Transcript Highlights:

• Most of our attorney time are taken on those long circuit court dockets, and we're 75% in those cases
• Most of our attorney time are taken on those long circuit court dockets, and we're 75% in those cases
• This program is funded through the Rocket Docket.
• that's funded by the rocket docket. that's funded by the rocket docket.
• > as rocket docket rocket docket sometimes as rocket docket rocket docket sometimes as a<01:19

Keywords: 0:00:04 Call to Order 0:00:50 Dept for Public Advocacy 0:51:31 Life Learning Center 1:21:06 Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The Budget Review Subcommittee on Justice and Judiciary heard testimony from the Department of Public Advocacy (DPA) on attorney compensation and alternatives to incarceration. Because the committee lacked a quorum, the chair skipped formal roll call and minutes approval, then invited DPA Public Advocate Damon Preston, Deputy Public Advocate Melanie Lowe, and alternative sentencing worker Cena/Tina Mills to present. Preston said DPA is fully state-funded, has 698 funded positions, and was near full staffing with 673 filled positions and 42 new law graduates expected to join in August. He argued that DPA’s resources lag behind those of prosecutors, noting that local prosecutorial offices receive substantially more total funding and have additional revenue sources beyond the state budget. Preston focused on salary disparities and turnover. He said DPA trial-office attorneys total about $26 million in salaries, compared with about $41.9 million for prosecutors on publicly listed state funding, and estimated that more than 100 additional prosecutors are paid through other sources, bringing total prosecutor compensation to a little over $50 million versus DPA’s $26 million. He said starting DPA attorney pay is $58,200, experienced attorney pay averages about $73,000, and that these levels are too low given law school debt and the state’s constitutional obligation to provide defense counsel. He also said DPA attorney turnover is about 20%, median service time before separation was 15 months in 2024, and exit interviews often cite salary as the main reason for leaving. He gave examples of former DPA attorneys moving to prosecutor offices for raises ranging from 12% to 50%. Committee members asked about how often defendants are represented by private counsel versus DPA and how that affects workload. Preston said a 2017 study found about 50% of misdemeanor cases and about 75% of circuit court cases were handled by DPA, with DPA handling most of the most labor-intensive cases. He said DPA will step aside when a defendant hires private counsel or is found ineligible, and he acknowledged the system historically erred by denying counsel in some cases, though he said the current concern is whether DPA is now appointed too broadly. Members requested updated trend data on appointments over the past decade. Preston also described DPA’s pay scale and said the agency’s compensation structure makes retention difficult. Mills then described DPA’s alternative sentencing worker program, which she said has operated for about 20 years and has received national recognition. She shared a case example involving a client named Patrick, who faced a prison sentence on a possession charge and was referred to a horse-based treatment and certification program in Shelbyville. She said the client wanted treatment and a fresh start, a bed became available, and she and the client’s attorney presented an alternative sentencing plan to the court. The presentation was interrupted briefly by a technical issue, but the testimony continued.

Transcript Highlights:

• Reyes's no-fee smart meter opt-out bills with urgency for six reasons.
• Citizens need a guaranteed no-fee opt-out. We're grateful Senator Moore and Rep.
• How will they be able to afford to pay opt-out fees?
• And Eversource's fee is even more punitive at $34 a month, or over $400 a year.
• Notification, consent, choice, the meter, no fee, no added cost to opt out.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on a range of energy, utility, broadband, and municipal infrastructure bills. Representative Powell supported H 3466, which would create a task force to study public ownership of utilities and alternatives to investor-owned electric and gas systems. Representative Therber supported H 3574, which would use RGGI funds to reimburse cities and towns affected by power plant decommissioning, citing lost jobs, tax revenue, and service cuts in communities such as Somerset, Plymouth, Salem, and Everett. Several witnesses from municipal light plants and related organizations testified in support of mutual aid bills, including H 3486/S 2252 and H 3330/S 2277, saying the measures would clarify protections and liability coverage for MLP workers assisting in emergencies and non-emergency work. Jim Leiden of EMWIC opposed H 3514/S 2295, saying the proposed board and governance changes would reduce local control, add burdens, and weaken confidentiality protections. A committee member asked whether the mutual aid bills had been reviewed for municipal impacts, and the witnesses said they had done due diligence. The committee also heard extensive testimony on H 3551/S 2306, the smart meter opt-out bills. Supporters argued that smart meters emit harmful wireless radiation, that some residents have developed health problems or electromagnetic sensitivity, and that opt-outs should be available without fees or penalties; several witnesses urged notification, consent, and non-transmitting analog meter options. The committee also heard testimony from municipal officials and the Massachusetts Municipal Association in support of H 3462/S 2250, which would strengthen municipal authority to enforce timely removal of double utility poles, citing safety, accessibility, and construction-delay concerns. Derek Leffert of Gateway Fiber opposed H 3450, saying it would improperly shift broadband deployment costs to competitors. At the end of testimony, the chair closed the hearing by motion and vote, with members voting aye and no opposition recorded.

Transcript Highlights:

• Getting things heard, uh, courts or they too have large dockets, judges do also, and a huge workload.
• Getting things heard, uh, courts or they too have large dockets, judges do also, and a huge workload.
• , judges do judges do also large dockets, judges do judges do also um<00:26:56.800> and<00:26:
• on the web portal allows all businesses to file for sales and use tax, employers withholding, tire fee
• > withholding, tax, employers withholding, tax, employers withholding, tire<00:30:50.760> fee

Keywords: Call to Order and Roll Call- 00:00:01 SERVS Informational Update- 00:01:22 Child Removal and Reunification Update: Department for Community Based Services Financials- 00:03:00 Small Business Sales Tax Websites: Department of Revenue-00:28:05 Senior Citizen Meal Programs: Department for Aging and Independent Living-00:35:50 Adjournment-01:41:57, 958, all

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes from the September 11 meeting by motion and voice vote. It then received a brief update on the statewide emergency responder voice system, but no presenter was present. The chair said he expected a more substantive update in November and warned that if there is not real progress on acquiring needed private properties, the committee may consider further action, including possibly freezing funding. The main discussion centered on the Department for Community Based Services’ child removal and reunification work and its structured decision-making tools. Commissioner Lisa Dennis and General Counsel Wesley Duke explained that the intake, safety, and risk assessment tools are being used at very high rates and that the department is still implementing and evaluating the system. Dennis said the tools are meant to inform, not replace, professional judgment; when staff disagree with a recommendation, the worker and first-line supervisor consult and decide together. Members questioned whether the system favors keeping children in the home, whether the department has studied safety outcomes for in-home cases versus removals, and whether foster home shortages affect removal decisions. Dennis said child safety remains the top priority, that the practice has not changed, and that the department would provide additional data on outcomes later. Members also asked about permanency timelines and delays in termination of parental rights cases; Dennis said federal timelines are difficult to meet because of family progress, substance use recovery, and court delays, and she confirmed foster parent shortages were not the reason for those delays. The committee then heard a presentation from the Department of Revenue on the new My Taxes portal. Staff said the portal, launched in March, replaced DOR’s portion of the old Kentucky One Stop Business Portal and now allows businesses to file and pay multiple taxes, update account information, and receive official notices. They reported the system is available 24/7 except for scheduled maintenance every other Thursday evening, has maintained over 99% availability since launch, and now has a dedicated contact center with 50 agents plus a public help line and email. In response to questions, the department said early downtime was caused by unexpectedly high traffic, but server capacity was increased and in the last three months there had been only one day of unexpected downtime.

Transcript Highlights:

• And what this really does is create docket priority.
• So those dockets are already established. And to try to force somebody in causes a problem.
• It's not like they just appear one day in court and you have to put them on your docket.
• In some counties, the courts control their docket, right? And as a judge, we control.
• Our docket, but there's counties, especially felony courts where the DAs, like you say, control the docket

Bills: HB268, HB305, HB307, HB380, HB548, HB727, HB268, HB305, HB307

Keywords: false reporting, emergency response, criminal penalties, restitution, public safety, penalties, emergency services, public institutions, false reports, criminal penalty, pretrial hearings, criminal competency, legal process, court timelines, restoration of competency, fines, community service, credit, criminal justice, defendants

Transcript Highlights:

• And Representative, um, we do have a schedule of our tipping fees.
• But we will get you those tipping fee numbers. Chair. Thank you.
• And Representative, um, we do have a schedule of our tipping fees.
• But we will get you those tipping fee numbers.
• Next on the docket, we have House right. Next on the docket, we have House File<01:09:25.960> 22.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• To fund this effort fairly, there's a proposition of a $100 per product annual registration fee and a
• one-time application fee that mirrors other states that have the same structure, so that regulation
• Are you saying you hardly... ...some jurisdictions don't even have forfeiture dockets anymore because

Bills: SB210, SB225, HB280, HB287, HB94, HB88, SB157, HB7, HB8, HB42

Keywords: hospital liens, medical billing, government healthcare, insurance claims, patient rights, blood tests, DUI, law enforcement, traffic offenses, chemical analysis, public nuisance, event liability, local government, community health, legal action, transparency, reporting, public safety, regulation, accountability

Transcript Highlights:

• cover our rising costs, such as the $36,700 requested by the Risk Management Division to cover legal fees
• Collaboration with the Department of Corrections is ongoing to improve docketing of PVs and ensure timely
• members for their time and expertise, as well as coverage for increased administrative costs, legal fees
• Of scheduling, reviewing their case dockets, reviewing victim notifications, and reading those letters

Transcript Highlights:

• But then, everybody crafts the rest of their docket around those. those kind of set docket hearings for
• professional regulation of lawyers as I mentioned, that includes professional discipline system, annual fee

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The really dockets within say the criminal division, but they're designed to address the root causes
• criminal justice system and once they're identified as appropriate for problem solving court, the the docket
• And then I got a fee, my disease.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

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.
• The bureau that administers the fee does not receive any proceeds from the fees.
• 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.

Transcript Highlights:

• to be hearing on the second item<00:00:52.640> on<00:00:52.760> the<00:00:52.879> docket
• > again<00:00:54.239> if<00:00:54.359> you<00:00:54.480> can item on the docket
• so again if you can item on the docket so again if you can we're<00:00:54.840> going<00:00:54.920
• <01:42:02.480> for arbitrators to allow the the fees for arbitrators to allow the the fees
• and house file 416 will be on the docket and house file 416 will be on the docket so<01:45:21.239

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• And the other is from the community solar facility to collect your subscription fee to the facility.
• Under SB 321, the subscriber fee will be shown.
• Under SB 321, the subscriber fee will be shown on the bill from the utility, so you'll just get one bill
• They'll forward the subscriber fee, then they will pay it to the community solar facility.
• Promise you not going to leave before you sign the docket. We'll leave.

Bills: SB9

Keywords: wetlands protection, nontidal wetlands, Delaware, environmental sustainability, climate change, carbon sink, permitting process

Summary: The House Natural Resources and Energy Committee met to consider two Senate bills. SB 321, with Senate Amendment 1, would change community solar billing so subscribers receive one consolidated utility bill instead of separate bills from the utility and the solar provider. Supporters said the bill would simplify enrollment and payment, improve customer retention—especially for low-income customers—and include safeguards such as guaranteed savings and an escrow mechanism to prevent cost shifts to other ratepayers. After public testimony from solar developers, the Public Advocate, the Sierra Club, and others, the committee initially lacked enough members present to release the bill, so the vote was circulated to absent members and the bill was later reported out for floor action. The committee then heard SB 9, with Senate Amendment 1, a long-negotiated wetlands protection bill. The sponsor and DNREC explained that it would create a state non-tidal wetlands program with exemptions for certain agricultural, conservation, and routine activities, general permits for some lower-impact projects, and individual permits for higher-value wetlands. Witnesses described the bill as a compromise among environmental, agricultural, development, and local government stakeholders, while some members raised questions about flooding, landowner impacts, wetland delineation, and the role of the regulatory advisory committee. Public testimony was broadly supportive from environmental groups, the Farm Bureau, builders, engineers, and affordable housing advocates. The committee then voted to release SB 9 from committee. At the end of the meeting, members offered thanks and remarks recognizing the chair’s service and leadership on environmental and energy issues. Both bills were ultimately released from committee and reported out.

Transcript Highlights:

• , special interests, that also often participate in the dockets.
• It's usually there aren't intervenors in the docket. Okay, thank you.
• The OCA also has a small operation and doesn't always participate in the docket.
• I mean, one, the PUC controls the pace of its docket process to some degree.
• <01:25:23.360> process controls the pace of its docket process controls the pace of its docket

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• and negotiating these impact fees and negotiating these impact fees outside<00:19:17.360> of<
• So this high impact load evaluation fee.
• We have 20 days to complete that fee.
• of general and administrative uh fees of general and administrative uh fees that<02:35:16.880>
• Uh we also have a pending docket rules.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It includes alternative fees in lieu of impact fees.
• Finally, it addresses impact fees. And that is the amendment. Are there questions of the sponsor?
• We believe that the impact fees are incredibly harmful to Tampa.
• The state statute concerning impact fees has already changed five times just in the last few years.
• One report, no extra fees, more access, more opportunity. And this bill goes even further.

Bills: HB 24, HB 45, HB 15, HB 35, HB 38, HB 47, HB 318, HB 349, HB 554, HB 1359, HB 1373, HB 1647, HB 2254, HB 2259, HB 2853, HB 3073, HB 3088, HB 353, HB 355, HB 786, HB 762, HB 705, HB 932, HB 849, HB 1160, HB 1119, HB 1612, HB 3041, HB 713, HB 3104, HB 3970, HB 3962, HB 5061, HB 4042, HB 4115, HB 4490, HB 1731, HB 1705, HB 2607, HB 3556, HB 138, HB 3689, HB 1788, HB 1887, HB 1914, HB 2402, HB 2306, HB 1809, HB 2350, HB 3000, HB 3237, HB 3326, HB 3211, HB 1056, HB 2081, HB 2187, HB 3092, HB 3308, HB 3526, HB 3750, HB 3527, HB 4219, HB 4230, HB 4290, HB 5238, HB 4804, HB 4749, HCR 6, HCR 12, HCR 34, HCR 50, HCR 55, HCR 58, HCR 70, HCR 71, HCR 72, HCR 74, HCR 75, HCR 78, HCR 80, HCR 93, HCR 100, HCR 107, HCR 116, HCR 117, HCR 90, SB 1806, SB 783, SB 1271, SB 326, SB 1637, SB 769, SB 897, SB 1035, SB 1706, SB 1185, SB 1194, SB 384, SB 1426, SB 1468, SB 1215, SB 1066, SB 599, SB 1930, SB 2065, SB 767, SB 1619, SB 1738, HB 1500, HB 718, HB 23, HB 34, HB 119, HB 128, HB 130, HB 132, HB 2756, HB 166, HB 406, HB 186, HB 331, HB 380, HB 1583, HB 1584, HB 621, HB 303, HB 552, HB 366, HB 463, HB 1211, HB 1327, HB 1461, HB 923, HB 1760, HB 2467, HB 5333, HB 1592, HB 1576, HB 1552, HB 2018, HB 3511, HB 1781, HB 2013, HB 2340, HB 2508, HB 2970, HB 865, HB 2851, HB 3385, HB 3336, HB 3309, HB 1127, HB 1232, HB 1397, HB 4236, HB 4041, HB 1965, HB 2730, HB 3698, HB 3699, HB 163, HB 201, HB 272, HB 405, HB 519, HB 654, HB 694, HB 791, HB 1136, HB 1240, HB 1266, HB 1275, HB 1437, HB 1532, HB 1675, HB 1842, HB 1868, HB 1894, HB 1943, HB 1990, HB 2029, HB 2061, HB 2286, HB 2523, HB 2622, HB 2652, HB 2692, HB 2842, HB 2885, HB 3016, HB 3096, HB 3248, HB 3255, HB 3479, HB 3611, HB 3623, HB 3803, HB 3804, HB 3805, HB 3806, HB 3810, HB 3816, HB 4129, HB 4163, HB 4187, HB 4238, HB 4454, HB 4588, HB 4643, HB 4738, HB 4739, HB 4945, HB 5015, HB 5616, HB 1749, HB 1775, HB 118, HB 1762, HB 2520, HB 24, HB 45, HB 15, HB 35, HB 38, HB 47, HB 318, HB 349, HB 554, HB 1359, HB 1373, HB 1647, HB 2254, HB 2259, HB 2853, HB 3073, HB 3088, HB 353, HB 355, HB 786, HB 762, HB 705, HB 932, HB 849, HB 1160, HB 1119, HB 1612, HB 3041, HB 713, HB 3104, HB 3970, HB 3962, HB 5061, HB 4042, HB 4115, HB 4490, HB 1731, HB 1705, HB 2607, HB 3556, HB 138, HB 3689, HB 1788, HB 1887, HB 1914, HB 2402, HB 2306, HB 1809, HB 2350, HB 3000, HB 3237, HB 3326, HB 3211, HB 1056, HB 2081, HB 2187, HB 3092, HB 3308, HB 3526, HB 3750, HB 3527, HB 4219, HB 4230, HB 4290, HB 5238, HB 4804, HB 4749, HCR 6, HCR 12, HCR 34, HCR 50, HCR 55, HCR 58, HCR 70, HCR 71, HCR 72, HCR 74, HCR 75, HCR 78, HCR 80, HCR 93, HCR 100, HCR 107, HCR 116, HCR 117, HCR 90

Keywords: zoning, public notice, local government, residential development, protests, peer support, first responders, mental health, confidentiality, emergency services, information network, health services, client referral, data privacy, disaster preparedness, accreditation, community services, sexual assault, victim rights, forensic examination

Summary: The Florida House conducted legislative business including prayer, pledge, and voting on multiple bills. Key legislation included land development and wetlands mitigation (SB 492), renewable natural gas infrastructure investment (SB 1574), local government regulation (SB 1080), housing and accessory dwelling units (SB 184), recovery residences (SB 954), and various health, education, and criminal justice measures. The session also addressed returning messages from the Senate with amendments, transportation facility designations, and claims bills for wrongfully convicted individuals. Several bills passed unanimously while others faced structured debate.

Transcript Highlights:

• Domain, providing authority to impose fees. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
• Members, HB 4739 eliminates a portion of the retail charge agreement delinquency fee.
• . own basically increase in their own fees, correct?
• Whether or not it is capping the fee.
• Because it is not capping the fee, it is simply saying that if you are charging a fee to an insured patient

Bills: HB24, HB45, HB15, HB35, HB38, HB47, HB318, HB349, HB554, HB1359, HB1373, HB1647, HB2254, HB2259, HB2853, HB3073, HB3088, HB353, HB355, HB786, HB762, HB705, HB932, HB849, HB 1160, HB 1119, HB1612, HB3041, HB713, HB3104, HB3970, HB3962, HB5061, HB4042, HB4115, HB4490, HB1731, HB1705, HB2607, HB3556, HB138, HB3689, HB1788, HB1887, HB1914, HB2402, HB2306, HB1809, HB2350, HB3000, HB3237, HB3326, HB3211, HB 1056, HB2081, HB2187, HB3092, HB3308, HB3526, HB3750, HB3527, HB4219, HB4230, HB4290, HB5238, HB4804, HB4749, HCR6, HCR12, HCR34, HCR50, HCR55, HCR58, HCR70, HCR71, HCR72, HCR74, HCR75, HCR78, HCR80, HCR93, HCR100, HCR107, HCR116, HCR117, HCR90, SB1806, SB783, SB1271, SB326, SB1637, SB769, SB897, SB1035, SB1706, SB1185, SB1194, SB384, SB1426, SB1468, SB1215, SB1066, SB599, SB1930, SB2065, SB767, SB1619, SB1738, HB1500, HB718, HB23, HB34, HB 119, HB 128, HB 130, HB132, HB2756, HB166, HB406, HB186, HB331, HB380, HB1583, HB1584, HB621, HB303, HB552, HB366, HB463, HB 1211, HB1327, HB1461, HB923, HB1760, HB2467, HB5333, HB1592, HB1576, HB1552, HB2018, HB3511, HB1781, HB2013, HB2340, HB2508, HB2970, HB865, HB2851, HB3385, HB3336, HB3309, HB 1127, HB 1232, HB1397, HB4236, HB4041, HB1965, HB2730, HB3698, HB3699, HB163, HB201, HB272, HB405, HB519, HB654, HB694, HB791, HB 1136, HB 1240, HB 1266, HB 1275, HB1437, HB1532, HB1675, HB1842, HB1868, HB1894, HB1943, HB1990, HB2029, HB2061, HB2286, HB2523, HB2622, HB2652, HB2692, HB2842, HB2885, HB3016, HB3096, HB3248, HB3255, HB3479, HB3611, HB3623, HB3803, HB3804, HB3805, HB3806, HB3810, HB3816, HB4129, HB4163, HB4187, HB4238, HB4454, HB4588, HB4643, HB4738, HB4739, HB4945, HB5015, HB5616, HB1749, HB1775, HB 118, HB1762, HB2520, HB24, HB45, HB15, HB35, HB38, HB47, HB318, HB349, HB554, HB1359, HB1373, HB1647, HB2254, HB2259, HB2853, HB3073, HB3088, HB353, HB355, HB786, HB762, HB705, HB932, HB849, HB 1160, HB 1119, HB1612, HB3041, HB713, HB3104, HB3970, HB3962, HB5061, HB4042, HB4115, HB4490, HB1731, HB1705, HB2607, HB3556, HB138, HB3689, HB1788, HB1887, HB1914, HB2402, HB2306, HB1809, HB2350, HB3000, HB3237, HB3326, HB3211, HB 1056, HB2081, HB2187, HB3092, HB3308, HB3526, HB3750, HB3527, HB4219, HB4230, HB4290, HB5238, HB4804, HB4749, HCR6, HCR12, HCR34, HCR50, HCR55, HCR58, HCR70, HCR71, HCR72, HCR74, HCR75, HCR78, HCR80, HCR93, HCR100, HCR107, HCR116, HCR117, HCR90

Keywords: zoning, public notice, local government, residential development, protests, peer support, first responders, mental health, confidentiality, emergency services, information network, health services, client referral, data privacy, disaster preparedness, accreditation, community services, sexual assault, victim rights, forensic examination

Transcript Highlights:

• , but you can be confident in the docket, but you can be confident in the integrity<01:13:27.679>
• Some of those consumer benefits driven in that docket included $50 million in consumer bill credits,
• The docket number is listed there if anyone is interested.
• as the these projects as these dockets as the these projects as these dockets move<01:28:31.679>
• > September<01:34:09.840> 2025 those two dockets that September 2025 those two dockets

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• That's all. dockets or proceedings before the public dockets or proceedings before the public utilities
• So I I that's how I of those dockets.
• That is looked at by the parties, the department, the OCA, and any other parties to the docket.
• The docket that was a UNATIL docket has been discussed before.
• they ended up opening a separate docket they ended up opening a separate docket for<05:20:37.440

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , the the tow fee, the the tow fee, >> the<00:08:57.519> appeal<00:08:58.080> process
• Now, a component of that suspension is paying the tow fee.
• hard enough for them to pay their fees. hard enough for them to pay their fees.
• companies to actually justify the fees companies to actually justify the fees that<02:38:32.080>
• <02:38:47.840> can kind of limit on what kind of fees can kind of limit on what kind of fees

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Fees meant to protect the taxpayer from having to subsidize. bad loans.
• So I think looking at borrower fees and lender fees. and reintroducing them is probably necessary.
• and the lender fee was waived up to I believe it's a million dollars No, no guarantee fee The borrower
• It's no lender fee up to $500,000.
• When I read the docket last night, it was really impressive.

Keywords: SBA, 7A loan program, underwriting standards, loan defaults, Community Advantage Program, small business funding, testimony

Summary: The committee meeting focused on discussions regarding the SBA's 7A loan program and its implementation challenges. Members raised significant concerns about recent changes to the underwriting standards, which have been criticized for leading to an increase in loan defaults. Ranking members expressed a desire for a return to stronger guidelines to protect taxpayers and ensure the program remains a viable source for small businesses struggling to secure funding. Testimonies from community lenders highlighted their efforts to support underserved communities and stressed the importance of the Community Advantage Program.