Transcript Highlights:

• the Legislature passed legislation saying that it did not want the consumers of California to be subsidizing
• The Legislature passed legislation saying that it did not want the consumers of California to be subsidizing

Summary: The Assembly Insurance Committee held an oversight hearing on the California Fair Plan, focused on the plan’s rapid growth, its financial stability after the January Southern California wildfires, and its role as the insurer of last resort. Fair Plan officials explained that the plan was created in 1968, is a not-for-profit involuntary association of licensed property insurers, and is intended to be a temporary safety net until policyholders can return to the admitted market. They emphasized that the plan is not a state agency or taxpayer-funded, but is regulated by the Department of Insurance and supported by member-company assessments if claims exceed available funds. Victoria Roach and Armand Feliciano said the Fair Plan has grown sharply since 2018 and especially after market pullbacks by major insurers, reaching about 575,000 policies and roughly $600 billion in exposure by spring 2025. They noted that growth is increasingly occurring in lower wildfire-risk areas, where the plan can sometimes be cheaper than the voluntary market, and said this undermines depopulation back into the private market. They also discussed recent policy expansions, including coverage for farms, higher residential and commercial limits, and pending or proposed changes such as AB 290, SB 525, and AB 226, which would add tools like a line of credit and bond access. A major portion of the hearing addressed the January wildfire losses and the plan’s financial response. Fair Plan officials said they assessed member insurers for $1 billion after determining claims and cash flow would exceed available resources, and that the process was approved quickly and paid smoothly, with more than 80% of the assessment collected within 10 days. They also described the reinsurance tower, the plan’s limited surplus, and the need for actuarially sound rates to reduce future reliance on assessments. On claims handling, they said the plan has received over 5,500 claims from the fires, has paid more than $2.9 billion so far, expects total payments near $4 billion, and has focused on advancing payments quickly for total losses and other urgent needs. Members questioned the plan’s solvency, the growth in non-wildfire areas, claim denials, smoke-loss coverage, and how depopulation works. Roach said most closed claims without payment were duplicates rather than denials, and that smoke claims require direct physical loss under the policy, with coverage determined case by case. Public commenters from the California Building Industry Association and the Independent Insurance Agents and Brokers of California said the Fair Plan’s growth reflects a weak voluntary market, inadequate rates, and insurer fear of future assessments, and urged support for rate increases and AB 226. The hearing concluded with no vote, but with a commitment from Fair Plan officials to follow up on unanswered questions and continue providing more transparency through public data and website disclosures.

Transcript Highlights:

• We were subsidizing child care.
• child care workers who are currently on the waiting list for early learning scholarships free or subsidized

Bills: HF2436, HF470, HF2643, HF2456, HF102, HF1367

Keywords: child welfare, economic assistance, child care, grant program, video security cameras, early education, scholarships, funding, children, families, Minnesota education, child care licensing, family child care, child care center, Minnesota Department of Children, Youth, and Families, correction order, conditional license, fix-it ticket, documented technical assistance, license suspension

Transcript Highlights:

• TO ESTABLISH A OUT-OF-STATE FEE FOR NONRESIDENT OUTLINED STUDENTS THIS ENSURES TAXPAYERS ARE NOT SUBSIDIZING

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So it compels taxpayers to subsidize religious teaching with which they disagree and restricts their
• c><01:45:30.480> religious taxpayers to sub subsidize religious taxpayers to sub subsidize religious
• > such<02:20:24.640> as Subsidized health insurance, such as Healthy Kids.
• I don't believe subsidizing the rich is a New Hampshire value that we were elected for.
• I don't believe subsidizing the rich is a New Hampshire value that we were elected for.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We're not going to subsidize tax-exempt interest for billionaire sports team owners. Great.
• We're not going to subsidize tax-exempt interest for billionaire sports team owners. Great.
• <04:12:47.720> a a subsid a a subsid a subsidy<04:12:50.040> for subsidy for subsidy
• Very few of them are interested in subsidizing woke journalism.
• Very few of them are interested in subsidizing woke journalism.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Friday, February 7, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And our approach year after year is to subsidize this industry.
• after<01:04:57.200> year<01:04:57.359> is<01:04:57.680> to<01:04:58.000> subsidize
• approach year after year is to subsidize approach year after year is to subsidize this<01:04:58.799
• a 50-whatever you guys come up with the numbers, but this idea of just always using tax money to subsidize
• a 50-whatever you guys come up with the numbers, but this idea of just always using tax money to subsidize

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Committee on Economic Development and Tourism heard seven bills on consumer protection, DBEDT-related matters, and tourism/creative industry issues. On SB 2031, DCCA supported aligning state law with the FTC’s 2025 rule on hidden fees and pricing misrepresentations in live event ticketing and short-term lodging; hotel and financial industry witnesses also testified, and senators asked for complaint and enforcement data. On SB 2129, DBEDT and business groups supported a study of minimum wage impacts, with testimony emphasizing effects on hours, employment, prices, and business viability; a senator asked whether the study could also examine the gig economy and business closures, and DBEDT said that may be possible but would require more research and data access. On SB 2259, which would promote dementia-friendly businesses, DBEDT said the measure fit better with another agency and lacked the department’s expertise, while the Executive Office on Aging and the Alzheimer’s Association supported the intent and offered to help with curriculum, branding, and training. Testifiers described dementia as a spectrum and said businesses should be trained to communicate effectively with customers and employees living with the disease; suggested amendments included changing the branding language and requiring at least 85% of employees to complete training rather than all employees. A senator also raised concerns about stigma and whether early-stage dementia should affect a person’s ability to function, and the witness responded that people can often function well in early stages. The committee also heard SB 2577 on sports tourism, which DBEDT and the Retail Merchants of Hawaii supported as a way to better understand which events draw visitors and economic benefits. SB 2578, creating a film commission, drew broad support from DBEDT, Creative Industries, SAG-AFTRA, the Hawaii Film Alliance, the Hawaii Film Office, and others, but several witnesses urged changes to the commission’s composition and authority, including more labor representation and limits on the commission’s ability to adjust the production cap. Senators questioned staffing, costs, and whether current film office employees should transfer to the new commission, and one senator proposed a friendly amendment to add musicians, SAG, IATSE, and Teamsters, though the department cautioned that too many members could make the commission difficult to manage. The transcript ends during discussion of the film bill, with no final votes or committee actions stated for the measures heard.

Transcript Highlights:

• And, as Senator Port talked about, we're not going to be able to subsidize our way out of the housing
• If we had $5 billion, we wouldn't be able to subsidize our way out of the housing shortage.
• to<01:12:57.520> be<01:12:57.600> able<01:12:57.840> to<01:12:58.159> subsidize
• <01:12:58.800> our not going to be able to subsidize our not going to be able to subsidize
• <01:13:02.960> be<01:13:03.040> able We had $5 billion, we wouldn't be able to subsidize

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Now, Connecticut, as you know, you can get subsidized through, like in our state, Minnesota Human Services
• Now, Connecticut, as you know, you can get subsidized through, like in our state, Minnesota Human Services
• Now, Connecticut, as you know, you can get subsidized through, like in our state, Minnesota Human Services
• Now, Connecticut, as you know, you can get subsidized through, like in our state, Minnesota Human Services
• Subsidized through, like in our state, Minnesota Human Services, where there's a certain amount where

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Homeline supports finding ways to stabilize rents in these tax-subsidized properties so renters can maintain
• that this committee should question why any household living in any low-income housing tax credit subsidized
• about<01:30:43.800> 73%<01:30:44.800> in<01:30:45.000> a<01:30:45.320> subsidized
• <01:30:46.560> facility<01:30:47.560> this about 73% in a subsidized facility this
• about 73% in a subsidized facility this isn't<01:30:48.119> like<01:30:48.280> a<01:30:

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• wanted to mention that how we spend the money, if in the previous bill most of the money was going to subsidize
• wanted to mention that how we spend the money, if in the previous bill most of the money was going to subsidize
• wanted to mention that how we spend the money, if in the previous bill most of the money was going to subsidize
• wanted to mention that how we spend the money, if in the previous bill most of the money was going to subsidize
• The money was going to subsidize other gambling entities.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• representatives have expressed today about allowing data centers to have private profit while we subsidize
• representatives have expressed today about allowing data centers to have private profit while we subsidize
• working people aren't... ...pay stubs or whatever that you're working, so that working people aren't subsidizing
• So Arizonans should not be subsidizing big tech, especially as electricity prices rise and tech profits

Bills: HB4138, HB4139, HB4140, HB4141, HB4142, HB4143, HB4144, HB4145, HB4146, HB4147, HB4148, HB4149, HB4150, HB4151, HB4152, HB4153, SB1831, SB1832, SB1833, SB1834, SB1835, SB1836, SB1837, SB1838, SB1839, SB1840, SB1841, SB1842, SB1843, SB1844, SB1845, SB1846

Keywords: appropriations, education funding, health care, general fund, state budget, local funding, gaming, pari-mutuel, horse racing, regulatory assessment, first-time starters, budget implementation, federal funds, government services, budget stabilization, financial reporting, capital outlay, infrastructure, veterans services, highway construction

Summary: The committee met in a special joint appropriations session to review the FY 2027 budget package, including House Bill 4138 and Senate Bill 1831, the general appropriations or “feed” bills. Staff described the budget as including a one-time transfer of state funds, a 5% lump-sum reduction to most agencies’ discretionary general-fund budgets, continued funding for the state health insurance plan and school facilities, and various one-time restorations or reversions of prior appropriations. Members spent much of the meeting clarifying how the 5% reductions would work, noting that formula and mandatory funding such as K-12 basic aid are excluded, while the governor’s executive branch would decide how to implement the cuts within agencies. The chair repeatedly emphasized that the committee was not specifying line-item cuts and that agencies would have discretion over implementation. A large portion of the discussion focused on the practical effects of the budget on universities, public safety, health care, rural programs, and fund sweeps. Arizona Board of Regents and university representatives said the proposed reductions would amount to more than $85 million statewide and could affect programs such as the Arizona Promise Program, Teachers Academy, and tuition freezes, though no specific program cuts were written into the bill. Other testimony raised concerns about fund sweeps from encumbered balances, including university research funds, housing trust funds, utility regulation funds, and ADOT-related accounts, with some members warning about possible impacts on rural infrastructure and federal matching dollars. The committee also discussed the state employee health plan, including a $228 million general-fund infusion and proposed employee premium increases over three years, as well as questions about corrections, forestry and fire management, and rural critical access hospitals. Public testimony was largely opposed to the budget. Speakers from Opportunity Arizona, the Arizona Board of Regents, health care, and local government argued that the package would reduce support for education, housing, SNAP, health care access, and rural communities while preserving tax benefits for data centers and wealthy taxpayers. A mayor from Globe described severe flood damage and asked for state help for a flood relief fund, while a motorcycle safety advocate questioned a proposed transfer from the motorcycle safety fund. Committee members debated whether the budget’s effects should be described as speculative or as likely consequences of the broad cuts, and several exchanges became contentious over comparisons to the Great Recession and references to federal tax policy. The meeting ended with continued public testimony and no final vote taken in the portion provided, though leadership had earlier said the committee planned a mass roll-call vote on all the bills at the end.

Transcript Highlights:

• They should not be forced to subsidize a federal surge that lacks leadership and accountability.
• They should not be forced<00:37:21.280> to<00:37:21.360> subsidize<00:37:21.880> a
• c><00:37:21.960> federal<00:37:22.280> surge<00:37:22.640> that forced to subsidize
• a federal surge that forced to subsidize a federal surge that lacks<00:37:23.040> leadership<

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Public housing, federally subsidized housing, low-income housing tax credit properties, they already
• Public<00:56:36.160> housing,<00:56:36.640> federally<00:56:37.080> subsidized Public
• housing, federally subsidized Public housing, federally subsidized housing,<00:56:38.200> low-income

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We want to make sure that ratepayers aren't subsidizing or or taking the risk on data center development
• We want to make sure that rateayers We want to make sure that rateayers aren't<00:24:09.679> subsidizing
• c> or<00:24:10.880> taking<00:24:11.120> the<00:24:11.360> risk aren't subsidizing
• or or taking the risk aren't subsidizing or or taking the risk on<00:24:12.240> data<00:24:12.559

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The House convened with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, then approved the journal, excused absent members, and suspended rules to allow co-sponsorships and vote modifications. The clerk reported Senate Bills 156, 173, and 193 had passed the Senate and requested concurrence. Committee reports were then read, advancing a number of bills on banking and insurance, judiciary, licensing/occupations, and primary/secondary education, including measures on insurance, fraudulent practices, virtual currency kiosks, eminent domain, DUI, legal representation, costs and fees, barbering, fire protection, licensing background checks, dentistry, school reporting, teacher certification, and educator placement. Those favorable reports were treated as first readings and placed on the calendar. The chamber then took up House Bill 307, the “My Kentucky Future Act,” on proactive post-secondary admission. Sponsors explained that the bill would send opt-in letters from public universities to eligible high school juniors, include a common application for the state’s public institutions, and share data with KY Stats to track outcomes. Members asked about scholarships, the target student group, and privacy; the sponsor clarified that participation is voluntary, the letters do not guarantee admission, and the program is meant to streamline college access. House Committee Substitute 2 and House Floor Amendment 2 were adopted, and HB 307 passed 97-0. House Bill 418 on domestic violence was then considered. The sponsor said the bill prioritizes the non-offending parent, requires abusive parents to address violent behavior before unsupervised visitation, and gives courts more tools to consider false abuse allegations and victim advocates’ testimony. House Committee Substitute 1 was adopted, and after brief discussion the bill passed 96-1. House Bill 593 on data centers followed; its sponsor said the measure is intended to support data center development while protecting ratepayers from subsidizing infrastructure risk, requiring companies to bring their own generation, buy power on the open market, or prepay certain costs. After adopting House Committee Substitute 1, the bill passed 90-8. The House also passed House Bill 5 on prison educational programs, with a committee substitute and a floor amendment adding data collection on post-release employment; it passed 99-0. Finally, House Bill 584 on licenses for prescribing or dispensing controlled substances was debated. The sponsor said the bill removes a permanent ban so a physician who has regained licensure may apply for DEA registration, while opponents raised concerns about repeated misconduct and the ability to practice without DEA authority. The transcript cuts off before final disposition on HB 584.

Transcript Highlights:

• county with fear of uncertainty for the future due to the current overpumping and documented land subsidence
• Arizona when this basin is already experiencing groundwater decline, facing wells and documented land subsidence
• plans to help the 840 people in the valley who depend on private wells, no plans to help mitigate subsidence
• that, because otherwise people in my working-class neighborhood in downtown Tucson are effectively subsidizing

Bills: HB2042, HB2052, HB2055, HB2056, HB2094, HB2098, HB2185, HB2328, HB2758, HB2798

Keywords: solar radiation management, environment, prohibition, Arizona Revised Statutes, public health, complaint process, Attorney General, groundwater management, water conservation, irrigation, water supply, brackish groundwater, water supply development, desalination, water infrastructure, financial assistance, environmental reviews, brackish water, groundwater, water resources

Summary: The committee first received an update from Arizona Department of Water Resources Director Tom Buschatzky on Colorado River negotiations and post-2026 operating rules. He described the legal framework governing Arizona’s allocation, argued that Arizona and the lower basin have already made substantial conservation cuts, and said the upper basin is pressing positions Arizona views as inconsistent with prior Supreme Court rulings. He emphasized the need to move water from upstream reservoirs to Lake Mead, warned of continued shortage risk, and said the state is seeking an equitable deal through ongoing federal and interstate negotiations. Members asked about outside water use, tourism and recreation impacts, and tribal water rights, including the Navajo-Hopi-San Juan Southern Paiute settlement. Buschatzky said the state’s delegation and bipartisan support have been helpful and urged continued public and legislative backing. The committee then heard House Bill 2758, which would expand McMullen Valley groundwater transportation authority and add related requirements and guardrails, including an amendment increasing the La Paz County transportation cap from 10% to 50% of the annual volume and adding conditions for sales or leases from historically irrigated acres. Supporters, including bill sponsor advocates, the Arizona Municipal Water Users Association, and the Home Builders Association, said the bill would create a lawful, regulated transfer option similar to the Harquahala model, support housing growth, and include oversight through hydrologic studies, pumping limits, and monthly reporting to ADWR. Opponents, including La Paz County Supervisor Holly Irwin’s statement, local residents, Sierra Club, and rural advocates, argued the bill would accelerate aquifer depletion, harm private wells and subsidence conditions, and benefit a New York hedge fund at the expense of rural communities. After debate, the committee adopted the Griffin amendment and then passed HB 2758 as amended on a 6-4 due-pass vote. The committee next took up House Bill 2098, which would modify bonding authority and public hearing notice requirements for county water augmentation authorities and allow local repayment agreements with WIFA. Pinal County Supervisor Stephen Miller and other supporters said the bill would clean up statutory language so the Pinal County Water Augmentation Authority can finance future water augmentation and infrastructure projects, including potential Bartlett Dam-related work, and better prepare for future Colorado River uncertainty. The Home Builders Association also supported the bill, saying it included proportionality protections for private utility water charges. The bill was moved for a due-pass recommendation and the committee proceeded to a roll call vote, with the transcript ending before the final vote result was shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• If the tenant resides in housing subsidized by the Section 8 program, this section expires in November
• 59:55.520> resides<00:59:55.920> in<00:59:56.160> housing<00:59:56.559> subsidized
• <00:59:57.119> by tenant resides in housing subsidized by tenant resides in housing subsidized

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• So that’s the same as the federal subsidized loan right now.”
• “Yes, so then the federal subsidized loan program in the state of California. I don’t believe so.
• And I just think that’s really unfair to students, that they have to basically subsidize the bloated
• When we have, at times, excess funds, we should be allowed to subsidize 100% of that work-study program

Summary: The committee first adopted its 2025-26 rules on a 7-0 roll call, then approved three consent items—AB 88, AB 240, and AB 313—on a due-pass motion to Appropriations. The hearing then moved to AB 648, which would give community college districts the same zoning authority as the UC and CSU systems to build student and staff housing on property they own or lease. The author and supporters argued the bill would help address severe housing insecurity and homelessness among community college students, while opponents and some members raised concerns about local control, zoning exemptions, and the impact on nearby communities. AB 648 passed the committee on a 5-2 vote and was sent to the Local Government Committee. The committee next heard AB 466, which would require California Community Colleges and CSU campuses to provide organ and tissue donor registry information during student orientation, and request UC campuses to do the same. Supporters shared personal stories about transplants and donation, saying college orientation is a good opportunity to increase registrations. Some members worried about information overload during orientation and suggested campuses have flexibility in how they present the material, but the bill advanced on a unanimous 7-0 vote to Appropriations. AB 326 followed, proposing campus-by-campus external audits of the CSU every three years and public release of the audits. The author, faculty supporters, and a student argued that systemwide audits do not provide enough transparency about how money is spent at individual campuses, citing examples of financial mismanagement and fee increases. CSU opposed the bill, saying it already conducts annual consolidated external audits and that campus-level audits would add cost without added benefit. After extensive discussion about transparency, audit scope, and implementation, the bill passed 6-1 to Appropriations. The committee then took up AB 335, which would create a California Black-Serving Institution Grant Program to support Black student success and broader underserved student services; supporters emphasized persistent equity gaps and low completion rates, while an opponent argued the bill needed to be carefully amended to comply with Proposition 209 and equal protection requirements. The transcript ends during that item’s discussion, before a final vote is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• Given the large output of utility-scale wind and solar, this could result in cross-subsidizing, meaning
• and solar this could result<00:14:28.839> in<00:14:29.199> cross<00:14:29.560> subsidizing
• <00:14:30.560> meaning<00:14:31.040> that result in cross subsidizing meaning that
• result in cross subsidizing meaning that it<00:14:31.279> could<00:14:31.519> increase<

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• funding support programs in health centers, early childhood education, domestic violence support, subsidized
• :53.160> support education domestic violence support education domestic violence support subsidized
• <00:09:54.680> housing<00:09:55.360> homelessness subsidized housing homelessness subsidized

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committees considered a large number of Senate bills, with many measures advanced either unamended or with technical or substantive amendments. Early action included SB 88 and SB 11 SD1, both passed unamended, and SB 562 SD1 and SB 642 SD1, which were passed with amendments reflecting agency testimony. SB 1133 SD1 was amended to remove duplicative county requirements and clarify tax credit carry-forward eligibility, while SB 1569 SD1 on sports wagering was deferred. Later, SB 933 on nonprofit/federal funding support drew strong testimony from nonprofit and health advocates emphasizing the risk of federal funding freezes and the importance of protecting services such as early learning, domestic violence support, housing, and workforce supports; the committee recommended amendments to define eligible organizations, require reporting, and include the Judiciary. SB 934 and SB 935 were also amended, with SB 934 tying mass transit funding to Honolulu project milestones and SB 935 revising retirement-system language to change “fewer than five years” to “five or more years.” The committees then took up additional measures with targeted amendments. SB 1033 was amended to clarify that the bill applies to legal entities, not individuals, though members noted concerns about closely held family corporations and asked that the issue be reflected in the committee report. SB 1166, SB 1249, and SB 1256 were advanced with amendments or committee-report notes reflecting concerns from the Attorney General, Hawaii Cattlemen’s Council, and Hawaii Farmers Union United, respectively. SB 1432 and SB 137, both relating to electric utilities, were amended to require retention of covered employees after mergers or acquisitions and to direct the PUC to consider whether proposed transactions further state policy goals. SB 157 on antitrust was narrowed to focus on coordinator conduct in rental housing markets, SB 252 on invasive species received a defective effective date, and SB 336 on defense of state employers and employees passed unamended. SB 536 on the Hawaii Community Development Authority was deferred to a later hearing, and SB 1064 on medical cannabis was heavily amended to authorize cultivator licenses with limits on canopy size, license counts, physician fees, and a special-fund appropriation for enforcement. In the Ways and Means portion, the committee passed several bills unamended, including SB 19, SB 124, SB 264, SB 345, SB 422, and SB 741 and SB 747 later in the agenda. SB 361 was amended to remove references to the attorney general and delete an appropriation section, SB 438 was amended to redefine buffer zones and landfill-unit language, and SB 441 and SB 494 were amended to blank appropriations and, in SB 494, assign charter-school audit responsibility to the state auditor. SB 659 was substantially amended to promote local procurement, including county-level geographic preferences and higher thresholds for locally sourced purchases, and SB 732 was amended to adjust film tax credit provisions, including the streaming-platform definition and sunset-related language. SB 819 was amended to replace references to “educators” with “teachers.” Throughout, most measures were adopted without recorded opposition, though several members noted reservations on particular bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• the limits, would be affected, as profits among delivery companies already are thin or even cross-subsidized
• the limits, would be affected, as profits among delivery companies already are thin or even cross-subsidized
• the limits, would be affected, as profits among delivery companies already are thin or even cross-subsidized
• the limits, would be affected, as profits among delivery companies already are thin or even cross-subsidized

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: House File 5 was heard in the Transportation Committee and moved by the author, Representative Jim Joy, to be referred to the Tax Committee. Joy described the bill as a package to make Minnesota more affordable by fully eliminating the Social Security tax subtraction, ending the motor fuels tax indexing, repealing the retail delivery fee, and studying vehicle registration/license taxes compared with neighboring states. Committee fiscal staff explained the bill’s fiscal effects across the general fund, highway user tax distribution fund, transportation advancement account, and metro county sales tax allocations, including that the delivery fee repeal would reduce Transportation Advancement Account revenue and that the bill would shift some revenue sources to offset losses. Several stakeholders testified. The Minnesota Grocers Association strongly supported repealing the retail delivery fee, arguing it is costly and complex for retailers to administer, especially small businesses, and that the costs are ultimately passed on to consumers. The Minnesota Propane Association also supported repeal, saying the fee is burdensome for propane businesses, that only a small share of deliveries are actually subject to it, and that compliance costs can exceed the fee revenue collected. Fiscal staff noted that delivery fee revenue forecasts have fallen below earlier projections, and explained that the fee is imposed on sellers with several exemptions, including a $100 transaction threshold and exemptions for some sales such as bars, restaurants, nonprofits, and certain small businesses. Opposition came from local government groups. The League of Minnesota Cities said it supported the Transportation Advancement Account and its 2023 funding sources, including the delivery fee and motor vehicle parts sales tax, and warned that the bill would prematurely alter a funding structure that cities rely on for predictable transportation revenue. The Minnesota Association of Small Cities said small cities had long lacked dedicated transportation funding and wanted a stable, ongoing revenue stream, but were neutral on the exact source as long as it was reliable. Metro Cities echoed support for stable, predictable transportation funding for metro-area cities. The committee took testimony and discussion only; no final vote was recorded in the excerpt beyond the motion to refer the bill to the Tax Committee.