisions and narrowed the bill to grant-funded stores in underserved areas. Next, the committee heard HB 2451, a major rewrite of local tax increment financing rules. The bill would tighten notice, consultation, reporting, and mitigation requirements for TIF areas, strengthen the “but-for” test, limit where increment areas can be located, and protect existing taxing districts by excluding certain levies and requiring negotiation, mediation, or arbitration when impacts are significant. Cities, ports, counties, libraries, fire chiefs, and hospital districts largely described the bill as a negotiated compromise that improves transparency and addresses unintended impacts, though some local governments said they still wanted more flexibility or protections for existing projects. One city testified against the bill, arguing the new restrictions would make TIF much less useful for large redevelopment efforts. The committee then heard HB 2298, which would authorize county auditors to create voluntary property title protection programs to help prevent land-record fraud by allowing owners to record a protection instrument that delays recording of a title transfer for up to five business days unless identity verification is provided. Auditors, treasurers, and county officials strongly supported the bill as a practical response to rising deed fraud, while title and foreclosure industry representatives said the proposal was too limited, could interfere with foreclosures or other transfers, and would only delay—not prevent—fraud. The final bill heard was HB 2566 on local government procurement, which would raise certain small-purchase and small-public-works thresholds for counties, remove some differences between larger and smaller counties, and give counties more options when no bids are received. County representatives supported the bill as a needed update to procurement rules and a way to reduce bureaucracy and keep pace with inflation.

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill makes a technical correction to the surcharges authorized for certified anesthesiologist assistance
• The bill makes a technical correction to the surcharges authorized for certified anesthesiologist assistance
• Senate Bill 5877 before us, and I'd like to read the title: making the technical correction to the surcharges
• Move committee be adjourned. technical correction to the surcharges authorized for certified anesthesiologist's

Summary: The Senate Health and Long-Term Care Committee heard testimony on several bills. SB 6159 would create a public hospital infrastructure account funded by a new annual coverage assessment on insurers and other businesses subject to the premium tax, and would allow public hospital districts and other public health entities to collaborate more freely and access capital financing for major construction or modernization projects. Senator Dhingra said the bill is intended to help public hospitals compete and modernize, especially amid federal Medicaid and ACA subsidy cuts. Supporters included UW Medicine, while hospital districts supported the general concept but said Section 2 could unintentionally narrow existing cooperative agreements with nonpublic entities. Health plans and insurers opposed the bill, arguing it would raise premiums, increase consolidation, and improperly sweep in property and casualty insurers and mutual companies; testimony also raised concerns about pass-through costs and retaliatory tax effects. The hearing on SB 6159 closed with 5 pro, 74 con, and 2 other sign-ins. The committee then heard SB 5845, which would modernize timely payment rules by requiring carriers and public employee plans to pay or deny all clean claims within 30 days, require prompt notice and a single request for additional information on incomplete claims, and impose interest or penalties for missed deadlines. Senator Slaughter said the bill would reduce uncertainty for providers and stabilize payments without increasing patient costs. Hospitals, physicians, and health systems strongly supported the measure, citing large volumes of late clean claims and examples of prolonged delays, including a Harborview claim that remained unpaid more than a year after billing. Health plans opposed the bill, saying the current 95% standard is workable, that they already meet high compliance rates, and that the bill could limit fraud, waste, and abuse review on high-dollar claims; they also sought more flexibility and additional time for responses. The hearing closed with 69 pro, 4 con, and 2 other sign-ins. The committee also heard SB 5916, which would prohibit health plans from disadvantaging non-opioid pain treatments relative to opioids in formularies and utilization management, and would require a Department of Health educational pamphlet on non-opioid alternatives. Senator Harris described the bill as a response to opioid deaths and a way to encourage safer pain treatment options. Patients, recovery advocates, and rare disease advocates testified in support, saying insurance barriers and step therapy often make non-opioid care harder to access and can push patients toward opioids. The Health Care Authority and an association of health plans opposed the bill, arguing it could reduce formulary flexibility, increase costs, and limit tools such as prior authorization and step therapy. The hearing closed with 8 pro, 1 con, and 2 other sign-ins. Finally, the committee heard SB 6102 and SB 6103, both sponsored by Senator Muzzall, and SB 6071. SB 6102 would align the ambulance transport quality assurance fee with federal rules after H.R. 1 barred new provider taxes, preserving the existing fee rate and adjusting the Medicaid add-on rate annually; the Washington Ambulance Association supported it, saying the program had improved wages and benefits for EMS workers. SB 6103 would make Medicaid payments for services provided by a rural emergency hospital subject to appropriation, creating a framework for East Adams Rural Health Care to convert to the new federal rural emergency hospital model; East Adams and the Washington State Hospital Association supported it as a way to preserve rural access. SB 6071 would shorten overpayment recovery timelines for all services to six months, or nine months for coordination-of-benefits cases, matching the shorter timelines already enacted for behavioral health services; providers and specialty associations supported the bill as a way to reduce destabilizing clawbacks, while the remaining testimony was still underway when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Kraft and Zalessnikar and others have introduced legislation for electric vehicle surcharges
• more generally than equivalent fossil fuel vehicles, and the existing $75 annual registration fee surcharge
• Raising the EV surcharge to $200 would put us tied for third place of all of the states in the country
• should someone who drives a Nissan LEAF 6,500 miles a year, you know, be penalized by paying an EV surcharge

Transcript Highlights:

• serving another municipality water or utility, that you can charge that other municipality up to a 25% surcharge
• And they're charging my residents 25% surcharge.
• I do believe that the surcharge was put in place so that if you did have to extend.
• I actually get my water from a different utility in a different city and pay a surcharge, but that facility

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:

• They oversee the statewide 911 program and the emergency dispatch systems.
• Most of this money, or all of this money, comes from the 911 fee that's imposed on cell phone service
• Most of this money, or all of this money, comes from the 911 fee that's imposed on cell phone service
• This account is derived from a surcharge on home insurance premiums.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• The woman ultimately called 911 and had first responders meet her in a Walmart parking lot, where she
• She finally agreed to call 911 and have first responders meet her in a Walmart parking lot.
• released, but the administration believes that this proposal will generate enough revenue from the surcharge
• released, but the administration believes that this proposal will generate enough revenue from the surcharge

Bills: HF837, HF1903, HF499, HF794

Keywords: health insurance, premium security plan, federal funding, state innovation waiver, Minnesota, newborn safety, anonymity, healthcare provider, safe place, child welfare, HF499, nursing, nurse licensure, temporary permit, temporary nursing permit, Board of Nursing, endorsement licensure, reregistration, refresher course, health occupations

Transcript Highlights:

• Aquatic invasive species, or AIS, surcharge increases are necessary.
• The AIS surcharge was last increased in 2019 for the first time in 25 years.

Bills: HF2439

Keywords: environmental protection, pollution reduction, waste management, climate change, funding allocations

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, the first is to add a surcharge to the applicant's assigned family responsibility.
• Um, adding a surcharge would bring that up to 80%.
• , they would bump up each bucket of students at the same with the same surcharge.
• , the same surcharge has to be applied.
• At that time, the rationing language was interpreted to mean that this AFR surcharge was a percentage

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The Higher Education Conference Committee reviewed differences among the Governor’s, House, and Senate proposals for state grant parameter changes and their effects on state grant spending, North Star Promise spending, and average student awards. Nonpartisan staff explained that the proposals use different combinations of parameter changes, with the Governor’s and Senate plans modeled to avoid or minimize rationing, while the House plan would require rationing to balance the program. Staff reported projected biennium balances of a positive $29.836 million for the Governor’s proposal, a negative $60.758 million for the House proposal without rationing, a positive $994,000 for the House proposal with rationing, and a positive $3.623 million for the Senate proposal; North Star Promise balances also varied, with the Senate showing a positive balance and the Governor and House with rationing showing negative balances. Staff also said the Senate proposal would extend availability of the state grant appropriation and suspend surplus procedures through fiscal year 2029, allowing the balance to carry forward. The committee then focused on the House-only tuition and fee cap provision, which would limit the tuition recognized for state grant purposes for four-year programs to the University of Minnesota Twin Cities level, with 1% annual increases in fiscal years 2026 and 2027. House members said the cap was intended to address rising tuition, especially at the University of Minnesota, and to produce savings in the state grant program. The governor’s office confirmed the provision was not included in the Governor’s bill. Representatives from the University of Minnesota and the Minnesota Private College Council opposed the cap, arguing it would reduce awards for low-income students and shift costs to students rather than address underlying tuition pressures; they also said it could discourage enrollment at higher-cost institutions. Supporters from Minnesota State argued the cap would improve fairness because students at lower-tuition institutions are effectively capped lower, while students at more expensive institutions receive larger awards, and they said the legislature should intervene in a variable that has grown substantially over time. Committee members questioned how the cap would work and whether it was tied to the Twin Cities campus rate. Testifiers clarified that the state grant formula is tied to the University of Minnesota level, but because Minnesota State institutions are below that level, the cap effectively limits their students to their own lower tuition while allowing higher awards at the University of Minnesota and private colleges. No formal vote or final action was taken in the portion of the meeting provided; the chair indicated the committee would continue with item-by-item review of the remaining parameter changes and hear additional testimony from agencies and institutions.

Transcript Highlights:

• I understand the mandatory fees or surcharges, but I don't know, this can get very tricky and complicated
• But I wanted to ask you, we had a bill on debit card surcharges. Yes, ma'am.
• And since then, I've also heard restaurants charge a surcharge on cash, and they're not told in advance
• And if somebody goes to a restaurant and they get surcharged because they're paying cash and it makes

Summary: The committee took up several House measures. HCR 66, as amended, asked Louisiana Economic Development and the Governor’s Office of Rural Development to study rural parish assets, infrastructure, workforce, and development opportunities, and it was moved forward without objection. HB 387, a clarification to allow the fire marshal’s office to review architectural and engineering plans equally, also passed favorably without objection. HB 1223, which would have LED promote Louisiana’s clinical trial capacity and adjust internal review board processes, was amended and moved favorably. HB 950, aimed at helping older adults recognize and avoid fraud through materials and resources from the Office of Elderly Affairs, was reported favorably. HB 975, a routine measure to recreate the Public Service Commission, was also reported favorably. HB 1186, which would create a more uniform statewide building code and licensing system for inspectors, was amended and moved favorably. HB 1222, described as a Grocery Initiative Act to let LED identify ways to address food deserts and food insecurity, was introduced near the end of the meeting. The most extensive debate centered on HB 617, a consumer transparency bill requiring mandatory fees to be included in upfront pricing. The author said the bill was intended to curb hidden fees and help consumers compare prices, with examples such as hotel resort fees and automatic restaurant service charges. Supporters argued it would improve transparency, while opponents from grocery, restaurant, hotel, housing, retail, and business groups said the bill was too broad, vague about terms like “total price,” unclear on enforcement and penalties, and could create compliance burdens and litigation risk, especially for small businesses. Housing advocates opposed the bill’s housing carve-out, arguing it could weaken renters’ ability to bring unfair-practice claims. Senator Morris moved to defer HB 617, and the committee agreed without objection. The committee also heard lengthy testimony on HB 797, which would create a Bayou Gold certification for certain transactional gold vendors that meet state-defined standards such as segregation, insurance, and nearby storage. The sponsor said the goal was to give consumers confidence and encourage vendors to keep gold closer to Louisiana, while critics argued the program would amount to a state endorsement of private companies, create misleading consumer impressions, and expose the state to confusion or liability. The bill drew opposition from the Sound Money Defense League and others, but the committee ultimately reported HB 797 favorably, with the understanding it still had to go to Finance. HB 1228, a hearing-aid cleanup bill updating definitions, contracts, testing periods, and licensing rules, was also moved favorably without objection.

Transcript Highlights:

• Some of these changes include correcting outdated language, clarifying that the advanced computing surcharge
• and the financial institution surcharge both apply to the new credit card processing B&O rate, clarifying
• Some of these changes include correcting outdated language, clarifying that the advanced computing surcharge
• and the financial institution surcharge both apply to the new credit card processing B&O rate, clarifying

Bills: HB2175, HB2227, HB2528, HB2292, HB2257, HB2608

Keywords: durable medical equipment, sales tax exemption, healthcare accessibility, cost reduction, nonprofit providers, affordable housing, real estate tax, exemption, housing policy, tax incentives, real estate excise tax, REET, growth management act, GMA, local government finance, capital facilities plan, comprehensive plan, county tax, city tax, voter approval

Transcript Highlights:

• And then the last lever that we would be creating would be establishing an electric vehicle surcharge
• going to impose a national electric vehicle registration fee, meaning that that registration fee surcharge
• have to be mindful that what we do here in New Mexico could be compounded with an eventual federal surcharge
• The other point I want to make about the surcharge for electric vehicles is that it isn't aimed at being

Transcript Highlights:

• there has been testimony from city and county of Honolulu regarding the use of the half percent surcharge
• The other counties may choose to use the half percent surcharge if it is not already earmarked for their
• </c><01:50:40.840><c> because</c><01:50:41.320><c> they're</c> half percent surcharge because they're
• half percent surcharge because they're earmarked<01:50:42.360><c> for</c><01:50:42.560><c> rail.
• </c> choose to use the half percent surcharge choose to use the half percent surcharge if<01:51:02.240

Bills: SB2908, SB2671, SB3085, SB2907, SB2353, SB2074, SB2360, SB2057, SB3251, SB2354, SB3001

Keywords: permit processing, permitting reform, county permits, development permits, building permits, land use, construction delays, housing development, infrastructure development, county workforce, differential pay, salary incentive, performance bonus, recruitment and retention, expedited hiring, vacancy rates, permit backlog, government modernization, county mayor, county council

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several Senate bills, with most measures drawing broad support and a few generating significant opposition or policy questions. SB 2908 SD1 and SB 2671 SD1 were taken up first; both appeared to have majority support, with SB 2908 receiving seven in support, one in opposition, and one comment, and SB 2671 receiving five in support and two comments. SB 3085 SD2, related to film industry operations, drew 11 supporters and no opposition. Georgia Skinner explained that the bill would streamline the approval timeline for productions by reducing delays tied to Land Board review, and she said DLNR supported the effort. Committee members asked about the need for the change and the relationship between the film studio, DLNR, and the approval process. The committee then discussed SB 2907 SD1, which would create an Office of Marine Affairs. Testimony was largely supportive, including from DLNR, HTDC, the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity, ocean industry representatives, and others. The governor’s office supported the bill’s intent but objected to placing the office within the Office of the Governor, urging instead that it be housed at HTDC. HTDC said it was willing and excited to take on the work and described ongoing stakeholder engagement. Members asked about the rationale for the placement and the long-term structure of the office. SB 2353 SD2, concerning the Aloha Stadium district and billboard/naming-rights issues, drew strong opposition overall, with four in support, 23 in opposition, and one comment. Andrew Pereira of the Stadium Authority argued the measure could generate revenue to help maintain and operate the stadium and said the district would remain self-contained; he also emphasized that the development would respect the character of the area. The committee then heard SB 2074 SD1, which had five in support and 26 in opposition; only one support testimony from the Carpenters was heard before the discussion moved on. Finally, SB 2360 SD1, an enterprise zones measure, received 14 supportive testimonies and two comments. Testimony focused on updating the program for modern business models, especially e-commerce and direct-to-consumer sales, while committee members questioned whether the program overlaps with higher tax burdens and whether businesses receiving subsidies should be monitored for job retention after graduation from the program.

Transcript Highlights:

• that the governor has already signed Senate Bill 2, which assesses some fees, or what they call surcharges
• We kept it in, and again, I mentioned Senate Bill 2 has been signed by the governor, and that's a surcharge
• on EVs. ...and that's a surcharge on EVs and hybrids.

Summary: The committee first received a detailed New Mexico DOT District 5 presentation from Rhonda Lopez. She reviewed District 5’s budget, staffing vacancies, completed and ongoing special appropriations from 2020 through 2025, active construction projects, maintenance work, STIP and local government funding, and equipment needs. Members asked about a guardrail issue near U.S. 64, the status of the 5% local match for Transportation Project Fund projects, and the New Mexico 371/Navajo Route 36 intersection; DOT said the match agreements were in place or waived where eligible, and that the Navajo Nation funding agreement was nearly finalized. The chair then moved the agenda to bills before finishing the remaining presentations later. House Bill 270, dealing with contributions to apprenticeship and training programs on public works projects, was presented by Rep. Borrego as a follow-up to the 2024 workforce development and apprenticeship trust fund law. The bill would remove an exclusion for street, highway, bridge, road, utility, and maintenance contracts and require contributions unless a trade classification has no approved apprenticeship program. Associated Contractors and the Asphalt Pavement Association opposed the bill, arguing it would raise road project costs and duplicate existing training programs. Members raised concerns about notice, added costs, and whether contractors with existing programs would be paying twice. A motion to table failed on a tie vote, and a later motion to pass also failed on a tie vote, leaving the bill in committee and available for reconsideration. Ranking Member Brown then presented House Bill 322, which would create a transportation trust fund and transportation program fund, with a planned distribution beginning in 2029, including a 5% use for federal matching funds. The bill would also dedicate a portion of the gross receipts tax on electricity and redirect part of the motor vehicle excise tax to grow the fund. Associated Contractors and the Asphalt Pavement Association supported the concept, saying it would help sustain DOT and address the state’s road maintenance gap. Members questioned the electricity tax component, its effect on ratepayers and data centers, the interaction with SB 2 and bond financing, and how projects would be prioritized. A motion to pass failed on a tie vote, and the ranking member suggested the bill could be reconsidered with an amendment removing the electricity portion. The committee then heard a District 4 DOT presentation from assistant district engineer Cruz Sudoste, covering the district’s geography, budget, staffing, completed and active projects, STIP and local government programs, and equipment replacement needs. Members asked about school district uses of transportation project funds and the impact of aging equipment on repair costs. The presentation concluded without any vote or other action on the district report.

Transcript Highlights:

• The second big change is the HMO surcharge in our original proposal.
• For the HMO surcharge, however, when we increase that, we also invest it back into the rates for the
• We're also making... ...updates to errors we've had in the original language, such as the surcharge changes

Transcript Highlights:

• Members, this bill protects everyday ratepayers by requiring a surcharge on large-load data centers during
• A surcharge on large-load data centers during peak demand periods.

Keywords: 914, all

Bills: SB1465, SB2110, SB1771, SB206, SB1584, SB1386, SB1696, SB1806, SB1428, SB1390, SB1381, SB201, SB1778, SB1332, SB1836, SB1369, SB1794, SB1290, SB175, SB1379

Keywords: professional engineers, surveyors, licensure board, sunset extension, state board, occupational licensing, engineering license, surveying license, professional regulation, regulatory board, sunset review, emergency clause, Oklahoma O.S. 59, board appointments, lay member, SB2110, eggs, ungraded eggs, graded eggs, egg sales

Bills: HB2323, HB2324, HB1509, HB2164, HB2165, HB2367, HB2619, HB1765, HB2187, HB1864, HB1452, HB2314, HB1898, HB2558, HB2319, HB1643, HB2121

Keywords: workers' compensation, treatment plans, vocational rehabilitation, electronic submission, reporting requirements, occupational safety, hoisting machines, discrimination protection, Department of Labor, safety standards, treatment plan, injured worker, medical treatment authorization, employer response deadline, secure electronic transmission, facsimile, fax, mail submission, denial of care, medical necessity

Summary: The committee heard several administration bills related largely to workers’ compensation and unemployment insurance. On HB 2323 HD1, which would modernize workers’ compensation notice and filing procedures, DLIR and other agencies testified in support of the original bill language but said HD1 removed key components and weakened the bill’s clarity and continuity. HB 2324 HD1, which would repeal state hoisting-machine certification requirements and the separate crane operator certificate, drew support from DLIR; members asked about whether the change would affect safety or local operators, and DLIR said OSHA-compliant certifications already exist and the union supported the change. HB 1509 HD1, which would require faster employer responses to treatment plans and impose penalties for nonresponse, received support from DLIR and others, while DHRD said it wanted an amendment. The committee also took up HB 2164 HD1 on compounded prescription drugs in workers’ compensation. DLIR supported the bill as a way to define compounded drugs and curb inflated pricing, but DHRD and a medical provider opposed it and asked for amendments. Testimony focused heavily on whether the definition should include 503B compounding facilities and whether physician dispensing should be limited to the first 30 days after injury. HB 2165 HD1, dealing with unemployment insurance eligibility and removing the two-year limit on recouping overpayments, was supported by DLIR but opposed by Unite Here Local 5, which argued it would make it harder for striking workers and other claimants. Members questioned the impact of changing reporting deadlines from calendar days to business days and raised concerns about future benefit offsets; DLIR said the bill was needed for federal conformity and that the committee would revisit the offset percentage and effective date. Later, the committee heard HB 2367 on pay transparency, requiring salary ranges in job postings and removing the small-employer exemption. The Hawaii Civil Rights Commission, AAUW, Hawaii Women Lawyers, and an individual testifier supported the bill, saying pay transparency promotes fairness, trust, and pay equity; one testifier described being underpaid compared with a predecessor and said posting ranges would save applicants’ time. HB 2619 HD1, concerning homemade food products and farm kitchens, received generally supportive comments from the Department of Health, which requested an amendment to preserve flexibility in future rulemaking. HB 1765 HD1, on spear-fishing safety warnings, drew support from a safety educator and comments from DLNR; supporters said warning labels would help prevent hypoxic blackout deaths and were low-cost and easy to implement. No votes or final committee actions were taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Bills: SB1465, SB2110, SB1771, SB206, SB1584, SB1386, SB1696, SB1806, SB1428, SB1390, SB1381, SB201, SB1778, SB1332, SB1836, SB1369, SB1794, SB1290, SB175, SB1379

Keywords: professional engineers, surveyors, licensure board, sunset extension, state board, occupational licensing, engineering license, surveying license, professional regulation, regulatory board, sunset review, emergency clause, Oklahoma O.S. 59, board appointments, lay member, SB2110, eggs, ungraded eggs, graded eggs, egg sales

Summary: The Senate convened with a quorum, opened with prayer, and included several member and gallery introductions, including recognition of the Doctor of the Day and family members of senators. The chamber then moved to floor business on several bills, with no major debate on most measures. Senate Bill 1465 extended the sunset date for the State Board of Licensure for Professional Engineers and Surveyors to 2031 and passed 43-2, including as an emergency measure. Senate Bill 2110, as amended, allowed the sale of ungraded eggs up to 150 dozen, with the author explaining it was requested by constituents to support rural economics and farmers markets. Senators asked about the need for the bill, the cap, and food safety; the author said the limit was a starting point and noted the eggs would be sold off-premises. The bill advanced and passed 44-2. Senate Bill 1771, which authorizes the Workforce Commission to obtain more complete information on workforce development funds and retain outside counsel, had a title-restoring amendment adopted and then passed 35-11. Senate Bill 206, making public EMS services eligible as essential for drawing down federal funds, passed 42-5 and was also declared an emergency measure. The Senate also heard acknowledgements, including congratulations to Senator Seifried on her first successful day presiding and recognition of Catoosa Day at the Capitol. Announcements followed on appropriations and Oklahoma Women’s Day at the Capitol, and the Senate adjourned until Thursday, March 5, 2026, at 9:30 a.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• They can't predict the oil companies taking advantage of the mystery gasoline surcharge that's been identified
• They can't predict the oil companies taking advantage of the mystery gasoline surcharge that's been identified
• They can't predict the oil companies taking advantage of the mystery gasoline surcharge that's been identified
• They can't predict the oil companies taking advantage of the mystery gasoline surcharge that's been identified
• They can't predict the oil companies taking advantage of the mystery gasoline surcharge that's been identified

Summary: The committee first heard SB 872 by Senator McNerney, which would dedicate $150 million annually each for Central Valley subsidence repairs and Delta levee improvements. The author and supporters, including Restore the Delta and State Water Contractors, described the bill as an urgent, bipartisan effort to protect State Water Project conveyance serving 27 million people, prevent levee failure, and safeguard billions in state assets. Support came from a broad coalition of water agencies, labor, environmental groups, and local governments; there was no opposition testimony. Because the committee was operating without a quorum at the time, the bill was heard as a subcommittee item and no final vote was taken then. The committee then took up SB 981 by Senator Niello, which would require CARB to include cost-of-living impacts in its existing economic analysis for major regulations. The author argued the bill would improve transparency by showing effects on gasoline, electricity, food, housing, and business costs, while supporters from agriculture, manufacturing, business, propane, and restaurant interests said it would help lawmakers understand affordability impacts. Opponents, including the Coalition for Clean Air and the Union of Concerned Scientists, argued it would add red tape, delay rulemaking, and require CARB to make speculative predictions. The chair and other members expressed concern that the bill was redundant, burdensome, and too narrow because it singled out CARB rather than addressing affordability across state government; no vote was taken in the excerpt. SB 887 by Senator Padilla would require large data center projects to undergo CEQA review, but offer streamlined treatment for projects meeting strong environmental, labor, and community-benefit standards. Supporters, including TURN, IBEW Local 569, and several environmental and local-government groups, said the bill would protect communities from high energy and water use, cost shifting, and pollution while still allowing responsible development. Opponents from the Data Center Coalition, Silicon Valley Leadership Group, Bay Area Council, and others argued the standards were overly prescriptive, potentially unattainable, and would drive investment out of California. After a quorum was established, the committee voted 3-1 to pass SB 887 as amended to the Senate Energy, Utilities and Communications Committee, with the bill kept on call. Finally, SB 1008 by Senator Ochoa Bog would renew the CEQA exemption for California Public Utilities Commission-ordered closure of at-grade rail crossings, which had expired at the start of 2025. Union Pacific and other supporters said the measure would restore a long-standing safety tool and help eliminate redundant crossings more quickly. With no opposition testimony, the committee approved the bill unanimously, 4-0, and kept it on call.

Transcript Highlights:

• .on business and consumer perspectives to understand the real-world impact of credit card fees, surcharges
• Looking at transparency measures for fees and surcharges, excuse me, reporting requirements or optional

Keywords: 1212, all

Summary: The House and Senate chairs opened the first organizational meeting of the special commission created by Chapter 238 of the Acts of 2024 to study the future of payments and sales transactions by credit card and the impacts on small businesses. They explained that the commission’s charge includes reviewing payment trends, cashless transactions, credit card fees, mobile payments, buy now/pay later financing, the costs to small businesses of accepting different forms of payment, and the impact of Section 28A of Chapter 140D. No testimony was taken at this first meeting; it was intended to introduce commission members, outline the process, and begin planning future hearings and a final report with recommendations or options for the Legislature. Members discussed possible hearing topics, including business and consumer impacts of credit card fees, surcharges, and gratuities; the legal and regulatory landscape; and policy considerations such as transparency, reporting requirements, and possible limits on fees. Several members supported the commission’s scope and noted the issue’s timeliness, citing the growth of cashless transactions and the burden of swipe fees on retailers and restaurants. One member suggested the commission also consider cryptocurrency in transactions, and another raised the possibility of holding hearings outside the State House to improve access for small businesses around the state. The chairs said the first public hearing is tentatively set for April 8 in Gardner Auditorium, with additional hearings to be scheduled depending on interest and sign-ups. They said testimony may be offered in person, online, or in writing, and that written testimony will be part of the record. The commission also encouraged members and interested parties to suggest experts, topics, and report formats as the study develops. The meeting ended with a motion to close and an affirmative vote to adjourn.