Transcript Highlights:

• This bill does not actually raise the fees; it just raises the caps on the fees.
• Our members don't like increasing fees or anything, but this bill just increases the cap.
• One other clarification with respect to the cap on the fees: it's going up to 20 cents per case.
• Madam Chair, Representative Brown, yes, so the fee caps were set in the 70s for the majority of our programs
• In 2005, the Pest Control Act was amended, and the fee caps were changed at that point in time.

Keywords: 996, all

Summary: During the legislative meeting, House Bill 287 was discussed, which proposes the establishment of a permanent Health and Human Services Committee to oversee the state's $14.4 billion expenditure in this area. An amendment to the bill was adopted, which clarified funding and operational details. Public comments were solicited, but no one spoke in opposition. The committee ultimately voted, with some members expressing concerns about budget implications, but the motion to pass the bill as amended was made and seconded, with several members opposing it. House Bill 371 was also addressed, which focuses on creating an Acequia Infrastructure Fund to support land grant and Acequia communities. The bill aims to provide a financial mechanism for these communities to access funds for infrastructure projects without relying on capital outlay requests. The committee discussed the bill's implications, potential funding sources, and the need for further amendments regarding representation and oversight. A motion to pass the bill was made, with some opposition noted, particularly regarding the lack of specificity in the bill's provisions. Lastly, Senate Bill 143 was presented, which seeks to raise the caps on inspection fees under the Egg Grading Act, among other agricultural regulations. Supportive testimony was provided by representatives from agricultural organizations, emphasizing the need for updated fee structures. The committee engaged in discussions about the bill's implications for consumers and the agricultural sector, ultimately moving towards a vote to pass the bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• In your packet, you'll find the current fees and proposed fees for your conversation.
• The current fees and proposed fees for your conversation.
• one fee and then each additional fee one fee and then each additional fee based<04:19:11.600>
• There are additional fees that get charged, like your mil foil fee.
• <04:30:19.680> violation traffic fees violation traffic fees violation fees<04:30:21.880><

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up HB 713, which would require mile markers on Route 112, the Kancamagus Highway. The sponsor and DOT testimony described the road as a heavily traveled but isolated corridor with little or no cell or radio service, frequent accidents and breakdowns, and serious public-safety problems when emergency responders cannot quickly locate incidents. Members discussed where markers should be placed, how frequently they should appear, whether both sides of the road should be marked, and the potential cost; DOT said the project could be done with federal funds and might be combined with other work to reduce mobilization costs. The committee agreed the bill was straightforward and voted OTP 18-0, with discussion that a friendly amendment might be offered later to refine the language. The committee then heard HB 563, concerning calculation of adequate education grants. Testimony explained that the bill would add fiscal capacity disparity aid in FY 27 and increase the special education differentiated aid factor, while also reducing extraordinary needs grants so the overall fiscal impact would be net neutral. Members noted the changes were limited to the second year because of the budget process and school district ballot timing. Supporters argued the fiscal capacity aid would help property-poor towns and should be expanded, while others emphasized the bill’s budget-neutral structure. The committee voted to retain HB 563 for further consideration in the budget process. Finally, the committee opened HB 675, which would limit the authority of school districts to make certain appropriations. A Derry resident and former local official testified in favor, arguing that property taxes are too high, that school spending has outpaced town-side tax caps, and that local voters should have more control over school budgets. Committee members questioned whether the issue should instead be handled locally through existing processes or broader governance changes, and one member noted the state’s constitutional obligation to provide an adequate education. The discussion continued, but no final action on HB 675 was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• to tax-related provisions, including changes to the preliminary tax, release of the medical action fee
• Eight, conference fees, meals, lodging, travel by the office, and staff involved in activities related
• Nine, in the case of the candidate committee for the governor, conference fees, meals, lodging, travel
• , and the authority of the board to set fees.
• The bill also changes fees and charges for brand renewal, physical inspection, electronic inspection,

Bills: LB764, LB815A, LB839, LB888, LB955, LB972A, LB1029, LB1087, LB1091, LB1126A, LB1181A, LB1237A, LB1261A, LB304A, LB762, LB889, LB929, LB966, LB1022, LB1187, LR508

Keywords: law enforcement, correctional services, Department of Correctional Services, corrections officers, state prison employees, peace officer, certification, police standards, training academy, Nebraska Commission on Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice, Nebraska Police Standards Advisory Council, criminal justice, correctional staff, conditional officer, law enforcement authority, public safety, LB815A, LB815, appropriation, appropriations bill

Transcript Highlights:

• There is no royalty cost that the airport is paying, and there's no franchise fee that the airport is
• associated with the connection, including fees for infrastructure required to service the property,
• I do have one question, because these convenience fees are charged by many other people.
• storage fee, only dealing with storage.
• aircraft entering into a specific radius of the airspace of the airport assessing this fee.

Bills: S0092, S0110, S0192, S0212, S0260, S0350, S0394, S0422, S0434, S0442, S0484, S0546, S0556, S0684, S0696, S0706, S0748, S0786, S0820, S0824, S0838, S0840, S0848, S0856, S0962, S1000, S1014, S1036, S1050, S1054, S1080, S1118, S1134, S1338, S1480, S1500, S1506, S1622, S1724

Keywords: employee protections, whistleblower, retaliation, public trust, ethics complaint, Commission on Ethics, Public Employees Relations Commission, public employee, local government attorney, public officer, adverse personnel action, protected disclosure, whistleblower retaliation, state agency, independent contractor, public employment, civil service, reinstatement, back pay, front pay

Summary: The Committee on Rules met with a quorum and considered a long agenda of bills, many of them retained from the prior week. The most debated measure was CS for SB 706, which would preempt naming of major commercial service airports to the state and designate Palm Beach International Airport as the Donald J. Trump International Airport, subject to FAA approval and a trademark agreement. Amendments were offered and rejected, including proposals to prevent private financial benefit from the naming. Several senators spoke in opposition, citing concerns about naming an airport after a sitting president, lack of local input, and the trademark/licensing arrangement; supporters argued there was no cost to the airport and that the bill simply set a state naming policy. The committee reported the bill favorably after a roll call vote. The committee also reported favorably CS for SB 546 on conservation land notice requirements, CS for CS for SB 1014 on municipal utility service to properties outside city limits, CS for SB 1500 on uncontested probate proceedings, SB 962 on excluding farms from certain zoning definitions, and CS for SB 820 on problem-solving court reporting requirements. The committee then approved several bills from Senator DiCeglie and Senator Arrington. SB 840, addressing land-use regulations for local governments affected by natural disasters, was supported by local-government and environmental advocates who said it would restore local control after SB 180’s hurricane-related restrictions; the sponsor said it was intended to correct unintended consequences of last year’s law. CS for SB 856, requiring online listing platforms to show estimated ad valorem taxes on residential listings, was amended to exclude social media platforms and broaden liability protections; the sponsor and a county property appraiser described it as a consumer-transparency measure. CS for SB 110, clarifying homestead exemption treatment for long-term leases that end at death, was also reported favorably. The committee took up a controversial strike-all amendment to SB 212, which focused on public swimming pools and added residency and related restrictions for certain sex offenders and offenders on community control or probation. The amendment drew strong opposition from advocates and affected families, who argued it would worsen homelessness, impose broad geographic restrictions, and lack evidence of improving child safety; supporters said it was a targeted public-safety measure. Despite the objections, the committee reported the bill favorably. The committee also approved SB 684 on electronic signatures for total-loss vehicle and vessel titles, SB 394 on reinsurance intermediary managers, SB 434 on property tax assessment treatment for wind-hardening improvements, CS for CS for SBs 658 and 608 on water-safety requirements for rental properties with pools or nearby water, SB 748 on adding voting-rights restoration information to sentencing score sheets, and CS for SB 824 requiring school districts to inventory unimproved real property. The meeting ended while the committee was beginning SB 848 on stormwater treatment, with an amendment being introduced as the transcript cut off.

Transcript Highlights:

• It should be something that's supported by the fees.
• It should be something that's supported by the fees.
• fee of $6,300 for each type of vapor product, then an annual renewal fee of $6,300.
• So $6,300 a year is a per-sku fee. They consider a product fee, right?
• First and foremost, the fee that is provided for in Senate Bill 435 is a fee that is paid by manufacturers

Bills: AB568, SB90, SB133, SB147, SB229, SB233, SB240, SB245, SB280, SB378, SB393, SB417, SB434, SB494, SB495, AB62, SB104, SB119, SB132, SB193, SB262, SB422, SB431, SB435, SB468, SB503

Keywords: higher education, Nevada System of Higher Education, operational expenses, instructional expenses, public funding, education funding, teacher grants, classroom supplies, instructional support, specialized personnel, civics education, Nevada Center for Civic Engagement, funding, youth programs, civic involvement, Southern Nevada, Clark County, Las Vegas Valley, regional planning, economic resiliency

Transcript Highlights:

• be in… NPA even though they were registered in another party because it was a cheaper qualification fee

Bills: SJR37, SJR57, SCR8, SB8, SB108, SB125, SB251, SB318, SB378, SB379, SB396, SB472, SB487, SB503, SB533, SB565, SB583, SB608, SB650, SB686, SB689, SB707, SB710, SB763, SB854, SB875, SB916, SB924, SB925, SB958, SB961, SB965, SB987, SB988, SB1006, SB1019, SB1021, SB1024, SB1026, SB1038, SB1146, SB1185, SB1194, SB1202, SB1252, SB1253, SB1330, SB1343, SB1362, SB1497, SB1498, SB1499, SB1527, SB1547, SB1596, SB1697, SJR36, SJR12, SJR57, SJR37, SCR22, SCR12, SCR8, SB925, SB1362, SB565, SB765, SB62, SB666, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB847, SB1248, SB504, SB857, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB1497, SB1499, SB1498, SB241, SB304, SB621, SB1023, SB1024, SB686, SB371, SB204, SB609, SB670, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB1539, SB447, SB875, SB406, SB985, SB965, SB1119, SB1505, SB1194, SB1253, SB1215, SB1302, SB856, SB583, SB673, SB681, SB1172, SB1252, SB378, SB608, SB955, SB957, SB988, SB1019, SB1021, SB1120, SB251, SB541, SB379, SB1737, SB266, SB1415, SB1527, SB125, SB599, SB1330, SB53, SB916, SB1352, SB785, SB710, SB472, SB1450, SB1502, SB1566, SB414, SB1062, SB961, SB1038, SB578, SB711, SB746, SB942, SB1404, SB1448, SB1738, SB108, SB8, SB318, SB507, SB533, SB689, SB1026, SB1349, SB1355, SB1433, SB1434, SB1596, SB1403, SB1146, SB763, SB667, SB1059, SB617, SB1567, SB503, SB16, SB310, SB311, SB396, SB505, SB1209, SB1210, SB1470, SB264, SB924, SB1029, SB1185, SB1202, SB1358, SB1364, SB1569, SB1697, SB1376, SB1228, SB519, SB878, SB1350, SB462, SB1535, SB827, SB1585, SB207, SB1207, SB1619, SB1396, SB920, SB1484, SB1273, SB1741, SB7, SB927, SB1227, SB1229, SB1353, SB1366, SB1464, SB1709, SB1729, SB1733, SB1744, SB1772, SB1816, SB1841, SB2188, SB1147, SB879, SB1008, SB378, SB710, SB916, SB1019, SB1146, SB1194, SB1253, SB1499, SB213, SB925, SB1362, SR263, SR311, SR333, SCR8, SB2407, SB2722, SB2949, SB2407, SB2722, SB2949

Keywords: voter ID, citizenship, election integrity, constitutional amendment, voting rights, central bank digital currency, CBDC, Federal Reserve, digital dollar, digital currency, cashless payments, financial privacy, cybersecurity, government surveillance, financial surveillance, money laundering, terrorism financing, illicit finance, banking policy, monetary policy

Bills: HB1519, HB1541, HB1737, HB1782, HB1854, HB1860, HB2023, HB2104, HB2276, HB2335, HB2455, HB2468, HB2551, SB177, SB411, SB874, SB2053, SB2069, SB2108, SB2268, SB2360, SB2363, SB2405, SB2407, SB2530, SB2543, SB2568, SB2803, SB2818, SB2851, SB2907, SB2934, SB2969, SB2999, SB3097, SB3103, SB3233, SB3238, SB3245, SB3001, SB3138, HB1946, HB389, HB1510, HB469, HB1573, HB1705, HB1858, HB1875, HB1961, HB1962, HB2001, HB2093, HB2096, HB2097, SB888, SB2169, SB2367, SB2557, SB2575, SB2698, SB3082, HB344, HB939, HB1688, HB1853, HB2443, HCR103, HCR117, HCR180, HCR112, HCR18, HCR105, HCR173, HCR35, HCR98, HCR42, HCR53, HCR181, HCR101, HCR179

Keywords: campaign contributions, lobbyists, transparency, election funding, ethical regulations, HB1541, Act 057, Department of Health, Hawaii State Hospital, Developmental Disabilities Division, civil service, civil service exemption, HRS 76-16, HRS 334-4, mental health program, state hospital, secure psychiatric rehabilitation facility, associate administrator, project manager, security manager

Transcript Highlights:

• Ten years ago, the European Union capped interchange fees in Europe.
• Ten years ago, the European Union capped interchange fees in Europe.
• But debit card fees in the U.S. are capped, correct?
• Large retailers might have the leverage and the resources to benefit from cap fees, but small businesses
• We appreciate it. might have the leverage and the resources to benefit from cap fees, but small businesses

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Legislative Commission on the Future of Payments and Sales Transactions by Credit Card and the Impacts for Small Businesses held a public hearing focused on interchange fees, sales tax and tip processing, chargebacks, fraud, surcharging, and the broader future of payment systems. Chair Paul Feeney and co-chair Rep. Jamie Murphy opened by explaining the commission’s charge and inviting testimony from small businesses, industry groups, banks, and policy experts. Representative Sean Garballey testified first, arguing that Massachusetts tourism depends on universal card acceptance and stable interchange, and urging the commission not to disrupt the current system ahead of major events expected to bring millions of visitors to the Commonwealth. A large portion of the hearing featured independent restaurant owners and advocates describing thin margins and the burden of paying percentage-based processing fees on sales tax and tips that are not business revenue. Jen Ziskin, Kristen Canty, Nancy Cushman, Kerry Colzer, and others said restaurants often operate on very small profits and that processing fees on taxes and gratuities can amount to tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars annually. Ryan Lotz also urged reforms to chargebacks, including refunding chargeback fees when merchants prevail, requiring consumers to contact businesses before disputing charges, and limiting repeat abuse. Commission members pressed witnesses on whether tax and tip amounts could be separated at the point of sale, and several witnesses said current consumer card systems do not transmit that level of detail. Testimony from credit union, banking, and payments representatives largely opposed state-level changes that would carve out taxes or tips from interchange, warning of compliance burdens, higher costs, reduced rewards, and possible effects on fraud protection and access to credit. Alex Verine of America’s Credit Unions and Deb Peters and Keely McEwen of the Electronic Payments Coalition said the payment system is complex, that interchange funds fraud prevention and network infrastructure, and that new state mandates could create operational and legal uncertainty. Dan Swanson argued states have authority to act and pointed to Illinois litigation and federal court rulings, while Julian Morris and Brad Popolado emphasized the benefits of card acceptance, the decline of cash, and the need to consider other payment methods and check fraud as well. Several witnesses discussed international payment systems, instant payments, and QR standards as possible future directions. The chairs and members engaged in extended back-and-forth with witnesses about whether Massachusetts could exempt sales tax from swipe fees, whether surcharging should be revisited, and whether vendor compensation or other targeted relief might be more workable than broad changes to interchange. No votes were taken. At the close of the hearing, the chairs said the commission would hold one additional public hearing date to be determined, after which members would begin developing next steps and a report.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's just going to cap that increase the same way real estate is capped.
• The cap is CPI or Hancock. That's the cap.
• It has a cap.
• And so if you put a cap on the attorney's fees, what you're doing is creating an incentive for them,
• But it's not capped at 15%. It's not a hard cap at 15. Okay. Okay. Thank you.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• There's no recommended changes to the agency's staffing cap.
• fees as low as possible.
• set the cap at 17.5.
• The recommendations maintain the cap at 57.3 FTEs.
• Delete this rider as agencies have deployed caps.

Bills: SB1, SB 1

Keywords: appropriations, budget, state funding, education, healthcare, infrastructure, campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This law doesn't cap the bill; it caps the recovery at trial. The bill remains.
• I can tell you this—caps need to be taken out, and they say they're not caps, they are caps.
• So, and that's capped. I would agree aggressively that this is a cap, unequivocally.
• He says his fees are $33,000. His assistant surgeon's fee is $15,000.
• How do you set your fees?

Bills: SB 30, SB 517, SB 1313, SB 1314, SB 1316, SB 1541, SB 1698, SB 1845, SB 1860, SB 2420, SB 2429

Keywords: gambling, criminal offenses, penalties, defense, electronic devices, tobacco advertising, youth protection, public health, criminal offense, retailer regulation, e-cigarettes, nicotine products, health, public safety, regulation, advertising restrictions, health and safety, elections, election audit, county elections

Summary: The Senate Committee on State Affairs convened to discuss several critical pieces of legislation including SB30 and SB38. Senator Betancourt introduced a committee substitute for SB38 which underwent a smooth adoption process, moving it favorably toward the Senate. The meeting featured a mix of invited testimonies where both proponents and opponents took the floor. One notable highlight included a testimony from Melissa Casey, who criticized the current legal state as prone to fraud and detrimental to both insurers and the public at large, contending that it inflated insurance costs across the board. The discussions delved deeply into the implications of the bills on judicial processes and potential insurance ramifications, with spirited debates surrounding issues of non-economic damages and jury rights. The atmosphere remained engaged as committee members heard varied perspectives on the bills, showcasing a robust democratic process. The meeting underscored the importance of public testimony in shaping legislation, ensuring that multiple voices were considered as the committee pressed on towards making decisions that affect the legal landscape of Texas.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, the bill does create a fee cap.
• It had a 10% fee cap for catastrophic losses, 15% fee cap for non-catastrophic losses.
• years ago had fee caps.
• It had a 10% fee years ago had fee caps.
• uh losses, 15% fee cap for catastrophic uh losses, 15% fee cap<00:13:51.960> for<00:13:52.080

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Call to Order and Roll Call 00:00:02 Discussion HB 144 00:00:58 Vote HB 144 00:02:40 Discussion HB 169 00:03:21 Vote HB 169 00:05:02 Discussion HB 568 00:05:56 Vote HB 568 00:28:27 Discussion HB 627 00:32:26 Vote HB 627 01:00:26, 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• fee some time ago.
• You're not permitted to charge any more than that cap, and I don't want to pay that fee.
• It is a capped fee. It is not a mandatory fee. You are correct. It is a capped fee.
• It is not a mandatory fee.
• Whereas if you go up, you ultimately hit that cap and anything beyond that stays at that cap.

Summary: The committee first took up SB 712, which would expand California’s smog-check exemption for classic vehicles by adding model years 1976 through 1986 in phases, with a sunset in 2032. The author and supporters, including lowrider advocates and the Specialty Equipment Market Association, argued the bill would preserve car culture, support a small class of rarely driven collector vehicles, and reduce burdens on owners who struggle to find equipment for older smog tests. Opponents, including air district officials, the American Lung Association, and other environmental groups, warned the bill would weaken an important emissions-control program and increase pollution. After discussion, the committee adopted the motion to do pass as amended to Appropriations on a roll call vote of 10-0, with the roll held open for additional votes. The committee then heard SB 800, which requires Caltrans, working with local governments, to assess mitigation measures for suicide prevention on locally owned overpasses crossing state highways. The bill was presented as a response to recent tragedies in Rancho Cucamonga and was supported by local officials, health organizations, and suicide-prevention advocates, who said the measure would help identify high-risk locations and lead to life-saving interventions. There was no registered opposition. The committee members expressed support, and SB 800 was passed to Appropriations on a unanimous roll call vote, with the roll held open. Next, the committee considered SB 30, which would prohibit California public entities from selling, donating, or transferring decommissioned diesel locomotives and railroad equipment with Tier 1 or older engines unless the engine is removed, while allowing Tier 2 and newer transfers under certain conditions. The author and supporters framed the bill as a climate and public-health measure to prevent older, dirtier locomotives from continuing to pollute elsewhere, while transit agencies opposed it, arguing it could limit useful transfers of equipment that still supports passenger service and could be better handled through case-by-case air-quality review. After debate, the committee voted 6-4 to pass SB 30 as amended to Appropriations, with the roll held open for later additions. The committee also heard SB 791, which replaces the flat dealer document processing charge cap with a 1% fee capped at $350, along with new disclosure requirements. Dealers and industry groups supported the bill as a way to recover costs and improve transparency, while consumer advocates opposed it as an unjustified increase that would burden buyers. The committee approved SB 791 on a 8-? roll call vote and held the roll open. The meeting then moved on to SB 34, a port-air-quality bill presented by Senator Richardson, but the transcript ends during testimony and debate on that measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• Fee revenues for, like, a licensing board, they can bring in up to 5% of that fee revenue and increase
• related management fees, but what type of cap are you thinking of?
• ...of the cap then, knowing that they're going to be those escalating related management fees.
• But what type of cap are you thinking of?
• And so that's why there's not a cap.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's a moratorium on increases in taxes and fees.
• So if we are looking at capping fees and revenue, and then again, potentially having... ...you know,
• capping fees and revenue, and then again, potentially having state cuts here, state income tax cuts,
• We're capping the increase on the rate. That's it. Nothing.
• They largely subsidize those user fee functions with general fund money, so please know that fees will

Bills: HB2780, HB4029, HB4030, HCR2052

Keywords: judicial foreclosure, tax lien, redemption rights, excess proceeds, property auction, income tax, federal tax conformity, revenue analysis, legislative session, tax reporting, municipal fees, county fees, utility rates, moratorium, tax classification, local government, inflation, economic stability, tax increases, cost-of-living protection

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 2780, a technical cleanup measure related to Arizona’s judicial tax lien foreclosure and excess proceeds process. The sponsor and a witness said the bill clarifies when a court should order a public sale, standardizes distribution of sale proceeds, and corrects inconsistencies left from prior reforms. No opposition was raised, and the committee approved HB 2780 unanimously on a 9-0 do pass vote. The committee then took up House Bill 4029, which would require the Governor’s Office of Strategic Planning and Budgeting and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee to evaluate the revenue impact of federal tax conformity changes earlier in the process, and would require the Department of Revenue to issue tax forms consistent with statute. An amendment was adopted to have OSPB and JLBC each make the evaluation and to require a governor’s report if the impact is $100 million or more, along with new reporting deadlines for DOR. Supporters argued the bill would force earlier action on conformity and prevent tax forms from diverging from statute; opponents said it added bureaucracy and could delay filing. The committee approved HB 4029 as amended by a 5-4 vote. The committee also heard House Bill 4030 and the related HCR 2052, both aimed at limiting local tax and fee increases. HB 4030 would bar municipalities and counties from adopting, imposing, or collecting increased fees, transaction privilege taxes, and utility rates from July 1, 2026, through June 30, 2030. The sponsor said the measure was intended to protect taxpayers from inflation and rising local costs. Cities, counties, and utility representatives opposed the bills, warning they would hinder infrastructure financing, water and wastewater projects, road improvements, and public safety services, and could force general fund subsidies or delayed maintenance. Supporters argued local governments have seen substantial revenue growth and should be restrained from further increases. The committee did not reach a final vote on HB 4030 or HCR 2052 in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Previously, that cap was… A legal document used in the closing. Previously, that cap was $250.
• The only other fee that is allowed is a voluntary fee for something that is… The only other fee that
• is allowed is a voluntary fee for something that was not previously a mandatory fee.
• There's a fee replacement fee. Or if you need an extra fob, a fee.
• There is no way I'm paying this fee. Now, I didn't pay the fee. We closed. We did this, right?

Keywords: 964, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And because cap-and-trade allows the continued emissions, I think cap-and-trade should be a part of the
• The cap-and-trade program is two components.
• We strongly support reauthorization of cap and trade.
• In some sense, the most important moment for cap and trade is, Petri Norris' comment about cap and trade
• It was for some specific fire prevention activities, and so I wouldn't think of this fee as a fee that

Summary: The Budget Subcommittee No. 4 hearing focused on the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) and cap-and-trade reauthorization, with members and panelists discussing how to balance climate goals, affordability, and legislative oversight. The chair emphasized the hearing as a broad review of past GGRF spending and future options, while the LAO outlined how GGRF revenues are generated, how variable they have been, and the tradeoffs between continuous appropriations and annual budget control. Two academic panelists, Dr. Kyle Meng and Danny Cullen Ward, argued that cap-and-trade remains an effective climate policy, but stressed that future revenue will depend heavily on market design, allowance allocation, and price levels. They also raised the idea that GGRF could be used more directly for affordability, especially by lowering electricity costs, and for targeted investments in technologies that the market would not otherwise support. Committee members pressed the panelists on where revenues come from, how much has actually been spent, and whether continuous appropriations reduce oversight. CARB staff said more than $33 billion has been generated to date and a little over $11–12 billion has been spent, with the rest committed or in process, and noted that project timelines can be lengthy. Members also asked about ways to lower electricity rates, reduce wildfire-related utility liabilities, and support electrification. The panelists said transportation fuels are the largest source of GGRF revenue, that industrial emitters receive a smaller share of free allowances, and that reducing wildfire liability and investing in grid-scale batteries could help lower costs and speed decarbonization. Public commenters largely urged the Legislature to preserve or expand continuous appropriations for specific climate programs. Speakers supported funding for nature-based solutions, natural and working lands, urban greening, agricultural climate solutions, waste and composting programs, clean transportation, AB 617 community air protection, clean cars, transit, affordable housing near transit, and dairy digesters. Several groups argued these programs are cost-effective, provide public health and affordability benefits, and should receive dedicated shares of GGRF. Others urged reducing free allowances and using more GGRF revenue to directly lower energy costs for households. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then the actual registration fee is just a portion of all the fees, and then these additional fees
• No, that's a fee that's in the fee schedule for us, and so we manage that fee so that we don't accrue
• And if we take off this cap and let folks just charge a reasonable fee, why don't we just move the cap
• ...and let folks just charge a reasonable fee. Why don't we just move the cap up?
• The registration fee is the same thing. Those fees, while we call them fees, are really taxes.

Keywords: 985, all

Transcript Highlights:

• For residential property, an initial fee of $250 and each year thereafter the fee shall increase by an
• additional $100, capped at an annual fee of $750.
• For commercial property, an initial fee of $500 and each year thereafter the fee shall increase by an
• additional $250, capped at an annual fee of $2,000. ordinance shall require payment of an ordinance
• additional $250, capped at an annual fee of $2,000. shall increase by an additional $250 shall increase

Keywords: 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• To adjust and assess what's happening with DTSC's fees and the under-collection of fees that were assumed
• All right, moving on to cap and invest.
• 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.
• What we're doing with this cap-and-trade, cap-and-invest, whatever you want to call it, it's very, very

Keywords: 988, house, all