Video & Transcript Research : 'fee structures'

Page 25 of 500
TX
Transcript Highlights:
  • All in my personal life, I've met many people who do not fall perfectly into the organizational structures
  • We build these organizational structures to keep ourselves comfortable and safe, sure.
  • The increase in fees is anti-small business.
  • The structure rewards bad actors willing to profit off others' deeply personal health care decisions.
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Public Education Apr 29th, 2025

Public Education

Transcript Highlights:
  • Additionally, there have been cases where vendors impose a handling fee for virtual products. despite
  • Well, and I completely agree with you, that's been one of the biggest structural deficits that the STAR
  • make sure that there is some clarification because I think that the draft because it's currently structured
  • choice that the Founding Fathers used that document to build a lot of the... foundational laws and structures
TX

Texas 89th Regular

State Affairs Apr 14th, 2025

State Affairs

Transcript Highlights:
  • Changes in law and to the structure of the wholesale market, combined with record high natural gas prices
  • It's not implied by the structure of the Constitution.
  • incurred before the Texas Supreme Court, they are pursuing... payment from us of $25,000 in legal fees
  • Similarly, we support a structured framework for handling vegetation management costs that are in the
  • You can't turn them off indefinitely because if you do, you get some structural fatigue.
OK

Oklahoma 2026 Regular Session

Senate Legislative Session Mar 25th, 2026 at 01:12 pm

Oklahoma Senate Floor Meeting

Transcript Highlights:
  • Development would be told about what kind of fee they would be charged for this.
  • Development would be told about what kind of fee they would be charged for this.
  • But then, whenever they come into a city, either they a dual authority structure.
  • And then cities and counties cannot change the zoning or fees if it impairs bond repayment. So...
  • And then cities and counties cannot change the zoning or fees if it impairs bond repayment. So...
OK

Oklahoma 2026 Regular Session

Senate Legislative Session Mar 25th, 2026 at 09:00 am

Oklahoma Senate Floor Meeting

Transcript Highlights:
  • And it builds in structured intervention so students are getting consistent, targeted help, not just
  • ensuring that legislative authority is not improperly delegated to unelected officials within this new structure
  • And I would love to hear why you feel like that this new structure is not that, but really would provide
  • community-based solutions explicitly protected, particularly within the new department's authority structure
CA
Transcript Highlights:
  • The registration fee, not a true licensure fee, would go to $10,000, which would... ...fee, not a true
  • Is there an additional workload analysis that is kind of fee by fee?
  • That's kind of a frustrating problem with the way that the fee structure is set up.
  • The current fee structure has not been meaningfully updated since 2000.
  • The current fee structure has not been meaningfully updated since 2009, while the scope and complexity
Summary: The joint Sunset Review Oversight Hearing focused on the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education (BPPE) and its reauthorization, operations, enforcement, fiscal condition, and student protections. Committee leaders and DCA officials praised the Bureau’s recent improvements in data systems, licensing, inspections, and enforcement, while noting the Bureau’s role has become more important as federal higher education oversight weakens. Bureau Chief Deborah Cochran said the agency has met its inspection mandate for the first time since the law was enacted, increased citations and disciplinary actions, reduced pending complaints, and used data tools to identify risk and monitor institutions more effectively. A major portion of the hearing centered on student harm, especially school closures, transcript access, predatory recruiting, and the Student Tuition Recovery Fund (STRF). Members asked how the Bureau protects students when schools close, whether bad actors can reopen under new entities, and whether enforcement tools are strong enough. Cochran said the Bureau can cite, fine, place schools on probation, revoke licenses, and order refunds, but it is seeking new authority to deny approval to operators who previously closed schools improperly or failed to refund students. She also said the Bureau is tracking ownership data and is concerned about institutions targeting immigrant and visa students. On STRF, Cochran explained that the fund is currently healthy, assessments are at zero because the balance is above the statutory target, and the Bureau paid about 1,100 claims totaling roughly $17 million over the last four years. Several members questioned the fairness of the assessment structure and discussed alternatives such as surety bonds, but the Bureau said STRF is working well and no change is needed at this time. Fee increases and the Bureau’s structural deficit were another major topic. Cochran said the Bureau reduced costs by eliminating positions, streamlining inspections, improving data analysis, and shifting some student-relief costs to STRF, but that legislative action is still needed to address the deficit. She said the proposed fees were based on workload analyses and that application fees generally match service costs, while annual fees are designed to cover most of the Bureau’s revenue needs. Some members and stakeholders criticized the proposed increases as too high, especially for out-of-state registration and campus fees, while others argued the Bureau needs sufficient resources to regulate effectively. Public commenters from private schools, Northeastern University, San Joaquin Valley College/Carrington College, and TICAS generally supported the Bureau’s mission and reauthorization, but urged changes such as risk-based oversight, better transcript protections, stronger limits on repeated provisional approvals, and more targeted fee and STRF reforms. No votes were taken, and the hearing ended with no formal action beyond discussion and receipt of testimony.
NH
Transcript Highlights:
  • I mean, yes, I hear that this is a structure that is one off, but how many other structures are in that
  • c> many other structures are in that many other structures are in that particular<00:36:36.880> scenario
  • So, this structure under shoreland.
  • expand a non-conforming structure expand a non-conforming structure provided<00:38:35.119> it's
  • Because as these structures make structural changes, if it involves code enforcement officers or code
Keywords: 928, house, all
Summary: The committee began with introductions and a description of the day’s process: a full committee work session on four bills, with no public testimony, followed by caucus and then executive action. The first bill discussed was HB 113, concerning OHRV operation on certain highways in Windsor. Representative Nab presented an amendment that would require a public hearing and Department of Transportation approval, modeled on procedures used in Coös and Grafton counties. Members discussed whether Windsor had already held a local vote or hearing, whether minutes from a town meeting existed, and whether the amendment truly preserved local control. A Windsor resident testified informally that the town had not taken a final vote and that the matter had been left to the state. Committee members also raised concerns about noise, dust, public safety, and the fact that the road in question would connect OHRVs on a state road rather than a trail system. The chair closed the work session on HB 113 and said the committee would return after caucus to vote on the bill and amendment. The committee then took up HB 595FN, relative to coastal resilience zones. Representative Nat said the bill addressed flooding concerns in both coastal and inland New Hampshire, but that the sponsor viewed it as too complex and had recommended breaking the issue into separate parts in future legislation. On that basis, Nat said it was appropriate to ITL the bill, and noted that the sponsor supported that course. No further discussion followed, and the work session was closed. Next was HB 629FN, funding the operation, maintenance, and repair of state dams. Representative Darby explained that the original bill had proposed both a waterfront frontage tax and a $5 charge tied to boat registration, but that the amendment would replace the bill by removing the frontage tax, moving the $5 dam-maintenance fee to the boat decal section of statute, and changing the effective date to January 1, 2027. Darby said the larger fee had raised concerns about impacts on current-use property and enforcement, while the revised $5 fee would raise roughly $500,000 to $600,000 annually. Representative Dunn thanked Darby and said the Marine Trades Association supported the revised approach. A question was raised about whether the original prime sponsors supported the amendment; the chair said they were on board, and Darby added that the proposal reflected recommendations from a prior study committee. The committee then closed HB 629FN and opened SB 27FN, relative to dwellings over water. On SB 27FN, Representative Derby said he opposed the bill because it would take away public access rights and amounted to a one-off legislative solution for a private concern. Representative Donnelly asked how many similar structures might be affected and whether the Department of Environmental Services knew of other cases; DES responded that there was one other related case under settlement compliance and no other active cases with the same issue. In follow-up discussion, DES clarified that the proposal was not a shoreland 50-foot setback issue, but rather involved structures extending over public water. The discussion remained focused on the scope of the bill and its potential precedent-setting effect, with no vote taken in the portion of the transcript provided.
NE

Nebraska 2025-2026 Regular Session

Legislative Afternoon Session Apr 9th, 2026

Nebraska Unicameral Floor Meeting

Transcript Highlights:
  • current structure in 1986.
  • All fees, mileage, and commission are collected.
  • The fee for a nonresident motor vehicle permit would be two times the resident fee.
  • The fee for a temporary nonresident motor vehicle permit would be two times the fee for a resident motor
  • permit, and the convenience fee.
NH

New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session

House Finance Division I (03/07/2025)

Transcript Highlights:
  • fees by 50%, and alteration of terrain fees are going up 100%.
  • as the fees go um they would these fee as the fees go um they would these fee increases<00:36:07.800
  • I can't speak to the fees. We haven't raised those fees in some time.
  • I think already, with having the PBN fee structure the way it is, we have that type of two-tier approach
  • They wanted to do a 10% fee increase, and this is currently a 50% fee increase.
Keywords: 928, house, all
Summary: The committee heard a presentation from the Department of Environmental Services on proposed changes in House Bill 2 and related technical changes in House Bill 1 tied to the governor’s permitting realignment initiative. The proposal would move environmental review staff from Fish and Game and DNCR to DES to create a more centralized “one-stop shop” for applicants needing DES permits, especially for wildlife and natural heritage reviews. DES said the goal is to speed permitting, support a 60-day review clock, and improve coordination among agencies while keeping the substantive review work in place. Members asked about staffing impacts, the scope of the transferred duties, and whether the change would create redundancy or weaken the other agencies. DES said most of the affected staff work primarily on these reviews, though Fish and Game staff also handle other state and federal reviews, which is why the proposal was adjusted to keep one of the four Fish and Game positions there and move three to DES, along with two positions from DNCR. DES also described a new supervisory position in HB 2 to manage the transferred staff within its land resources bureau. Officials said the reviews would still be done by specialists, but under DES supervision, and that the agencies would continue to coordinate recommendations on species impacts and mitigation. The committee also discussed fee increases intended to offset costs, including a 50% increase in wetlands fees and a 100% increase in alteration-of-terrain fees, with the department saying the changes would cover the new positions. Members raised concerns about impacts on private homeowners, possible incentives to work without permits, and whether fines should be used more as a revenue source or for mitigation. DES said wetlands permits are roughly split between homeowner-related and commercial projects, that permit-by-notification already creates a two-tier structure for smaller projects, and that enforcement relies partly on public complaints and online permitting systems. The department also said most fines currently go to the general fund and vary widely year to year, with about $75,000 budgeted, and that the proposal would also create permit-by-notification authority for alteration-of-terrain projects between 100,000 and 150,000 square feet, mirroring language in Senate Bill 110. No vote or final committee action was taken in the portion provided.
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Senate Session May 20th, 2025

Texas Senate Floor Meeting

Transcript Highlights:
  • illegally solicited and do not enter formal contracts, they can be misled into paying outstanding legal fees
  • Through this study, we can evaluate how establishing a telecom service fee or other funding mechanism
  • This unique structure empowers our state to craft energy policies and responses that are tailored to
  • bill touches on many key functions of the Commission, including the responsibility and governance structure
  • amendments change the language with regards to the Secretary of State being able to charge a reasonable fee
Bills: SJR60, SB203, SB317, SB397, SB511, SB524, SB731, SB781, SB801, SB867, SB1071, SB1232, SB1319, SB1444, SB1483, SB1633, SB1798, SB1944, SB1978, SB2082, SB2233, SB2363, SB2603, SB2607, SB2717, SB2797, SB2841, SB2919, SB2928, SB2969, SB3038, SB3063, HB102, HB107, HB130, HB132, HB148, HB647, HB668, HB677, HB694, HB748, HB754, HB923, HB1193, HB1240, HB1318, HB1397, HB1584, HB1639, HB1875, HB1893, HB1922, HB2071, HB2187, HB2254, HB2350, HB2510, HB2513, HB2516, HB2522, HB2559, HB2712, HB2713, HB2733, HB2775, HB2788, HB2789, HB2894, HB2960, HB3033, HB3126, HB3211, HB3370, HB3376, HB3751, HB3805, HB3810, HB4187, HB4219, HB4238, HB4273, HB4325, HB4344, HB4384, HB4506, HB4529, HB4643, HB4753, HB4783, HB4850, HB4885, HB5342, HB5424, HB5560, HCR90, HCR98, SJR5, SJR34, SB9, SB27, SB40, SB458, SB482, SB493, SB529, SB541, SB693, SB841, SB843, SB912, SB963, SB1173, SB1241, SB1350, SB1383, SB1388, SB1559, SB1646, SB1734, SB1789, SB1833, SB1883, SB1951, SB1968, SB2143, SB2544, SB1, SB17, SB260, SB509, SB1506, SB1637, SB1833, SB2308, HB2525, SJR36, SJR50, SJR63, SJR60, SCR12, SCR39, SB2023, SB511, SB62, SB666, SB847, SB284, SB854, SB810, SB1505, SB583, SB507, SB1434, SB1772, SB2016, SB1122, SB731, SB397, SB508, SB1436, SB287, SB1882, SB393, SB1791, SB209, SB2429, SB1085, SB1975, SB2717, SB1262, SB636, SB2056, SB884, SB1200, SB1845, SB2458, SB801, SB3014, SB3013, SB758, SB2797, SB2076, SB2876, SB1640, SB1449, SB1181, SB1234, SB2926, SB2841, SB1528, SB1854, SB317, SB1250, SB2082, SB1237, SB2819, SB629, SB2608, SB1602, SB2009, SB867, SB640, SB1698, SB2680, SB913, SB1071, SB1086, SB1087, SB1483, SB1444, SB1553, SB1556, SB1703, SB2133, SB2297, SB2298, SB2622, SB2955, SB2334, SB1367, SB2044, SB2363, SB2565, SB1888, SB3036, SB3057, SB3043, SB3063, SB3035, SB203, SB2688, SB2522, SB2459, SB2655, SB2251, SB1884, SB2928, SB2566, SB1749, SB2549, SB2553, SB2919, SB1944, SB1232, SB1798, SB2603, SB2607, SB2233, SB2683, SB1319, SB1978, SB3038, SB3045, SB1633, SB1538, SB719, SB3071, SB3065, HJR34, HB1393, HB26, HB3810, HB388, HB2712, HB1633, HB685, HB4753, HB762, HB2286, HB1606, HB132, HB1458, HB1240, HB2788, HB2791, HB3146, HB1893, HB4850, HB4187, HB1397, HB3751, HB2061, HB647, HB2522, HB4738, HB3033, HB2563, HB128, HB581, HB766, HB2259, HB2358, HB4384, HB748, HB793, HB1734, HB2340, HB2350, HB3104, HB5180, HB1584, HB4219, HB3806, HB3804, HB3803, HB1522, HB3597, HB1612, HB4224, HB1314, HB2254, HB4643, HB1237, HB3126, HB2856, HB3114, HB3505, HB4205, HB5652, HB3687, HB5424, HB4506, HB3370, HB2025, HB4273, HB3395, HB3376, HB2733, HB2495, HB4325, HB2071, HB2510, HB138, HB18, HB107, HB694, HB923, HB1639, HB1700, HB2187, HB3211, HB4529, HB4655, HB5342, HB2516, HB4783, HB1894, HB1965, HB102, HB300, HB1875, HB2513, HB2713, HB39, HB114, HB24, HB3088, HB4163, HB3479, HB2842, HB519, HB609, HB1275, HB1592, HB3348, HB120, HB6, HB247, HB1533, HB2421, HB2273, HB2464, HB2011, HB3575, HB3788, HB4370, HB4809, HB5057, HB5084, HB5534, HB5668, HB3424, HB2715, HB2564, HB2760, HB2765, HB2898, HB3260, HB3800, HB4396, HB5195, HB4341, HB43, HB5686, HCR90, HCR98, SJR60, SB1633, SB2233, HB102, HB107, HB132, HB694, HB923, HB1639, HB1875, HB1893, HB2071, HB2187, HB2510, HB2513, HB2522, HB2733, HB2788, HB3033, HB3211, HB3370, HB3376, HB3751, HB3810, HB4187, HB4219, HB4273, HB4325, HB4506, HB4529, HB4643, HB4753, HB4783, HB4850, HB5342, HB5424, SB511, SB1978, SR533, SR554, HCR90, HCR98, HCR144, SJR34, SB529, SB541, SB693, SB1173, SB1646, SB1734, SB1833, SB3074, HB1233, HB1285, HB1828, HB1876, HB2091, HB2301, HB2725, HB3063, HB3177, HB3483, HB4662, HB5606, HCR9, HCR10, HCR40, HCR76, HCR118, HCR127, HCR135, HCR141, SB3074, HB1233, HB1285, HB1828, HB1876, HB2091, HB2301, HB2725, HB3063, HB3177, HB3483, HB4662, HB5606, HCR9, HCR10, HCR40, HCR76, HCR118, HCR127, HCR135, HCR141
AL

Alabama 2025 Regular Session

Alabama Senate May 14th, 2025

Alabama Senate Floor Meeting

Transcript Highlights:
  • All fees, percentages, commissions, and fees, percentages, commissions, and fees, percentages, commissions
  • levied on the other taxes or fees levied on the other taxes or fees levied on the products.
  • levied on the other taxes or fees levied on the other taxes or fees levied on the products.
  • The director fees, or interest payments. The director fees, or interest payments.
  • Four, whether penalties or fees will be whether penalties or fees will be whether penalties or fees will
Bills: HJR 1, HB 9, HB 21, HB 26, HB 30, HB 37, HB 116, HB 630, HB 879, HB 913, HB 1151, HB 1318, HB 1593, HB 1899, HB 2703, HB 2809, HB 2890, HB 2970, HB 3307, HB 3526, HB 5092, SB 128, SB 203, SB 317, SB 393, SB 397, SB 644, SB 731, SB 801, SB 913, SB 1071, SB 1073, SB 1086, SB 1087, SB 1232, SB 1250, SB 1262, SB 1285, SB 1310, SB 1359, SB 1444, SB 1483, SB 1705, SB 1782, SB 1861, SB 1897, SB 1944, SB 2023, SB 2043, SB 2082, SB 2133, SB 2215, SB 2297, SB 2298, SB 2309, SB 2532, SB 2549, SB 2566, SB 2617, SB 2619, SB 2639, SB 2688, SB 2696, SB 2717, SB 2790, SB 2841, SB 2847, SB 2850, SB 2857, SB 2891, SB 2919, SB 2928, SB 2972, SB 3052, SB 3053, SB 1, SB 260, SB 1506, SB 1637, HB 37, HB 109, HB 334, HB 1130, HB 1238, HB 1327, HB 1610, HB 1615, HB 1620, HB 1689, HB 2081, HB 2809, HB 2884, HB 2890, HB 4215, HB 5092, HCR 7, HCR 75, HCR 86, HCR 92, HCR 93, HCR 126, SB 644, SB 1086, SB 1230, SB 1310, SB 1361, SB 1553, SB 1778, SB 1790, SB 2344, SB 2460, SB 2515, SB 2600, SB 2747, SB 2751, SB 2785, SB 2790, SB 3047, SB 3048, SB 3050, SB 3051, SB 3052, SB 3053, SB 3056, SB 3058, SB 3061, HJR 1, HB 1130, HB 1689, HB 2884, HB 1393, HB 2559, HB 26, HB 3012, HB 1327, HB 109, HB 1238, HB 2890, HB 9, HB 4215, HB 2970, HB 37, HB 1899, HB 1593, HB 2607, HB 3526, HB 3810, HB 5092, HB 388, HB 2809, HB 1151, HB 913, HB 3307, HB 879, HB 116, HB 12, HB 2703, HB 1610, HB 1615, HB 1620, HB 30, HB 21, HB 2712, HB 2692, HB 1633, HB 1318, HB 685, HB 630, HB 4753, HB 2742, HB 303, HB 198, HB 1535, HB 762, HB 148, HB 1520, HB 5061, HB 2286, HB 1606, HB 1041, HB 132, HB 11, HCR 7, HCR 75, HCR 86, HCR 92, HCR 93, HCR 126, SJR 36, SJR 50, SJR 63, SCR 12, SCR 39, SB 2023, SB 1310, SB 2972, SB 1073, SB 2847, SB 2532, SB 2619, SB 62, SB 666, SB 847, SB 284, SB 854, SB 810, SB 1505, SB 583, SB 507, SB 1434, SB 1772, SB 2016, SB 1122, SB 731, SB 397, SB 508, SB 1436, SB 287, SB 1882, SB 393, SB 1791, SB 209, SB 2429, SB 511, SB 2309, SB 1085, SB 1975, SB 2717, SB 1262, SB 636, SB 2056, SB 884, SB 1200, SB 1845, SB 2458, SB 801, SB 3014, SB 3013, SB 758, SB 2797, SB 2076, SB 2876, SB 1640, SB 1449, SB 1181, SB 1359, SB 1234, SB 2926, SB 2841, SB 1528, SB 2891, SB 1854, SB 317, SB 1250, SB 2082, SB 1285, SB 1237, SB 2819, SB 629, SB 2608, SB 1602, SB 2009, SB 2460, SB 867, SB 640, SB 1698, SB 2680, SB 2994, SB 2747, SB 913, SB 1071, SB 1086, SB 1087, SB 1483, SB 1444, SB 1553, SB 1556, SB 1703, SB 2133, SB 2297, SB 2298, SB 2622, SB 2955, SB 2334, SB 1861, SB 2043, SB 1367, SB 2857, SB 128, SB 3058, SB 2044, SB 2363, SB 2565, SB 1888, SB 3048, SB 3052, SB 3053, SB 3036, SB 3057, SB 3056, SB 3043, SB 3050, SB 3063, SB 3035, SB 1790, SB 1778, SB 203, SB 3061, SB 2799, SB 2790, SB 2688, SB 2515, SB 1230, SB 2522, SB 2639, SB 2459, SB 3051, SB 2655, SB 2251, SB 1884, SB 2617, SB 2751, SB 2928, SB 2566, SB 1897, SB 1749, SB 1361, SB 2549, SB 2553, SB 2919, SB 1782, SB 1705, SB 2696, SB 1944, SB 2215, SB 644, SB 1232, SB 2850, HB 45, HB 48, HB 1261, HB 1465, HB 1778, HB 2596, HB 5238, HB 33, HB 1188, HB 210, HB 1022, HB 1458, HB 5560, HB 1240, HB 1950, HB 2027, HB 2768, HB 2788, HB 2791, HB 3146, HB 3698, HB 3699, HB 1893, HB 3700, HB 4850, HB 4187, HB 1397, HB 4885, HB 4804, HB 3751, HB 3611, HB 2775, HB 2061, HB 2003, HB 1729, HB 1242, HB 791, HB 2029, HB 647, HB 2522, HB 4738, HB 3033, HB 3594, HB 3474, HB 2563, HB 2802, HCR 90, SJR 87, SB 2969, SB 3073, SB 2497, SB 1798, SB 2603, SB 2607, SB 781, SJR 34, SB 17, SB 314, SB 455, SB 509, SB 529, SB 541, SB 693, SB 761, SB 963, SB 1023, SB 1968, SB 2122, SB 2308, SB 2371, SB 2420, SB 2544, SJR 87, SB 1285, SB 1359, SB 2857, SB 3073, HJR 1, HB 9, HB 21, HB 116, HB 913, HB 1151, HB 1899, HB 2970, HB 3307, SB 1073, SB 1310, SB 2532, SB 2619, SB 2847, SB 2972, SB 128, SB 2043, SR 393, SR 511, SR 518, SR 520, SB 314, SB 455, SB 761, SB 1023, SB 2122, SB 2371, SB 2420, SB 17, SB 509, SB 644, SB 1230, SB 1361, SB 1778, SB 1790, SB 2460, SB 2515, SB 2747, SB 2751, SB 2790, SB 3048, SB 3050, SB 3051, SB 3052, SB 3053, SB 3056, SB 3058, SB 3061, HB 37, HB 109, HB 1130, HB 1238, HB 1327, HB 1610, HB 1615, HB 1620, HB 1689, HB 2809, HB 2884, HB 2890, HB 4215, HB 5092, HCR 7, HCR 75, HCR 86, HCR 92, HCR 93, HCR 126, SB 1086, SB 1553, HJR 182, HB 4, HB 24, HB 46, HB 101, HB 146, HB 170, HB 214, HB 305, HB 426, HB 549, HB 551, HB 594, HB 722, HB 824, HB 1119, HB 1579, HB 2215, HB 2458, HB 2530, HB 2674, HB 2713, HB 2974, HB 3015, HB 3151, HB 3180, HB 3221, HB 3359, HB 3556, HB 4088, HB 4211, HB 4396, HB 4413, HB 4580, HB 4609, HB 4864, HB 5088, HB 5154, HB 5263, HB 2294, HJR 182, HB 4, HB 24, HB 46, HB 101, HB 146, HB 170, HB 214, HB 305, HB 426, HB 549, HB 551, HB 594, HB 722, HB 824, HB 1119, HB 1579, HB 2215, HB 2458, HB 2530, HB 2674, HB 2713, HB 2974, HB 3015, HB 3151, HB 3180, HB 3221, HB 3359, HB 3556, HB 4088, HB 4211, HB 4396, HB 4413, HB 4580, HB 4609, HB 4864, HB 5088, HB 5154, HB 5263, HB 2294
MA
Transcript Highlights:
  • a two-tiered federal debit card fee structure here in the U.S.
  • A significant part of that is how these fees are structured.
  • Bring transparency and balance to the fee structure.
  • and other layering of payment fees and structures between point of sales, fees and other layering of
  • So as we discuss credit card fees and the seeming economic rent of these fee structures, the complexity
Keywords: 995, all
Summary: The commission met for its second hearing to study the future of credit card payments and sales transactions and their impacts on small businesses. Members heard extensive testimony from credit unions, retailers, restaurants, and payment-industry representatives on interchange fees, processing fees, fraud, chargebacks, rewards programs, and the ability of businesses to pass fees on to customers. Several witnesses argued that swipe fees have risen sharply, are especially burdensome for restaurants and other small businesses, and are charged on taxes and tips that are merely pass-through amounts. They urged state action to prohibit fees on tax and tip portions, improve transparency, and allow surcharging or convenience fees, while opponents warned that state regulation could reduce fraud protections, increase compliance costs, and threaten consumer rewards programs. Business owners and trade groups described thin margins, rising costs, and the difficulty of understanding merchant statements or negotiating with processors. Restaurant witnesses said card-not-present and online transactions create the greatest fraud and chargeback risk, with money often removed immediately from merchants’ accounts and disputes rarely resolved in their favor. Retail witnesses gave examples of rising effective rates, higher fees on rewards cards, and the burden of processing fees on low-value transactions. A representative from the Massachusetts Restaurant Association and others said restaurants are effectively paying fees on meals tax and gratuities, which they argued should not be subject to interchange charges. On the other side, the Cooperative Credit Union Association said interchange revenue helps credit unions fund fraud prevention, rapid card replacement, and member protections, and warned that state limits on interchange could weaken those safeguards and lead to higher consumer costs or reduced services. Airlines for America testified that airline credit card rewards are popular, support travel and jobs in Massachusetts, and could be harmed by interchange reform. The National Restaurant Association and a payments-policy attorney countered that interchange fees are set by card networks rather than competitive markets, that banks remain highly profitable even with rewards, and that states can act after recent court decisions. No votes were taken; the hearing consisted of testimony and questions from commissioners.
HI

Hawaii 2025 Regular Session

JHA Public Hearing - Thu Mar 20, 2025 @ 2:00 PM HST

Judiciary & Hawaiian Affairs

Transcript Highlights:
  • occupying previously lawful structures occupying previously lawful structures and<00:16:53.519><
  • Nonconforming also, if lawful means permit structure and nonconforming structure, always lawfully, you
  • That's an original way we put two terms: permit structure and a nonconforming structure, but finally
  • say lawfully constructed structure.
  • <00:45:33.440> So<00:45:33.599> the fees. So it it's very dependent. So the fees.
Keywords: 910, house, all
Summary: The committee heard testimony on several measures. SB 1296 HD1, relating to disaster recovery, would exempt reconstruction of lawfully constructed structures damaged or destroyed in a declared disaster from special management area permits under certain conditions. OPSD, DLNR, the County of Maui, Front Street Recovery, and the Grassroot Institute supported the bill, saying it would speed rebuilding after disasters like the Maui fires; one witness noted the bill would not cover shoreline parcels unless amended, and members asked about the five-year rebuild window, the meaning of “lawfully constructed,” and whether unlawful structures were excluded. Testimony was also heard on SB 1413, which would allow the Hawaii Public Housing Authority to dispose of abandoned property in federal public housing projects after notice and within five days; HPHA said the bill would help address illegal dumping and clarify procedures. SB 31 HD1, concerning discriminatory restrictive covenants, was briefly described and had support from the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission and comments from the Uniform Law Commission, with no in-person testimony. The committee then heard SB 1341, which would add HEMA and the Office of Homeland Security to agencies allowed to review energy industry information and would expand the program’s emergency-management purpose. The Hawaii State Energy Office supported the measure, saying the data is important for emergency response and fuel-supply planning. SB 10008 HD1 would authorize counties to adopt ordinances enforcing accessible parking space requirements and clarify county enforcement of EV-related parking provisions; the Disability and Communication Access Board strongly supported the accessible-parking provisions, saying current enforcement is weak, while noting section three on EV spaces is already largely in statute and could be struck if the committee preferred. Tina Yamaki of the Retail Merchants of Hawaii testified in opposition. Finally, the committee heard SB 1028 SD1 HD1, which would eliminate fees, fines, and court costs for offenses committed by minors, discharge existing related debt, limit community service for minors to 72 hours, and repeal certain penalties tied to minors and their parents or guardians. The Office of the Public Defender, Office of Hawaiian Affairs, the Juvenile Justice State Advisory Council, Community Alliance on Prisons, and DebtFree Justice Hawaii supported the bill, arguing that youth fines burden families, worsen poverty, and disproportionately affect Native Hawaiian youth. The Department of the Attorney General offered comments, raising possible constitutional title issues because the current draft incorporates material from HB 129 and includes sections that may relate more to restitution or curfew than to fines and fees; supporters responded that the title is sufficient and cited case law. No votes or final actions were taken on the measures in the portion of the meeting provided.
FL

Florida 2026 Regular Session

Regulated Industries Feb 3rd, 2026

Regulated Industries

Transcript Highlights:
  • The alternative would be for the utility to simply take the same rates, fees, and charges that it is
  • The bill does include provisions that could allow a utility to require connection fees, impact fees,
  • could allow a utility to require connection fees, impact fees, and other rates and charges, including
  • The second issue addressed in the strike-all concerns an emerging fee structure imposed by developers
  • more than doubled your fees in just the last few years.
Bills: S0936, S1724, S1014, S1498
Summary: The Committee on Regulated Industries met with a quorum and took up four bills. First, it considered SB 1724 on municipal utility services. Senator Martin offered a late-filed delete-everything amendment that would require annual customer meetings for extraterritorial utility customers, cap use of gross utility revenues for general government at 10%, eliminate a 25% surcharge on customers outside city limits, reduce the rate differential cap from 50% to 25%, remove municipal natural gas utilities from the bill, and preserve certain existing bond-related surcharges until debt is retired or refinanced. The League of Cities raised implementation concerns about the July 1, 2026 effective date and the need for rate studies and budget adjustments. The amendment was adopted and the committee reported CS/SB 1724 favorably. The committee then heard SB 936 on temporary door locking devices from Senator McLean. The bill would define temporary door locking devices, allow them to be installed at any height, require the Florida Building Commission to add standards to the Florida Building Code, and require their use to be incorporated into safety plans, drills, and training. With no opposition or amendments, SB 936 was reported favorably. Next, the committee considered SB 1014 by Senator Mayfield, which would prohibit municipalities from refusing water or wastewater service solely because a property owner will not annex, and would require service expansion when a property is near a municipal main line, not served by another utility, and the utility has capacity. A committee amendment narrowed the bill to properties near a main line and reduced the distance threshold from 2,000 meters to one-half mile. The Florida League of Cities opposed the bill as amended, citing concerns about property size, annexation conflicts, enclave creation, and possible revenue impacts, but the bill was reported favorably. Finally, the committee heard SB 1498 on community associations from Chair Bradley. A strike-all amendment revised technical provisions on video conference recordings, turnover inspection reports, SIRS references, and electronic voting, and added two major policy changes: requiring associations to provide records to law enforcement and prosecutors and creating a second-degree misdemeanor for willful refusal, and prohibiting mandatory club or amenity fee schemes controlled by developers or third parties that generate profit beyond proportional expenses. Testimony in support described homeowner disputes involving concentrated board control, lack of transparency, and mandatory fees in communities such as Rosedale. The amendment was adopted and CS/SB 1498 was reported favorably. At the end of the meeting, Senator Bracey Davis asked to be recorded voting in the affirmative on tabs 1, 2, and 3, and the committee adjourned.
KY
Transcript Highlights:
  • judicial branch collects: civil filing fees, master commissioner fees.
  • Court technology fees, criminal background checks, expungement fees. There's a range of them.
  • These are the SaaS fees.
  • These are the SaaS fees.
  • These are the SaaS fees.
Keywords: 958, all
Summary: The Interim Joint Budget Review Subcommittee on Justice and Judiciary met without a quorum and heard an update from the Administrative Office of the Courts on the judicial branch budget. AOC Director Zach Ramsey and budget director Carol Henderson outlined the branch’s current funding structure, noting that fiscal year 2026 general fund support is about 2.77% of the state general fund, below the National Center for State Courts’ typical 2% to 4% range. They emphasized Kentucky’s unusual responsibility for courthouse facilities, with the judicial branch directly involved in construction, maintenance, and operations across 229 facilities in all 120 counties. AOC said nearly 91% of its general fund is spent on personnel and other non-discretionary costs, and that the branch has long relied on agency revenue, restricted fund carryforwards, and vacancy credits to balance court operations. Members were told that Senate Bill 25 required a $34.5 million transfer into a reserve account, part of which was used to purchase the Chamberlain Avenue building in Frankfort. AOC reported that only $11.9 million remains in restricted funds, while it projects needing about $13.5 million to cover fiscal year 2026 obligations, not including roughly $9 million in flood-related remediation costs for Hardin and Franklin counties, much of which it expects to recover through insurance and FEMA. Looking ahead to the next biennium, AOC said it will seek full funding of court operations at $341 million annually, a $13.5 million increase to bring current services into the base appropriation rather than relying on reserves. It also previewed additional requests, including a 15% across-the-board pay parity plan for Kentucky Court of Justice personnel, replacement of declining master commissioner fee revenue tied to 141 deputy circuit court clerk positions, funding for technology subscription and case management system costs, JAV audiovisual system upgrades, AEDs and medical kits for courthouses, and other staffing and operational needs. Senator Funky Frommeyer asked whether the 15% salary proposal was included in the $13.5 million increase; AOC said it was not, and that it would be an additional request. No votes or formal actions were taken.
FL

Florida 2026 5th Special Session

Regulated Industries Feb 3rd, 2026

Transcript Highlights:
  • The bill does include provisions that could allow a utility to require connection fees, impact fees,
  • Could allow a utility to require connection fees, impact fees, and other rates and charges, including
  • The second issue addressed in the strike-all concerns an emerging fee structure imposed by developers
  • more than doubled your fees in just the last few years.
  • You've raised your fees more than doubled your fees in just the last few years.
Summary: The Senate Committee on Regulated Industries met with a quorum and considered four bills. First, the committee took up SB 1724 on municipal utility services. A late-filed strike-all amendment by Senator Martin was adopted after he explained it would require annual customer meetings for certain extraterritorial utility customers, cap the use of utility revenues for general government purposes, eliminate a 25% surcharge and reduce the rate differential cap, remove municipal natural gas utilities from the bill, and preserve certain surcharges only as needed to satisfy existing bond covenants. The Florida League of Cities raised implementation concerns about the July 1, 2026 effective date and the time needed for rate studies and budget adjustments, but the bill as amended was reported favorably. The committee then heard SB 936 on temporary door locking devices by Senator McLean. The bill would define temporary door locking devices, authorize their installation at any height, require the Florida Building Commission to add standards to the Florida Building Code, and require their use to be incorporated into safety plans, drills, and training. With no opposition or debate, SB 936 was reported favorably. Next, the committee considered SB 1014 by Senator Mayfield, which would prohibit municipalities from refusing water and wastewater service solely because a property owner declines annexation, if the property is near a municipal main line, not served by another utility, and the utility has capacity. An amendment narrowed the bill by defining “main line” and reducing the distance threshold from 2,000 meters to one-half mile. The Florida League of Cities opposed the bill as amended, citing concerns about large users, possible conflict with annexation law, potential enclave creation, and revenue impacts, but Senator Mayfield said he would continue working on the issues. The committee reported the bill favorably. Finally, Chair Bradley presented SB 1498 on community associations. A strike-all amendment was adopted that made technical changes to video conference recording, turnover inspection reports, and electronic voting, and added provisions requiring associations to provide records to law enforcement and prosecutors, creating a second-degree misdemeanor for willful refusal. It also targeted mandatory club or amenity fee structures controlled by developers or third parties, declaring such provisions against public policy, limiting assessments to proportional expenses, and allowing suits and conveyance of common areas after turnover. Testimony from homeowners described alleged governance abuses and opaque, profit-driven mandatory fees in their communities, while the Community Associations Institute supported the amendment. The committee reported CS for SB 1498 favorably. Members then recorded additional votes for the record, and the meeting adjourned.