Transcript Highlights:

• This bill will not add any additional fees or generate any new revenue.
• underfunding. of the Texas Rural Volunteer Fire Department Assistance Program, which has an annual cap
• The bill also increases the funding cap for the Rural Volunteer Fire Department Assistance Fund.
• There's a $10 fee down below that you didn't know about, and there's another $10 fee if the bird actually
• If it runs, there's a $10 fee as well.

Bills: SB34, SB119, SB261, SB532, SB1035, SB1245, SB1247, SB1267, SB1442, SB1930, SB1948, SB2078, SB2112, SB2143, SB2155

Keywords: wildfire, wildfire mitigation, wildfire prevention, volunteer fire department, Texas A&M Forest Service, West Texas A&M University, prescribed burning, fuel loading, fuel reduction, firefighting equipment database, emergency communications, disaster preparedness, rural fire protection, asset hardening, natural resource management, emergency management, large wildfire risk, fire grant funding, fire suppression, Texas Legislature

Transcript Highlights:

• of wire transfer fee of wire transfer fee of $7.50 Plus plus one and a half% of $7.50 Plus plus one
• there is a fee because them to wire there is a fee because them to wire there is a fee because there
• that we fee that we fee that we are placing on individuals again who are are placing on individuals
• I think I think starting with the fee I think I think starting with the fee I think I think starting
• it is so it's it's a flat fee it is so it's it's a flat fee $7.50 and if it's regardless of the $7.50

Bills: SB82, SB78, SB4, SB6, SB62, SB66, SB77, SB63, SB79, SB53, SB55, HB14

Keywords: SB82, warrant recall, outstanding warrants, stale warrants, misdemeanor warrants, Class B misdemeanor, Class C misdemeanor, municipal magistrate, circuit court clerk, criminal procedure, court administration, docket cleanup, warrant audit, law enforcement notification, domestic violence, sex offense, weapons offense, deadly weapon, dangerous instrument, felony-related charges

Transcript Highlights:

• and fee cap for all it creates a tuition and fee cap for all four-year<00:09:27.760> programs<
• That's the tuition and fee cap for a Winona State student, but the tuition and fee cap for a student
• That's the tuition and fee cap for a Winona State student, but the tuition and fee cap for a student
• That's the tuition and fee cap for a Winona State student, but the tuition and fee cap for a student
• That's the tuition and fee cap for a Winona State student, but the tuition and fee cap for a student

Keywords: 919, house, all

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

Transcript Highlights:

• But the bill also removes an existing 4,000-ton cap on calculating emission fees.
• But the bill also removes an existing 4,000-ton cap on calculating emission fees.
• But the bill also removes an existing 4,000-ton cap on calculating emission fees.
• The bill also removes an existing 4,000-ton cap on calculating emission fees.
• So what will happen is that by removing the cap that currently exists, the per-ton fee goes down, and

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00 Attendance Roll Call 00:12 Introduction of Guests 01:09 HB 88 Discussion 01:46 HB 88 Roll Call Vote 03:24 HB 346 Discussion 04:20 HB 346 Roll Call Vote 21:58 Chair Comments 24:31, 958, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and first considered House Bill 88, which was described as a short bill to clarify procedures for Waste Management boards, including term limits, appointments, and making sure consolidated governments actively recruit community members and make openings easier to find. The sponsor said the bill was intended to resolve confusion about members staying on after terms expire. The bill received no opposition, passed the committee unanimously, and was reported favorably for the floor. The committee then took up House Bill 346, as amended by a committee substitute. The sponsor explained that the bill responds to a dispute over air emission fees, especially for emergency generators and backup generators used for worker safety and limited non-emergency testing. The bill would exempt emergency generators and backup generators operating 100 hours or less for maintenance/testing from fees, while also removing an existing 4,000-ton cap so the per-ton fee would drop for most permitted sources. Members discussed the possible impact on utilities and ratepayers, with concerns raised that costs could be passed through to consumers and affect coal-dependent areas. The sponsor and another member argued the change would generally reduce fees for most sources and incentivize emissions reductions; the cabinet was described as neutral, and the affected utilities were identified as TVA, LG&E, East Kentucky Power, and Big Rivers, with only TVA having raised comments. The committee substitute was adopted, and the bill passed the committee with a favorable recommendation, though one member voted no and several members explained yes votes while expressing ongoing concerns about future rate impacts. At the end of the meeting, members briefly discussed broader concerns about utility surcharges and the need to monitor the effects of legislation on ratepayers, but those comments were not part of the bill under consideration. The chair noted that future meetings may include more bills and could start earlier if needed, and the committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Do you want to go back to cap and trade? Are we going back to cap and trade? Yeah, go to. Yeah.
• 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.
• a statutory cap or a fee schedule.
• a statutory cap or a fee schedule.

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:

• This bill would allow the groundwater district to raise their production fees.
• That's disturbing, moving on, fee shifting, the very next.
• I know it does have different fee-shifting measures. I'll defer to you on that.
• their fees.
• three years you could still bring a suit to get your fees anyways.

Bills: SJR59, SCR30, SCR46, SB31, SB127, SB324, SB401, SB407, SB467, SB482, SB506, SB529, SB584, SB619, SB636, SB646, SB647, SB659, SB715, SB732, SB735, SB771, SB784, SB800, SB801, SB816, SB1013, SB1026, SB1049, SB1055, SB1065, SB1137, SB1169, SB1181, SB1383, SB1395, SB1410, SB1433, SB1524, SB1531, SB1568, SB1640, SB1666, SB1681, SB1718, SB1754, SB1757, SB1972, SB1980, SB2004, SB2007, SB2041, SB2046, SB2050, SB2075, SB2076, SB2154, SB2173, SB2206, SB2225, SB2253, SB2268, SB2306, SB2308, SB2314, SB2322, SB2330, SB2351, SB2366, SB2371, SB2392, SB2398, SB2476, SB2533, SB2540, SB2544, SB2589, SB2610, SB2623, SB2660, SB2662, SB2693, SB2707, SB2717, SB2722, SB2742, SB2753, SB2779, SB2807, SB2843, SB2844, SB2858, SB2877, SB2880, SB2885, SB2920, SB2938, SB2986, HJR4, HCR35, SJR3, SJR18, SB5, SB260, SB1786, SB914, SB963, SB1197, SB1415, SB1437, SJR36, SJR50, SJR63, SJR84, SJR59, SCR12, SCR39, SCR46, SCR48, SCR19, SCR30, SCR3, SB2023, SB1433, SB2322, SB2877, SB407, SB1718, SB1395, SB62, SB666, SB847, SB284, SB854, SB1073, SB810, SB1505, SB583, SB1502, SB507, SB1026, SB1434, SB1376, SB1585, SB1772, SB2016, SB1163, SB619, SB1122, SB732, SB731, SB397, SB508, SB1436, SB287, SB261, SB1882, SB393, SB1791, SB529, SB209, SB2429, SB1999, SB511, SB2309, SB510, SB2253, SB584, SB1085, SB2314, SB2046, SB1975, SB2717, SB1262, SB1524, SB1137, SB636, SB2056, SB884, SB517, SB1200, SB1410, SB1845, SB1863, SB2681, SB2200, SB2199, SB1757, SB2050, SB2458, SB2201, SB1055, SB2660, SB2662, SB1065, SB801, SB2533, SB3014, SB3013, SB758, SB647, SB1721, SB2268, SB2366, SB1013, SB2797, SB2371, SB2383, SB646, SB1169, SB1754, SB2779, SB2004, SB2119, SB2448, SB1777, SB1283, SB2392, SB2076, SB2786, SB2876, SB2284, SB2225, SB1540, SB2920, SB2929, SB1972, SB2540, SB2742, SB2595, SB2217, SB715, SB2330, SB1383, SB500, SB1640, SB2001, SB2080, SB2722, SB506, SB2514, SB2623, SB2753, SB2398, SB1241, SB2927, SB2173, SB2538, SB898, SB467, SB1449, SB2529, SB1531, SB2846, SB2476, SB986, SB1181, SB2075, SB2154, SB2864, SB31, SB2880, SB1359, SB2386, SB771, SB2844, SB2550, SB1351, SB1423, SB1931, SB2245, SB2589, SB2707, SB2807, SB2351, SB410, SB659, SB816, SB2776, SB2693, SB2580, SB1980, SB1886, SB1234, SB739, SB482, SB456, SB127, SB1666, SB2843, SB2801, SB800, SB2055, SB784, SB2986, SB735, SB1012, SB324, SB2926, SB2938, SB2007, SB2138, SB1242, SB2615, SB1049, SB2310, SB1224, SB2972, SB1568, SB2841, SB2885, SB3016, SB2858, SB2610, SB2139, SB1856, SB2035, SB2308, SB2306, SB2041, SB1528, SB1681, SB1141, SB2401, SB2530, SB2375, SB547, SB1266, SB1373, SB1467, SB2069, SB2269, SB2480, SB2544, SB672, SB904, SB2695, SB2891, SB2422, SB2543, SB1854, SB317, SB2539, SB2532, SB2925, SB1250, SB2082, SB2203, SB457, SB2357, HJR4, HB135, HB1109, HCR35, HCR64, SB2721, SB243, SB1285, SB2568, SB1959, SB1442, SB1454, SB2520, SB2541, SB1708, SB1237, SB1844, SB1586

Keywords: education funding, Texas State Technical College System, capital projects, infrastructure, higher education, Birding Capital, Matagorda County, wildlife, conservation, Texas Legislature, Texas beef, cattle industry, agricultural heritage, Texas strip steak, economic growth, SB 31, Life of the Mother Act, Texas abortion law, medical emergency, reasonable medical judgment

Transcript Highlights:

• That $30,000 attorney fee cap was a compromise between all members of the task force.
• However, according to their own FIR, the 2023 task force warned that raising attorney fee caps has the
• That same task force found that the vast majority of cases, fully 93%, didn't reach the fee cap.
• And so half of the fee does come from the worker's benefits that they've received up to the cap.
• As you might have heard, once an attorney fee cap is met, that case may still be ongoing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Two, the representative has stated a 3.5% fee cap.
• But that's not, that would be a fee, that would be a fee that they are charging.
• So the cap has to do with where that note—really, the only purpose of the cap is to give the retailer
• Now, raising the cap or raising the amount that a credit card wants to charge for those processing fees
• It caps it at five years.

Bills: HB1268, HB3041, HB3075, HB3378, HB3463, HB3619, HB3620, HB3624, HB3722, HB4335

Keywords: retirement, public employees, deferred option plan, service credit, contributions, distributions, credit card transactions, payment methods, service charge, consumer rights, financial regulation, rounding, cash payments, public finance, Oklahoma Common Cents Act, political subdivision, science and technology, research, board appointments, emergency legislation

Transcript Highlights:

• Not only did they raise license fees.
• you're paying that same fee. you're paying that same fee.
• license tab fees, and gas tax. license tab fees, and gas tax.
• Uh, well, the license tab fee is very complex.
• raised every single fee on a car. car. car.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: Minnesota Senate Republicans held a press conference unveiling a package of affordability and tax-relief bills aimed at property taxes, taxes on tips and overtime, and vehicle registration costs. Leader Mark Johnson said the proposals were meant to counter rising costs for wages, homeownership, and driving, and argued that Democrats’ policies had made life more expensive. Several senators echoed that theme, saying Minnesotans need immediate relief and that the state has room to act because of a reported surplus. Senator Michael Kunesh described a property-tax cap bill that would limit increases for cities and counties to inflation plus 50% of population growth, with higher increases requiring voter approval. He said constituents, including seniors, a disabled veteran, and young people, are seeing unsustainable property-tax hikes, and he argued that state and federal mandates have driven local costs. In response to a question about added county workload from federal SNAP and Medicaid changes, he said the solution is both to pause new mandates and to cap property-tax growth. Senator Karin Housley outlined a proposal to end state taxes on tips and overtime, with deductions up to $25,000 for tips and $12,500 for overtime, phased out at $150,000 for individuals and $300,000 for families. She said the measure would help workers keep more of what they earn and would not cost small businesses directly. Senator John Jasinski proposed rolling back vehicle registration tab fees to pre-2023 levels, saying Minnesota’s fees are far higher than neighboring states and that the change would save drivers money over time. Senator Julia Coleman also supported the package, saying the bills would provide practical relief for families facing high housing, driving, and work-related costs. No votes were taken; the event ended with questions from reporters about fiscal impacts, offsets, and whether the proposals would worsen the state’s structural budget imbalance.

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill will... ...remove the cap and limits that restrict the board to expanding no more than seven
• million per fiscal year and removes the cap on the number of locations across the state for veteran
• Specifically, the bill ties the existing dollar amount statute for assessments currently capped at $1
• The impact that delegation fees have on access to health in rural areas.
• First, it removes the delegation fee for APRNs.

Bills: HB135, HCR64, SCR3, SCR30, SB500, SB739, SB816, SB898, SB1283, SB1351, SB1423, SB1531, SB1540, SB1666, SB1721, SB1886, SB1931, SB2001, SB2075, SB2154, SB2173, SB2217, SB2284, SB2375, SB2383, SB2386, SB2398, SB2448, SB2476, SB2540, SB2580, SB2589, SB2693, SB2707, SB2776, SB2786, SB2801, SB2864, SB2927, SJR84, SCR30, SB243, SB324, SB393, SB457, SB511, SB529, SB547, SB636, SB646, SB659, SB715, SB731, SB735, SB800, SB801, SB904, SB1065, SB1141, SB1181, SB1224, SB1241, SB1242, SB1250, SB1266, SB1285, SB1359, SB1434, SB1442, SB1467, SB1502, SB1524, SB1528, SB1551, SB1585, SB1640, SB1754, SB1757, SB1777, SB1844, SB1863, SB1972, SB2007, SB2035, SB2046, SB2055, SB2069, SB2082, SB2119, SB2139, SB2154, SB2200, SB2201, SB2269, SB2310, SB2330, SB2357, SB2366, SB2401, SB2422, SB2514, SB2530, SB2533, SB2543, SB2544, SB2550, SB2568, SB2589, SB2660, SB2693, SB2695, SB2707, SB2717, SB2721, SB2742, SB2753, SB2807, SB2846, SB2891, SB2925, SB2938, SJR3, SJR18, SB5, SB326, SB767, SB769, SB783, SB914, SB963, SB1035, SB1197, SB1271, SB1415, SB1437, SB1619, SB1637, SB1786, SB1806, SB494, SB530, SB2312, SB1, SB260, HB135, HB1109, HB1392, HB22, HCR64, SJR36, SJR50, SJR63, SJR84, SJR59, SCR12, SCR39, SCR48, SCR19, SCR30, SCR3, SB2023, SB62, SB666, SB847, SB284, SB854, SB1073, SB810, SB1505, SB583, SB1502, SB507, SB1434, SB1376, SB1585, SB1772, SB2016, SB1163, SB1122, SB731, SB397, SB508, SB1436, SB287, SB261, SB1882, SB393, SB1791, SB209, SB2429, SB1999, SB511, SB2309, SB510, SB1085, SB1975, SB2717, SB1262, SB1524, SB636, SB2056, SB884, SB517, SB1200, SB1845, SB1863, SB2681, SB2200, SB2199, SB1757, SB2458, SB2201, SB801, SB2533, SB3014, SB3013, SB758, SB1721, SB1013, SB2797, SB2383, SB2119, SB2448, SB1777, SB1283, SB2076, SB2786, SB2876, SB2284, SB1540, SB2929, SB2540, SB2595, SB2217, SB715, SB500, SB1640, SB2001, SB2514, SB2753, SB2398, SB1241, SB2927, SB2173, SB2538, SB898, SB1449, SB2529, SB2846, SB2476, SB986, SB1181, SB2075, SB2154, SB2864, SB1359, SB2386, SB2550, SB1351, SB1423, SB1931, SB2245, SB2589, SB2707, SB410, SB2776, SB2580, SB1886, SB1234, SB739, SB456, SB1666, SB2801, SB2055, SB1012, SB2926, SB2138, SB1242, SB2615, SB2310, SB1224, SB2972, SB2841, SB3016, SB2139, SB1856, SB2035, SB1528, SB1141, SB2401, SB2530, SB2375, SB547, SB1266, SB1373, SB1467, SB2069, SB2269, SB2480, SB672, SB904, SB2695, SB2891, SB2422, SB2543, SB1854, SB317, SB2539, SB2532, SB2925, SB1250, SB2082, SB2203, SB457, SB2357, SB2721, SB243, SB1285, SB2568, SB1959, SB1442, SB1454, SB2520, SB2541, SB1708, SB1237, SB1844, SB1586, SB1551, SB3039, SB2819, SB66, SB629, SB1015, SB2342, SB2903, SB2933, SB1965, SB2477, SB3029, SB2605, SB2419, SB1957, SB375, SB250, SB777, SB628, SB2523, SB2367, SB2703, SB2608, SB2778, SB3044, SB2965, SB2521, SB865, HB2525, HB3093, SB1032, SB2165, SB2501, SB2675, SB2452, SB2835

Keywords: sales tax exemption, exotic animals, game animals, agriculture, livestock, gifted education, education support, student achievement, academic excellence, Texas education, cowboy culture, Bandera, cultural heritage, historical significance, Texas identity, Birding Capital, Matagorda County, wildlife, conservation, Texas Legislature

Bills: HB135, HCR64, SCR3, SCR30, SB500, SB739, SB816, SB898, SB1283, SB1351, SB1423, SB1531, SB1540, SB1666, SB1721, SB1886, SB1931, SB2001, SB2075, SB2154, SB2173, SB2217, SB2284, SB2375, SB2383, SB2386, SB2398, SB2448, SB2476, SB2540, SB2580, SB2589, SB2693, SB2707, SB2776, SB2786, SB2801, SB2864, SB2927, SJR84, SCR30, SB243, SB324, SB393, SB457, SB511, SB529, SB547, SB636, SB646, SB659, SB715, SB731, SB735, SB800, SB801, SB904, SB1065, SB1141, SB1181, SB1224, SB1241, SB1242, SB1250, SB1266, SB1285, SB1359, SB1434, SB1442, SB1467, SB1502, SB1524, SB1528, SB1551, SB1585, SB1640, SB1754, SB1757, SB1777, SB1844, SB1863, SB1972, SB2007, SB2035, SB2046, SB2055, SB2069, SB2082, SB2119, SB2139, SB2154, SB2200, SB2201, SB2269, SB2310, SB2330, SB2357, SB2366, SB2401, SB2422, SB2514, SB2530, SB2533, SB2543, SB2544, SB2550, SB2568, SB2589, SB2660, SB2693, SB2695, SB2707, SB2717, SB2721, SB2742, SB2753, SB2807, SB2846, SB2891, SB2925, SB2938, SJR3, SJR18, SB5, SB326, SB767, SB769, SB783, SB914, SB963, SB1035, SB1197, SB1271, SB1415, SB1437, SB1619, SB1637, SB1786, SB1806, SB494, SB530, SB2312, SB1, SB260, HB135, HB1109, HB1392, HB22, HCR64, SJR36, SJR50, SJR63, SJR84, SJR59, SCR12, SCR39, SCR48, SCR19, SCR30, SCR3, SB2023, SB62, SB666, SB847, SB284, SB854, SB1073, SB810, SB1505, SB583, SB1502, SB507, SB1434, SB1376, SB1585, SB1772, SB2016, SB1163, SB1122, SB731, SB397, SB508, SB1436, SB287, SB261, SB1882, SB393, SB1791, SB209, SB2429, SB1999, SB511, SB2309, SB510, SB1085, SB1975, SB2717, SB1262, SB1524, SB636, SB2056, SB884, SB517, SB1200, SB1845, SB1863, SB2681, SB2200, SB2199, SB1757, SB2458, SB2201, SB801, SB2533, SB3014, SB3013, SB758, SB1721, SB1013, SB2797, SB2383, SB2119, SB2448, SB1777, SB1283, SB2076, SB2786, SB2876, SB2284, SB1540, SB2929, SB2540, SB2595, SB2217, SB715, SB500, SB1640, SB2001, SB2514, SB2753, SB2398, SB1241, SB2927, SB2173, SB2538, SB898, SB1449, SB2529, SB2846, SB2476, SB986, SB1181, SB2075, SB2154, SB2864, SB1359, SB2386, SB2550, SB1351, SB1423, SB1931, SB2245, SB2589, SB2707, SB410, SB2776, SB2580, SB1886, SB1234, SB739, SB456, SB1666, SB2801, SB2055, SB1012, SB2926, SB2138, SB1242, SB2615, SB2310, SB1224, SB2972, SB2841, SB3016, SB2139, SB1856, SB2035, SB1528, SB1141, SB2401, SB2530, SB2375, SB547, SB1266, SB1373, SB1467, SB2069, SB2269, SB2480, SB672, SB904, SB2695, SB2891, SB2422, SB2543, SB1854, SB317, SB2539, SB2532, SB2925, SB1250, SB2082, SB2203, SB457, SB2357, SB2721, SB243, SB1285, SB2568, SB1959, SB1442, SB1454, SB2520, SB2541, SB1708, SB1237, SB1844, SB1586, SB1551, SB3039, SB2819, SB66, SB629, SB1015, SB2342, SB2903, SB2933, SB1965, SB2477, SB3029, SB2605, SB2419, SB1957, SB375, SB250, SB777, SB628, SB2523, SB2367, SB2703, SB2608, SB2778, SB3044, SB2965, SB2521, SB865, HB2525, HB3093, SB1032, SB2165, SB2501, SB2675, SB2452, SB2835

Keywords: sales tax exemption, exotic animals, game animals, agriculture, livestock, gifted education, education support, student achievement, academic excellence, Texas education, cowboy culture, Bandera, cultural heritage, historical significance, Texas identity, Birding Capital, Matagorda County, wildlife, conservation, Texas Legislature

Transcript Highlights:

• Between CCTR and CAP.
• , and that because the average cost of CAP is lower, slots are reduced with CAP to absorb these federal
• So, for instance, CCTR to CAP.
• A similar size reduction in General Child Care and in CAP will continue to affect more slots in CAP than
• We do have a Medi-Cal fee-for-service fee schedule for payment rates in the fee-for-service delivery

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The subcommittee first heard May Revision items for child support, child care, and related human services. The Department of Child Support Services described two technical adjustments, which the LAO said raised no concerns. The Department of Social Services then walked through child care proposals, including a shift in how federal and Proposition 64 funding reductions would be absorbed, a 2.01% COLA, disaster-related child care infrastructure grants, an increase in in-contract administrative support costs for alternative payment agencies, reversion of prospective-pay implementation funding after a federal rule change, a one-time allocation to cover the first quarter of Cost of Care Plus payments in the next fiscal year, reappropriation for existing infrastructure grant closeout work, and estimates of unspent child care funds. The department also outlined trailer bill language on a single rate structure, site safety and emergency procedures, CalWORKs child care data sharing, and child care oversight. The LAO recommended that the Legislature seek more justification for shifting reductions from General Child Care to the Alternative Payment Program, noting that CAP reductions affect more slots and that General Child Care has had significant unspent funds. It supported removing prospective-pay funding, but recommended rejecting the administrative cost shift to a percentage-based rate because it could create future General Fund pressure. It also suggested the Legislature review alignment between the disaster grants and the child care infrastructure program. Senators and members pressed the administration on why the budget would reduce child care slots and COLA percentages while the state still has waitlists and unspent funds, and questioned the need for early funding of Cost of Care Plus payments and the move from a flat administrative amount to a percentage. Public commenters, including providers, advocates, county offices, and infrastructure partners, urged full COLA funding, preservation of child care slots, support for prospective pay, and continued investment in child care access and facilities. After a short recess, the committee moved to Part B on health and heard the Department of State Hospitals. DSH presented a May Revision budget of $3.2 billion and described proposals for a central utility plant replacement at Metropolitan State Hospital, an electronic health record implementation, reduced county bed billing authority due to phased-in LPS bed capacity, limited contract exemption authority for online clinical subscriptions, reversion of prior-year unspent operating funds, and a workforce development proposal shifting some costs to Behavioral Health Services Act funds, including support for an additional psychiatric training cohort at Napa. The department also outlined IST-related savings and a trailer bill to remove the sunset on the independent placement panel program.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's not cap-and-invest. It's not even cap-and-trade. Let's be clear.
• application to a fee for service.
• fee for service.
• , timber harvest fees, etc.
• a statutory cap or a fee schedule, but since it is still open-ended, we urge the legislature to continue

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We talked about caps on attorney fees.
• What these proposed caps on attorney fees do is they attempt to limit access to justice.
• If we cap fees, if we cap damages, we're still going to have the injuries.
• They're protected by no punitive damages, and they're protected by caps on fees.
• terms of recoveries, they're capped in terms of legal fees, and so forth.

Transcript Highlights:

• All right, moving on to cap and invest.
• Most of them focused on the cap-and-invest proposal.
• Trying to then layer in and shoehorn in the reauthorization of our landmark climate cap-and-trade cap-and-invest
• I think those are my points on cap-and-trade.
• and trade, cap and invest, whatever you want to call it.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee hearing focused on the governor’s May Revision, especially the proposed extension of the cap-and-trade program to 2045 as “cap-and-invest,” the related greenhouse gas reduction fund (GGRF) spending framework, and several trailer bill proposals. Department of Finance staff outlined budget solutions including a $1.5 billion annual General Fund-to-GGRF shift for Cal Fire that would grow to $1.9 billion by 2029-30, continued support for high-speed rail, climate bond implementation, and various environmental and water-related statutory changes. The administration also described proposals affecting the Delta Conveyance Project, water quality planning, groundwater bulletin timing, Exide cleanup funding, and other agency-specific items, though the chair repeatedly asked staff to keep the presentation high-level and save details for the next hearing. Members from both parties raised strong concerns about the cap-and-invest proposal, arguing that it could reduce or displace funding for transit, affordable housing, active transportation, wildfire prevention, zero-emission vehicles, and other previously committed programs. Several members questioned whether the administration was effectively shifting essential ongoing services like Cal Fire onto a temporary carbon market fund, how the General Fund backstop would work if auction revenues fall short, and whether the proposal would leave enough money for continuous appropriations and future awards. Members also criticized the inclusion of cap-and-invest reauthorization in the budget process and asked for clearer information on the impact to high-speed rail, transit, and other GGRF priorities. The Delta Conveyance Project and related trailer bill language drew significant opposition from members and public commenters, who argued the proposal would fast-track the project, weaken CEQA-related review, and authorize revenue bond financing without sufficient legislative oversight. Public testimony also included support for maintaining or expanding funding for transit, affordable housing, AB 617 community air protection, offshore wind infrastructure, and ignition interlock programs, while environmental and community groups opposed cuts to wildfire prevention, housing, and school climate-related programs. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational, and the chair said the committee would continue the discussion and receive more detailed responses at the follow-up hearing on Tuesday.

Transcript Highlights:

• We had some questions about putting a limit or a cap because caps oftentimes become the bottom.
• Let's just say the late fee may be, you know, $50, if the percentage is not capped. and it's 10%, well
• fee ends up being.
• people end up going at the cap and just charging a $10 flat fee.
• It still allows them a free option to make that payment, and it puts a cap on any fee that would occur

Transcript Highlights:

• The 10% rule is actually not related to tax caps; it's independent of tax caps.
• The 10% rule is actually not related to tax caps; it's independent of tax caps.
• cap law.
• <06:12:16.200> are fee um calculations impact fees are fee um calculations impact fees are
• impact fees may be assessed.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So, no cap in New Mexico; we have no cap on attorney's fees.
• California caps attorney fees, New York caps attorney fees, Massachusetts caps attorney fees, Illinois
• caps attorney fees.
• Your report, your number one suggestion is we cap fees on legal fees.
• You say Delaware caps attorney's fees.

Transcript Highlights:

• fees.
• fees is good enough.
• <00:28:52.320> Well, and capping fees is good enough.
• Well, and capping fees is good enough.
• resale caps.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• A permit fee may be charged for each permit issued by the local fire department, and the fee shall be
• It seems like we kind of now have this hodgepodge of caps and soft caps and, you know, levy limitations
• Whatever fees they had, they cracked down on them.
• As you can tell by this year, we are all in on fees. Let's increase fees all across the board.
• As you can tell by this year, we are all in on fees. Let's increase fees all across the board.

Bills: LB737, LB753, LB788, LB913, LB1055, LB1195, LB1216, LB1256, LB429, LB721, LB722, LB727, LB743, LB745, LB749, LB778, LB787, LB365A, LB823, LB900, LB903, LB940, LB954, LB1127, LB1127A, LB1205, LB1240, LR293, LR296, LR422, LR505, LR507

Keywords: LB737, Olmstead, developmental disabilities, disability services, community-based services, integrated settings, DHHS, Department of Health and Human Services, stakeholder advisory committee, independent consultant, public hearing, legislative oversight, disability rights, community integration, housing, employment, education, transportation, community supports, self-advocacy