Transcript Highlights:

• The May Revision includes trailer bill language to modify the fee structure that supports the California
• And that is a fee for service.
• Fee and then we always go above it and then we invoice accordingly. So it's fee for service.
• We have not talked specifically about the fee structure prior to it being published.
• structure study.

Summary: The hearing opened with budget framing from the chair and the LAO, who said the May Revision addresses roughly a $14 billion budget problem and that the environment and transportation subcommittee’s proposals account for about $1.9 billion of the solution. The LAO urged members to focus on solutions that do not worsen out-year deficits, to preserve reserves, and to defer major policy changes that are not necessary to pass the budget, including the newly introduced water-related trailer bills. Members also raised concern about a late-dropped Olympic-related trailer bill, which the LAO likewise suggested should be deferred for fuller review. The first major item was the Delta Conveyance Project and related water quality control plan trailer bills. The administration argued the proposals would streamline permitting, water rights proceedings, judicial review, and land acquisition, and would clarify DWR’s bond authority for the project. DWR said the project is needed to protect water supply reliability against drought, earthquakes, sea level rise, and other climate-related disruptions, and that the tunnel would help move water when conditions are wet and safer for the environment. Committee members from both parties questioned the timing, the use of budget trailer bills for major policy changes, the scope of the CEQA and water-rights changes, the lack of a bond cap, cost growth, and eminent domain protections. The LAO recommended deferring both water trailer bills without prejudice. Public comment was sharply divided, with labor, water agencies, and some business groups supporting the project as climate adaptation and reliability infrastructure, while environmental, tribal, fishing, county, and community groups opposed it as an attempt to bypass public process and weaken protections. The committee then briefly heard the DMV’s Digital Experience Platform fee trailer bill, which would reinstate a $1 system improvement fee to help fund the vehicle-registration phase of the project. DMV said the fee would raise about $7 million annually and offset roughly $59 million to $60 million of project costs, while the LAO noted it would help but would not solve the Motor Vehicle Account’s broader structural gap. The hearing then moved to California High-Speed Rail, where the new CEO presented an updated plan and said the project remains a major climate and infrastructure investment. He reported a revised Merced-to-Bakersfield cost range of $34.9 billion to $38.5 billion, said the agency is trying to reduce risk through direct procurement of materials, and argued that stable annual funding is needed to avoid higher costs from delays.

Transcript Highlights:

• Fee revenue may also be used...
• the fee.
• Primary funding sources: insurance fees, or insurer fees.
• As such, the fees...
• after fee.

Keywords: 981, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Lastly, expenses would include land acquisition, planning and design costs, impact fees, permitting fees
• Of the structures themselves.
• than we do in the traditional dual-staircase structures.
• waiver: the City of Corpus Christi doesn't charge impact fees.
• And so if there's not an ability to charge the fee at the beginning, we have no fee revenue for the inspectors

Bills: SB208, SB628, SB777, SB1042, SB2354, SB2477, SB2521, SB2523, SB2608, SB2703, SB2778, SB2835, SB2965, SB2367, SB3044

Keywords: workforce housing, capital investment fund, affordable housing, housing development, Texas housing laws, loan programs, community development, Texas housing, zero-interest loans, low-income housing, nonprofit organizations, construction, economic stability, housing affordability, capital investment, Texas housing policy, county fire code, fire marshal, local government code, interlocal agreement

Summary: The Senate Committee on Local Government met with a quorum at the start, adopted a two-minute limit for public testimony, and heard a series of housing, local government, fire code, and district-governance bills. Several measures were laid out with committee substitutes, including SB 628 on county fire code administration through interlocal agreements with emergency service districts; SB 208 creating a Workforce Housing Capital Investment Fund for zero-interest loans to nonprofit builders; SB 2835 allowing cities to opt into single-stair apartment buildings; and SB 2477 easing office-to-residential conversions in certain cities. Other bills addressed ESD spending thresholds (SB 2778), hospital district updates (SB 1042), subdivision/platting issues (SB 1708), public housing tax credit eligibility (SB 2608), groundwater district representation for Marfa and Presidio (SB 3044), park board authority in Waller County (SB 2367), ETJ removal procedures (SB 2523), and reporting death certificates to appraisal districts to help address squatting and homestead issues (SB 2521). Testimony was largely supportive on the housing bills. Supporters of SB 208, including Habitat for Humanity affiliates, a Brownsville nonprofit developer, Texans for Housing, and an educator, said the revolving fund would help nonprofit builders finance land, infrastructure, and development costs for affordable homes, especially for families earning 30% to 80% of area median income. SB 2835 drew support from architects, planners, and housing advocates who argued that single-stair buildings can be safe, more efficient, and better suited to missing-middle housing, though the Texas APA registered qualified opposition, saying the proposal bypasses the usual code-development process and may not be sufficiently studied. SB 2477 also received broad support from housing groups and policy organizations, who said office conversions could help address vacancy and housing shortages, though Corpus Christi raised a concern about fee recovery and local cost reimbursement. The committee also heard support for SB 628 from a county fire marshal and an ESD representative, who said the bill would reduce duplicate fire-code enforcement and costs. SB 2778 was backed by a Bexar County ESD fire chief, who said the current $2,000 expenditure approval threshold is outdated and slows emergency purchases and repairs. SB 2608 was supported by the El Paso housing authority, which said adding certain Section 8 projects to the at-risk LIHTC set-aside would help renovate aging subsidized housing. SB 3044 was presented as a way to give Marfa and Presidio representation on the groundwater district board while preserving permitting authority. Each bill heard public testimony was left pending subject to the call of the chair, and the committee recessed to reconvene after the Senate adjourns.

Transcript Highlights:

• So VLF, vehicle license fee, our favorite topic.
• The vehicle license fee, our favorite topic.
• structure.
• The prior fee structure was a flat fee of either $75,000 or $100,000 based on two tiers of total tonnage
• Whereas the new fee structure applies The new fee structure applies a $60 per ton rate, including fractions

Summary: The subcommittee first heard an informational presentation on the May Revision’s proposed reorganization of the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency into separate housing-focused and consumer/business-focused entities. Administration officials said the split would improve oversight, streamline decision-making, and create a dedicated California Housing and Homelessness Agency with a new housing development and finance committee. The Department of Finance said funding was needed in 2025-26 to begin implementation, while the LAO recommended rejecting the proposal without prejudice because the Little Hoover Commission review was still pending and the plan would require ongoing General Fund costs. Members raised concerns about the timing, the lack of alignment with the budget process, and whether the reorganization would improve accountability for homelessness spending; several public witnesses supported the concept but stressed it could not substitute for new housing and homelessness dollars. The committee then took up the Department of Veterans Affairs. CalVet requested funding for phase three of its electronic health care record project and a trailer bill to preserve authority for federal background checks, but the May Revision withdrew requests for deferred maintenance and additional administrative support. The LAO noted deferred maintenance can prevent larger future costs, and the chair criticized the withdrawal of less than $1 million for veterans’ homes as short-sighted given existing repair needs. No vote was taken. Next, the Department of Housing and Community Development presented its budget. HCD said the May Revision provides no new affordable housing or homelessness funding, but does retain existing rounds of funding and proposes a $31.7 million reversion from undersubscribed housing programs. Members from both parties expressed concern about zeroing out ongoing housing and homelessness investments, especially for LIHTC, the Multifamily Housing Program, and HAP. HCD also defended its homelessness accountability and compliance work, saying the unit includes about 30 program staff and six attorneys, with three additional attorneys requested mainly to handle public records and litigation workload. Public commenters largely opposed the lack of new funding and urged continued support for housing and homelessness programs, while some supported the reorganization and accountability efforts. Finally, the committee heard Go-Biz proposals. The administration requested authority to increase funding for a federal trade program match if needed, plus reappropriations for administrative funds tied to the Containerized Ports Interoperability Grant Program, zero-emission vehicle operations, and the Women’s Business Center Enhancement Program. It also proposed withdrawing the Cal Competes grant request and reverting remaining funds from the Performing Arts Equitable Payroll Fund. The LAO said Cal Competes is generally effective but could be cut as a budget solution, while warning that the performing arts fund was close to awards and should be considered carefully. Members objected to pulling back committed funds for performing arts organizations and questioned why the state would withdraw support after applications had already been submitted.

Transcript Highlights:

• Third, and most importantly, we must align our incentive structures.
• They just have the wrong incentive structures.
• But we've got to just get to bottom-line incentive structures.
• over this period in attorney's fees.
• And then there's prejudgment interest and attorney's fees.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Utilities and Energy held a hearing on the California Earthquake Authority’s SB 254 report and possible reforms to California’s utility wildfire recovery system. The chair framed the discussion around the Palisades and Eaton fires, the high and growing wildfire-related costs on utility bills, and the need to weigh tradeoffs among survivors, ratepayers, utilities, insurers, and taxpayers. The chair emphasized that the SB 254 report is an inventory of policy pathways rather than recommendations, and that the Legislature’s role is to evaluate the options publicly. The first panel featured wildfire survivors William Abrams and Joy Chen, who described severe ongoing displacement, housing insecurity, delayed compensation, and frustration with what they characterized as opaque and unfair compensation structures. They argued for greater transparency, clearer accountability for utilities, stronger oversight of wildfire mitigation spending, and incentives tied to safety performance. They also urged faster survivor payments, but only if they are full, fair, and not financed by shifting more costs to taxpayers or ratepayers. Committee members asked about gaps in the SB 254 report, the meaning of “full” compensation, and how a fast-pay facility might work. The second panel included the California Earthquake Authority, RAND, PG&E, LADWP, Consumer Attorneys of California, and the Public Advocates Office. Tom Welsh of CEA explained the report’s process and the current wildfire fund structure, including that utilities remain liable, the fund reimburses eligible claims, and prudency reviews can require reimbursement to the fund. RAND’s Lloyd Dixon outlined how roughly $38 billion has been paid to survivors, insurers, and public entities since 2017, and noted substantial litigation costs and cost-shifting among stakeholders. Utility representatives supported reforms that preserve financial stability and reduce risk, while consumer and public-interest advocates opposed shifting more costs to ratepayers and stressed accountability, audits, and safety-linked recovery. No votes or formal actions were taken in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• So when I began reviewing these fee structures, I started with polling our racing jurisdictions across
• And I would hesitate to recommend a fee structure that affects our bottom line.
• would hesitate to recommend a fee would hesitate to recommend a fee structure<00:10:13.760> that
• <00:10:22.800> Um<00:10:23.200> as status quo on our fee structure.
• Um as status quo on our fee structure.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee approved the minutes from its August 21 meeting and then received an update from Kentucky Horse Racing and Gaming Corporation leadership on implementation of Senate Bill 299 and House Bill 566. Jamie Eids and staff described the agency’s new structure after charitable gaming was brought under the corporation, including new divisions, staffing, banking, payroll, insurance, procurement, and reporting systems. They also unveiled the corporation’s new logo and tagline, and said the transition had been designed to avoid interruption for charities, licensees, and racing operations. A major focus was the fee structure required by House Bill 566. Eids outlined current licensing fees across racing, sports wagering, and charitable gaming, compared Kentucky’s fees with other states, and recommended keeping the status quo for one more year because the agency has only recently brought all three components fully in-house. Members asked about whether charitable gaming had harmed veterans’ groups or other nonprofits, whether any revenue should be transferred back to the state, and whether the charitable gaming licenses cover one-off raffles as well as standing operations. Eids said she had not heard complaints, said the licenses include all such activity with some exemptions, and agreed to look at the question of future transfers. The committee then heard from Melissa Combs Wright on pari-mutuel wagering and Hannah Sims on sports wagering. They reported continued growth in historical horse racing, more than $11 billion in total pari-mutuel wagering in fiscal year 2025, over $10.5 billion in HHR wagers, and about $161 million in pari-mutuel tax revenue, with most of that supporting the general fund and horse-breeding development funds. They also said sports wagering has generated nearly $5 billion in wagers since launch, $73 million for the public pension fund, and more than $2 million for problem gambling services, while expanding to 13 retail locations and 92 additional sports events. Members raised concerns about players being cut off after winning, the lack of local government revenue sharing from gaming facilities, and the growth of computer-assisted wagering; the witnesses said they were reviewing CAWs and that Kentucky does not license poker rooms through the corporation.

Transcript Highlights:

• This time, under the new 2022 structure, the additional fee totaled $117,445 and was coupled with a $21,814
• under the new 2022 structure.
• The issue is not simply the fee, but the unanticipated increase in fees without a fee cap.
• The issue is not simply the fee, but the unanticipated increase of fees without a fee cap.
• setting and what changes may be warranted now that we're a few years into this new fee structure, because

Summary: The Assembly Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee heard three bills after beginning without a quorum and later establishing one. SB 328 would cap DTSC hazardous waste generation and handling fees for infill housing and master development projects and set response timelines for cleanup reviews. Supporters said the current fee structure has made some housing and remediation projects infeasible, while opponents warned that capping fees for one sector could shift costs to other hazardous waste generators. The committee discussed the need for broader DTSC fee reform, and SB 328 was approved on a 7-0 vote and sent to the Committee on Revenue and Taxation. SB 754 would require manufacturers of disposable menstrual products to test for and disclose concentrations of certain contaminants, with DTSC able to verify results and publish them. Supporters framed the bill as a transparency and public health measure, citing recent studies finding toxic metals in tampons and emphasizing consumer right-to-know. Opponents, including manufacturers and hygiene product groups, argued the bill adds duplicative testing, vague requirements, and public disclosure that could be misinterpreted, and urged amendments. The committee members generally supported the goal of transparency, and the bill passed 5-2 with not voting members, moving to Appropriations. SB 466 would provide temporary legal protections for public water systems that are complying with approved chromium-6 compliance plans while they work toward the new drinking water standard. Supporters from Los Banos, Coachella Valley Water District, and other water agencies said the measure would help avoid costly litigation during a lengthy and expensive compliance period, especially for systems dealing with naturally occurring chromium-6. Committee members raised concerns about limiting recourse for harmed individuals and discussed possible alternative language, but the author said the bill would not affect state enforcement authority. SB 466 passed 7-0 and was sent to the Committee on Judiciary. The committee also adopted a consent calendar of additional measures by voice vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• It structured regulation guidelines for alternative nicotine products.
• Volk, under this regulation structure, yes.
• As passed the Senate, the House had a 10-year refund structure.
• As passed the Senate, they reduced it to a five-year refund structure.
• The conference committee includes that five-year structure, but also changes the refund structure to

Summary: The caucus reviewed several bills and Senate or conference committee amendments, with members generally noting whether the sponsor intended to concur. HB 2749 would let courts enter a Class 1 misdemeanor conviction for certain lower-level felony convictions, with the Senate amendment requiring at least five years since completion of sentence before eligibility. HB 2082 would create a childhood cancer and rare childhood disease research commission and adjust funding rules, including a five-million-dollar threshold tied to appropriations or federal grants. HB 2096 would allow counties to seek WIFA assistance for cesspool remediation, with the Senate adding an alternative compliance path using ADEQ’s nonpoint source management plan. HB 4001 would regulate alternative nicotine products through the Department of Liquor Licensing and Control; members discussed whether some tobacco-related products remain outside the bill, tribal enforcement limits, and the absence of a tax provision. The presenter said the AG and governor support the bill. The caucus then shifted to conference committee bills. HB 2003 would lower the learner’s permit age from 15.5 to 15 and increase supervised driving time, but several members raised safety concerns and questioned whether the change was needed; the conference amendment would let current instruction permit holders qualify for a license after six months, while still requiring age 16 for licensure. HB 2133 would impose content-verification requirements for commercial websites publishing sexual material, with conference changes exempting pre-effective-date motion pictures and television programming. Members noted the Motion Picture Association still had concerns, though the changes addressed some retroactivity issues. HB 2874 would change campaign finance penalty rules, including a five-day publication requirement for committees owing late-filing penalties, a $5,000 cap on penalties per late report, and retroactive relief for certain inactive committees that filed no-contribution/no-expenditure reports and later terminated; one member said they still had not received the outstanding fee totals requested on the floor. HB 2010 would regulate digital goods sellers and refunds for revoked access to licensed digital content; the conference version kept a five-year refund structure but changed the refund amount to 20% per year, clarified refund procedures, and removed the refund requirement if alternative access is provided. The caucus took no votes in the transcript and ended after the bill presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• from fees. from fees.
• fee exemption process is not in statute. fee exemption process is not in statute.
• fee-for-service claims. fee-for-service claims.
• organizational structure and processes. organizational structure and processes.
• and structure our programs. and structure our programs.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• well I can give you examples of the fee well I can give you examples of fees<01:33:08.840> uh
• The Internal Revenue Service's fee structure begins at a couple hundred dollars and includes fee amounts
• unlikely that a specific or capped fee unlikely that a specific or capped fee amount<01:56:10.159
• which I mean, if I wrote the bill, I would have some structure for you and you can charge fees in your
• for you and um you can charge structure for you and um you can charge fees<01:58:08.639> in<01

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This structure, it's the Ran Wash spill structure, is a shared structure.
• the fee fair to make sure that the fee the fee fair to make sure that the fee is<02:44:29.359>
• And the difference between a tax and a fee is that a fee directly benefits the person paying the fee.
• And the difference between a tax and a fee is that a fee directly benefits the person paying the fee.
• And the difference between a tax and a fee is that a fee directly benefits the person paying the fee.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Lastly, expenses would include land acquisition, planning and design costs, impact fees, permitting fees
• than we do in the traditional dual-staircase structures.
• Have there been any studies of the safety of these structures? There have.
• waiver: the City of Corpus Christi doesn't charge impact fees.
• And so if there's not an ability to charge the fee at the beginning, we have no fee revenue for the inspectors

Bills: SB208, SB628, SB777, SB1042, SB2354, SB2477, SB2521, SB2523, SB2608, SB2703, SB2778, SB2835, SB2965, SB2367, SB3044

Keywords: workforce housing, capital investment fund, affordable housing, housing development, Texas housing laws, loan programs, community development, Texas housing, zero-interest loans, low-income housing, nonprofit organizations, construction, economic stability, housing affordability, capital investment, Texas housing policy, county fire code, fire marshal, local government code, interlocal agreement

Summary: The Senate Committee on Local Government met with a quorum and limited public testimony to two minutes per person. The committee heard Senate Bill 628 by Senator Zaffirini, which would clarify that counties may enter interlocal agreements with emergency service districts to administer and enforce county fire codes, including for multi-county ESDs in the committee substitute. Witnesses from Travis County ESD-11, the Travis County Fire Marshal’s Office, and a member of the public supported the bill as a way to reduce duplication, costs, and jurisdictional confusion. Public testimony was closed and the committee substitute was left pending. The committee then heard several housing-related bills. Senate Bill 208 by Senator West would create a Workforce Housing Capital Investment Fund to provide zero-interest loans to nonprofit builders for workforce housing; Habitat for Humanity representatives, a Brownsville nonprofit developer, and housing advocates supported it as a way to finance infrastructure and land development for affordable homes. Senate Bill 2835 by Senator Johnson would allow cities to opt into single-stair apartment buildings for small-scale, multi-story housing; supporters said the design is safe and could expand housing supply, while the Texas APA expressed qualified opposition over code-process concerns and fire-safety questions. Both bills were left pending after testimony. Additional bills heard included SB 1042 updating the Kimble County Hospital District’s enabling law; SB 1708, a committee substitute protecting familial property divisions from platting requirements; SB 2778 raising the ESD expenditure threshold requiring board approval from $2,000 to up to $50,000; SB 2608 expanding LIHTC eligibility for certain public housing projects; SB 3044 adding board representation for Marfa and Presidio on the Presidio County Underground Water Conservation District and adjusting an exemption; SB 2367 extending park board authority to Waller County; SB 2523 clarifying ETJ reduction procedures and owner opt-out rights; SB 2521 requiring death-certificate reporting to appraisal districts to help address squatting and homestead exemption issues; and SB 2477 easing office-to-residential conversions in larger cities. In each case, the bills were laid out, testimony was taken, and the measures were left pending subject to call of the chair. The committee then recessed until 15 to 30 minutes after adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• We'd have the fee in place.
• Legally, the board approves the fee. Is the fee a legal fee at that moment?” “Yes, it is.”
• So you have a legal fee.
• It is a fee.” “It is legally a fee at that point in time.
• It is not a fee unto itself.

Summary: The committee hearing focused heavily on CARB’s broad trailer bill request for regulatory fee authority. Finance and CARB argued the proposal would let CARB develop fees to recover reasonable costs for implementing and enforcing regulations, while the LAO recommended rejection because the authority was too broad, could apply to an entire division of code, and would delegate core legislative taxing/fee-setting power without enough guardrails. Members from both parties raised concerns about the breadth of the authority, accountability, affordability impacts, and whether the Legislature would be put in an up-or-down position after CARB had already developed regulations. CARB responded that fees would still go through a budget change proposal and legislative approval before collection, and cited existing examples such as transport refrigeration units and commercial harborcraft fees. The committee then reviewed CARB’s request for permanent resources to implement SB 905 on carbon capture, utilization, storage, and carbon dioxide removal. CARB said the Legislature had previously authorized limited-term positions and funding, but it had struggled to recruit and retain staff with specialized regulatory and technical expertise, and that the work had included pre-rulemaking contracts, technology review, and permit-related preparation. Members questioned the pace of work, the use of limited-term positions, and whether additional permitting authority would be needed. CARB said it hoped to begin rulemaking later in the year if permanent resources were approved. Members also discussed the cap-and-trade spending plan, noting lower-than-expected auction revenues but higher interest earnings, and the need to monitor the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and possible May Revision changes. The committee then heard overviews of the zero-emission vehicle package, the Community Air Protection Program, demand-side grid support, and e-bike incentives. CARB described ongoing investments in community-based transportation equity, drayage trucks, harbor craft, and other clean technology demonstrations, while members pressed on affordability, program duplication, and whether enough funding was being directed to incentive programs. No formal votes were taken during the portion provided, and the chair repeatedly indicated that the hearing was intended to surface concerns for later budget negotiations.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:18:18.720> what over into the adjacent structures what over into the adjacent structures
• c> for structures existing structures uh for structures existing structures uh for for<00:25:16.559
• some of the three story structure some of the three story structures<00:26:41.600> they<00:26
• There are fees that they pay, but still those fees could be a fee per bedroom that you live in.
• There's less structure, and there's a reduction in the cost to their weekly fee.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The House Municipal and County Government subcommittee met on February 19, 2025 to gather additional information on House Bill 432, which concerns recovery houses. The first witness, State Fire Marshal Sean Tumi, said his office had worked with stakeholders for more than a year on the bill’s definition changes and supported the revised definition. He explained that the bill removes vague language such as “safe, healthy, family” and instead relies on fire-code requirements and certification standards, including a primarily non-transient dwelling unit and living as a single household. He distinguished recovery houses from boarding or rooming houses and from other congregate settings such as group homes or transitional housing, saying those other uses do not currently have the same exemptions. Members questioned Tumi about fire safety, inspections, smoke alarms, egress, and whether sprinklers should be required. He said recovery houses are inspected by the fire marshal’s office and local fire departments, with annual inspections under state fire code provisions, and that operators must work with a certifying body. He described the inspection process as checking alarms, extinguishers, heating systems, cooking equipment, street numbers, and no-smoking rules, and said new houses are generally given time to obtain certification. He also said he would prefer sprinklers everywhere but believed mandating them for these existing structures would likely shut down many recovery houses and significantly harm the recovery community. Bill McKenny of the New Hampshire Building Officials Association then testified in support of HB 432. He said recovery housing is an important step after treatment and that the 2024 code changes and the bill help align state law with federal disability law. He emphasized that certification through a recognized organization gives code officials confidence that standards are being monitored, and warned that if a recovery home loses certification it would lose the waiver from sprinkler requirements and could be treated more like a boarding or rooming house. No vote or final action was taken at this meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the fees are used as the state share.
• We have to have a broad-based and uniform fee structure that is approved by the feds to be charged to
• So the fees are used as the state share.
• We have to have a broad-based and uniform fee structure that is approved by the feds to be charged to
• plan to make sure their fees are paid.

Summary: The subcommittee met to review Arkansas DHS hospital spending and reimbursement methods, with Secretary Janet Mann and Deputy Secretary Misty Eubanks explaining Medicaid hospital payments. They described fee-for-service per diem payments, cost settlements, and the upper payment limit (UPL) program, noting that SFY 2025 hospital payments included $688 million in inpatient/outpatient claims, $473 million in UPL payments, $248 million in cost settlements, and about $47 million in other payments such as graduate medical education and disproportionate share hospital funds. Members asked about why per diem rates vary, how cost settlements work, why UPL applies mainly to private hospitals, and how assessment fees are structured and funded. DHS said the hospital assessment fee is broad-based and uniform, used as the state share to draw federal funds, and that supplemental hospital payments after federal match totaled $548 million with no general revenue used. The Arkansas Hospital Association’s Jody Ann Tritt then gave a broader overview of the hospital landscape, explaining the different hospital types in the state, including critical access hospitals, rural emergency hospitals, PPS hospitals, and specialty hospitals. She said Arkansas hospitals face financial strain, citing a negative 5.18% patient service margin statewide and lower reimbursement than surrounding states. She argued that Arkansas hospitals are paid less than hospitals in neighboring states for similar services, that commercial payer rates and administrative burdens are a major problem, and that Medicaid and Medicare rates remain below cost even with UPL support. She also said hospitals are the backbone of community care, provide emergency and public health functions, and are looking for ways to invest in technology and telehealth but often lack the revenue to do so. Members pressed for clearer data on hospital finances, reimbursement adequacy, and the impact of commercial insurers. Tritt said the association had just authorized a statewide survey to gather updated financial information from hospitals, which she said would take about a year to complete. She also explained that Medicaid pays weekly, Medicare and commercial plans can involve delays and denials, and that hospitals often spend significant resources on revenue cycle work. The discussion ended with a brief update on assisted living reimbursement: DHS said one facility, The Pillars of the Community in Crossett, had announced closure, nine Living Choices waiver clients were being transitioned, and the updated rate study would be available after cost reports are collected, likely before the end of the fiscal year. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• But it's really time to recognize that we have outgrown our current structure at BCSA.
• I'll cover the BCP on the generation and handling fee.
• structure.
• The prior fee structure was a flat fee of either $75,000 or $100,000 based on two tiers of total tonnage
• Whereas the new fee structure applies. a $60 per ton rate, including fractions of a ton.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But despite these belt-tightening measures, our structural budget deficit remains.
• With that, respectfully asking... ...collect their fees as requested.
• Curio, I talk. collect their fees as requested. With that, respectfully asking for an aye vote.
• The results of this structure are not hypothetical; they are tangible.
• But when those agreements are structured... ...tool to attract economic development.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We're also simplifying the fee structure for institutions and revising what should be the workload based
• Uh we're also simplifying<00:18:29.280> the<00:18:29.440> fee<00:18:29.679> structure
• <00:18:30.400> for simplifying the fee structure for simplifying the fee structure for institutions
• They change the fee structure for registered institutions so that they're not based on the program level
• uh the fee structure<00:26:09.279> for<00:26:09.520> registered<00:26:10.000> institutions

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Third, and most importantly, we must align our incentive structures.
• They just have the wrong incentive structures.
• But we've got to just get to bottom-line incentive structures.
• over this period in attorneys' fees.
• I think the Chair for the structure and protocol for this hearing.

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

Transcript Highlights:

• the new 2022 structure.
• The additional fee totaling $117,932.
• The issue is not simply the fee but it's the unanticipated increase of fees without a fee cap.
• And don't discount the very significant fees charged by DTSC as part of the generation handling fee.
• setting, what changes may be warranted now that we're a few years in. into this new fee structure, because

Keywords: 988, house, all