Transcript Highlights:

• So let's start with the financial structure. Like most CCRCs, we have an upfront entry fee.
• fees to pay off construction debt.
• So if we did an apples-to-apples comparison of entry fees and monthly fees with existing buildings, of
• Thus, the higher entry fees, the much, much higher monthly fees because you are paying into what feels
• The entrance fee...

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The commission meeting focused on continuing care retirement communities (CCRCs), beginning with a presentation from Two Life Communities on its Opus Newton model, which is opening in the fall. Two Life described Opus as a middle-income, modern CCRC built around affordability, care coordination in residents’ apartments rather than separate care buildings, and resident-driven community life. Commissioners asked about financing, home care arrangements, affordability, Medicaid/MassHealth access, and the role of resident councils versus board representation. Two Life said it wants to remain within the CCRC framework, but expressed concern about proposals that would require multiple discrete care levels, impose deadlines on entrance-fee refunds, or require resident board seats. The commission then discussed possible recommendations. There was broad support for Senate Bill 478, which would require clearer disclosure of entrance-fee refund terms in a separate document for prospective residents. On refund timing, members were divided: some favored a one-year deadline or a deadline with waivers, while others opposed a fixed deadline because of financing risks and the potential impact on new development and current residents. Several members suggested keeping the status quo but adding better data collection and reporting on refund timing. On the CCRC definition and marketing, members debated whether the current statutory definition is too vague and whether the commission should recommend clearer standards or a certification-like process, while also noting resource limits for state oversight. Members also discussed the Age CCRC Consumer Guide, with general agreement that it should be updated and made more useful to consumers, possibly with clearer questions to ask and more information about facilities, though some cautioned against adding subjective financial-risk statements that would be hard to administer. On resident representation, several commissioners strongly supported requiring resident voting members on boards, while providers argued that strong resident associations and regular meetings with boards may be preferable and that communities should retain flexibility. The meeting ended with a request for written comments by July 11, draft recommendations to be circulated July 18, and a possible final meeting on July 21, with the commission aiming to finish by August 1.

Transcript Highlights:

• We want to know that the water and sewer tap fees, the sewer fees, the stormwater runoff fees, those
• Rick, does it matter if it's a home rule versus a general law city as far as how they do their fee structures
• Rick, on does it matter if it's a home rule versus a general city as far as how they do their fee structures
• Impact fees. Wow.
• One's a base fee and one's a volumetric fee.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Is the fee going to be basically get rid of one fee and then charge the same fee for the new entity?
• Is the fee going to be basically get rid of one fee and then charge the same fee for the new entity?
• or an oversight fee, it's really a registration fee only.
• But this bill is not anticipating—there's no change in the fee structure.
• So when we propose a fee structure, it will go through the process again through consultation council

Summary: The committee heard several higher education bills. It first approved the consent calendar, which included SB 67 and SB 619. The main discussion centered on SB 437, which would direct the CSU system to develop a fair, evidence-based process for verifying whether someone is a descendant of a person enslaved in the United States, as part of the state’s reparations work. Supporters said the bill fills a gap left by the Reparations Task Force and would create a transparent, credible lineage-verification process; opponents argued genealogy methods already exist, the bill would waste money and delay action, and some raised constitutional concerns. The committee took a vote on SB 437, but the roll was left open after the initial tally showed three ayes and three noes. The committee then heard SB 790, which would allow California to join the interstate reciprocity agreement for online postsecondary education. The author and supporters said the bill would improve consumer protections for California students taking out-of-state online courses and help California institutions compete more effectively by reducing the burden of seeking separate state approvals. Opponents, including University of Phoenix and other groups, argued the bill conflicted with the existing reciprocity framework, could exclude some institutions, and might not actually secure California’s entry into the agreement. The committee voted 3-1 to pass SB 790 as amended to the Business and Professions Committee, with the roll left open. The committee also heard SB 391, which would authorize the Community College Chancellor’s Office to charge fees for research partners seeking access to data. Supporters said the office is absorbing significant unfunded workload from data requests and that fees would help recover costs; opponents, including the California Teachers Association community college association, warned the fees could create barriers for faculty and smaller researchers. Members discussed possible exemptions and implementation details. The committee voted 5-1 to pass SB 391 as amended to the Appropriations Committee, with the roll left open. Finally, the committee heard SB 685, a pilot program to provide cost-of-attendance assistance at four CSU campuses for students who experienced homelessness in high school. Supporters said it would help students cover housing, food, and transportation costs and reduce dropout risk; members asked about eligibility and implementation, and the author explained the bill would use McKinney-Vento homelessness designations and target students at risk of “summer melt” and college homelessness.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, so it's 100% of Medicare, um, but it's using the regular fee schedule and the rural fee schedule,
• Uh, so it's 100% of Medicare, um, but it's using the regular fee schedule and the rural fee schedule,
• Um that then triggers which fee schedule Um that then triggers which fee schedule it<00:51:04.960>
• So the the higher cost structure.
• on the structure of the bill?

Bills: HB0004

Keywords: medical assistance, birthing centers, healthcare, Medicaid, Wyoming, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• :07:57.360> for That governance structure continued for That governance structure continued for
• legislature to fill the structural legislature to fill the structural operating<00:45:37.200>
• not flowing to the state structure not flowing to the state structure operating<00:46:19.599>
• annual uh amount from the structural annual uh amount from the structural deficit<00:47:47.599><
• So the associated fees a big deal.

Bills: HF4693

Keywords: transportation, license plates, validation stickers, replacement fees, government fees, 1183, house

Summary: The Transportation Finance and Policy Committee approved the April 13, 2026 minutes and then heard a presentation from Charles Carlson of Metropolitan Transportation Services on regional transit governance and finance in the Twin Cities area. Carlson reviewed the history of transit governance from private streetcars and buses to public control, including the creation of the Met Council and Metropolitan Transit Commission in 1967, later fragmentation through suburban opt-outs and the Regional Transit Board, and the 1994 consolidation that made Metro Transit part of the Met Council. He also explained the role of the Transportation Advisory Board as a state-created advisory body to the council’s federally designated MPO function, and noted that any major structural change to the Met Council could trigger federal redesignation requirements. The presentation then focused on funding changes over time. Carlson said transit was long supported by fares, property taxes, and federal aid, but that property taxes for operations were prohibited in 2001, federal operating assistance ended, and the state shifted to general fund support and then motor vehicle sales tax revenue. He described the 2006 constitutional dedication of motor vehicle sales tax, the volatility of that revenue during the Great Recession, and the use of one-time state appropriations and later federal COVID relief to cover operating gaps. He said the 2023 legislature created the regional 3/4-cent transportation sales tax to stabilize transit operations, reduced the state’s rail operating obligation, and moved Metro Mobility/Metro Move into a state forecast-based program effective in 2025. Members asked several questions about the structure of suburban “opt-out” providers, including Maple Grove and Plymouth, and how they can contract with Metro Transit or private providers while still retaining control of their allocated funds. Carlson explained that replacement service municipalities receive statutory and formula allocations and choose how to use them. He also described Metro Move as a waiver-based service begun in 2024 that uses human services and Medicaid funds to reduce pressure on the state general fund. Later discussion covered ridership and service shares, with Metro Council providing the vast majority of regional transit service and suburban providers accounting for a small share. No votes or bill actions were taken beyond adoption of the minutes; the chair indicated a bill would be taken up later in the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• An impact fee, instead, if it follows the dual rational nexus test, is a fee, and that fee is going to
• So $10,000 impact fee. What's a $10,000 impact fee?
• Well, that's a lot of money. $10,000 impact fee. What's a $10,000 impact fee?
• on fees on fees very often, and they have some of the highest fees in the state.
• It just mentioned you can't use impact fees on existing structural problems, infrastructure problems.

Summary: The Intergovernmental Affairs Subcommittee met for its first meeting of the 2026 session and took up impact fees, with an opening overview from Eric Poole of the Florida Association of Counties. Poole explained that impact fees are one-time charges on new development used only for new infrastructure capacity, not existing deficiencies or maintenance, and must satisfy the dual rational nexus test. He traced their history in Florida and described how comprehensive plans, concurrency, and later mobility fees relate to local infrastructure funding. He argued that impact fees are restricted, tied to capital improvements, and are one tool for paying for growth. Panelists representing counties, cities, builders, and community developers largely agreed that growth creates real infrastructure costs but differed on how those costs should be allocated. County and city representatives said impact fees are a necessary, targeted way to fund roads, water, sewer, fire, schools, and parks without spreading costs across all taxpayers. They pointed to long periods without fee updates, rising construction costs, and examples of large increases justified by studies. Builder and developer representatives argued that fees are often unpredictable, can be doubled or tripled, and contribute to housing affordability problems; they also said the system can be inconsistent across jurisdictions and may encourage sprawl. Several witnesses emphasized that fees must be transparent, proportional, and tied to actual benefits, and some suggested a statewide framework or mobility-fee model with more consistency and peer review. Members asked about how long local governments can hold fee revenue, whether fees can generate profit, what they can be spent on, and whether they can pay for police stations, fire stations, or other public safety facilities. Witnesses said the funds must be used for capital projects and cannot be used for salaries or unrelated purchases, and that refunds may be required if money is not spent within the local ordinance’s timeframe. The discussion also covered examples of local fee increases, the use of impact fees versus direct construction or “pipelining” of infrastructure, and concerns about level-of-service changes and extraordinary-circumstance increases. No votes were taken; the meeting ended after the panel discussion and member questions, with the chair noting the conversation would continue.

Transcript Highlights:

• , unusually high fees.
• So, there's a state fee, there's a county fee, and there's a formula that sets that fee.
• <00:36:03.119> structure<00:36:03.599> is bit deeper because our fee structure is bit
• deeper because our fee structure is uh<00:36:04.800> a<00:36:05.040> little<00:36:05.200
• The fees about how we got to these fees.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Attendance Roll Call 00:00:30 Personnel Cabinet 00:03:25 Department of Veterans Affairs 00:12:40 Auditor of Public Accounts 00:22:39 State Treasurer 00:42:24, 958, all

Summary: The committee first heard from Personnel Cabinet officials on House Bill 6, which required the Kentucky Employees Health Plan to offer a qualified high-deductible health plan by the 2026 plan year. Officials said the plan was already added for 2025, described it as the lowest-premium option with higher deductibles, and explained that federal rules prevent first-dollar coverage except for limited preventive services. They said 264 members had selected the plan out of about 142,000, and noted it also allows health savings accounts. Members asked about the plan’s benefits, what “catastrophic” meant, the deductible amounts, and whether employees were aware of the option; the cabinet said it would continue to highlight the plan in communications and that the deductible is above $8,000 for individuals and above $16,000 for families. The committee then received an update from the Kentucky Department of Veterans Affairs on the Bowling Green veterans center. Officials said the current target is to move into the building on October 28, with first admissions about two months later, pending final fixes and certification steps for Medicare, Medicaid, and the VA. They explained that about $7 million in FY25 appropriations lapsed because of construction delays, staffing ramp-up was postponed to avoid unnecessary spending, and the unspent funds should be considered in the next budget request. Members praised the project and asked about annual operating costs; officials said the current operating budget is about $15 million, though they do not expect to spend all of it this year. The commissioner also announced the fifth annual state commanders conference in Lexington, focused on veterans issues and featuring state, federal, and advocacy leaders. State Auditor Allison Ball then outlined her office’s budget priorities. She said the office is primarily a billing agency that charges audited entities for its work, and warned that some agencies are now signaling they may refuse to pay for audits related to kinship care and the medical cannabis application process. She said the office plans to continue requesting outlier credits for unusually burdensome county audit fees, funding for the ombudsman office’s transition and expanded in-office operations, and revenue replacement for local government audits and possibly state audits and special examinations. Ball also said the office conducts about 500 audits, reviews, and examinations a year and wants to restore performance audits with seed funding, as well as add investigators to the ombudsman office to focus more on child abuse and neglect cases. Members discussed the value of performance audits, the possibility of raising certain board thresholds to account for inflation, and the need for additional capacity to handle more audits.

Transcript Highlights:

• really not a very large fee.
• And so, can I ask what the fee was that or what the fee is that they charge?
• But having said that, our fee structure on something like this is determined at the campus level and
• But having said that, um our fee But having said that, um our fee structure<00:13:42.639> on<
• situation, function, structure. situation, function, structure.

Bills: HF4479, HF4368, HF4889

Keywords: higher education, public university, college campus, postsecondary institution, Minnesota State Colleges and Universities, University of Minnesota, town hall, town hall meeting, elected official, legislator, public forum, constituent meeting, campus access, free meeting space, parking fees, civic engagement, public outreach, chapter 135A, HF4368, Minnesota State

Summary: The committee approved the April 9 minutes and then took up House File 4479, which would require public postsecondary institutions to make space available for town halls and similar official events by elected officials, with limits intended to keep the events on the official side and not campaign-related. Representative Frederick said the bill is meant to prevent universities from creating barriers such as fees or parking charges and to ensure a neutral, accessible venue for community conversations. The bill was laid over for possible later action. The committee heard supportive testimony from Jim Dimmick of Minnesota State University, Mankato, who argued that town halls should be public, open, moderated, and dialogic rather than speeches, and said universities should be centers for public discourse. He also said charging fees can undermine neutrality and that using partisan student groups to sponsor events can create the appearance of bias. Minnesota State official Mr. Omen said campuses often host these events, fees are set locally to cover costs, and student government sponsorship can sometimes avoid charges; he also noted the fee at Mankato is discounted and depends on room size. Several members raised concerns about the bill. Representative Scott, Chair Robbins, Representative Schwarz, Representative Allen, and others argued that campuses should not be required by statute to give legislators special treatment, that fees and parking costs cover real expenses, and that universities should remain focused on education rather than political events. Questions also focused on who would decide what room size is reasonable, how disputes would be handled, and who would pay for security if protests or safety issues arose. Representative Frederick responded that room selection would be a good-faith partnership with the university, that the bill does not require a town hall or guarantee a specific room, and that security funding is not spelled out in the bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• fees, and our elevator inspection fees.
• unit our boiler inspection structures unit our boiler inspection fees<00:06:44.680> and<00:06
• <00:06:47.160> I fees and our elevator inspection fees I fees and our elevator inspection
• The shipment label fee and the resale decal fee are both new.
• That fee that you'd pay, that same fee, to have the home inspected.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• would, that fee would be. have a license with a fee that would be self-sustaining.
• Fees from time to time really make a lot of sense.
• structure, do not restrict the use, or adversely affect the cost of the structure.
• Um, so the impact fees, I just first want to be clear that the impact fees are not the big bad city charging
• Just to give you an example of some of these fees.

Bills: HB2072, HB2251, HB2279, HB2308, HB2323, HB2342, HB2400, HB2408, HB2456, HB2660, HB2697, HB2868, HB2873, HB2877, HB2910, HB2946, HB2955, HB2991, HB4001, HB4010

Keywords: Cesar Chavez, public holiday, state law, holiday repeal, Arizona Revised Statutes, midwifery, medication administration, healthcare, patient safety, advisory committee, licensed midwives, river trips, liability, outfitter, Grand Canyon, negligence, risk management, contractual waiver, dental practice, business registration

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:

• 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:

• 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:

• 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

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:

• 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:

• 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:

• 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:

• 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.