Video & Transcript Research : 'fee structure'

Page 35 of 500
AL

Alabama 2026 1st Special Session

Alabama House Transportation, Utilities and Infrastructure Committee Mar 11th, 2026

Transportation, Utilities and Infrastructure

Transcript Highlights:
  • The bill is needed due to a patchwork of fee structures across the state.
  • The bill is needed due to a patchwork of fee structures across the state.
  • Fee structure is not a new concept.
  • <00:51:44.960> Uh<00:51:45.680> fee<00:51:46.000> structure<00:51:46.240>
  • Uh fee structure is not a same project. Uh fee structure is not a new<00:51:46.960> concept.
FL

Florida 2025 Regular Session

January 15, 2025 - 01:00 PM

Transcript Highlights:
  • It is the same type of structure.
  • It is the same type of structure.
  • The cost of rebuilding all of those structures is expensive.
  • We're just charging a fee at that point.
  • So I don't... fee at that point.
Summary: The Intergovernmental Affairs Subcommittee held its first meeting of the 2025 session and focused on an overview of county and municipal home rule powers and state preemption. After roll call and member introductions, Chair Alex Rizzo and Vice Chair Griff Griffiths explained the constitutional and statutory basis for local self-government, the distinction between charter and non-charter counties, and how express and implied preemption limit local authority. Griffiths emphasized that home rule gives local governments broad power to address community needs, but the Legislature can override that authority through clear preemption, with courts ultimately deciding disputes. Representatives Holcomb and LaMarca added that local issues should generally be addressed locally first, but statewide standards can be appropriate when uniformity is needed or local action is ineffective. The committee then heard from a panel representing counties, cities, business, and construction interests: Ginger Delegal of the Florida Association of Counties, Carolyn Johnson of the Florida Chamber of Commerce, Rebecca O'Hara of the Florida League of Cities, and Carol Bowen of Associated Builders and Contractors of Florida. Delegal and O'Hara argued that home rule is rooted in local autonomy, policy experimentation, and accountability to voters, and warned against broad or “vacuum” preemptions that remove local authority without replacing it with state regulation. Johnson and Bowen supported preemption when local rules create a patchwork that hurts statewide competitiveness, raises costs, or complicates business operations, citing examples such as labor rules, heat safety, permitting, and procurement preferences. The panel also discussed the 2023 local ordinances law, which requires business impact estimates and provides attorney’s fees in certain challenges, as a mechanism to resolve disputes locally before resorting to preemption. Members questioned the panel about the 2024 heat-safety preemption and how to protect workers in the absence of local ordinances. Business representatives said existing OSHA duties and industry best practices already require employers to provide safe conditions, while local governments and the state should avoid inconsistent standards across jurisdictions. Another discussion centered on construction permitting, licensing, and local boards that may slow projects and increase costs; Bowen suggested eliminating redundant local fees and barriers while preserving statewide licensing and enforcement against bad actors. No votes were taken, and the meeting remained informational, with the chair inviting continued discussion on when preemption is appropriate versus when local governments should retain authority.
AZ

Arizona 2026 Regular Session

03/23/2026 - Senate Finance

Finance

Transcript Highlights:
  • It is not in lieu of impact fees. So how would impact fees and... ...specific items, correct.
  • It is not in lieu of impact fees.
  • It's basically how impact fees are paid, impact fees are paid for, right?
  • fees?
  • That's the average fee.
Summary: The Senate Finance Committee approved the minutes from March 16, 2026, then heard testimony on a series of bills, with the chair noting that testimony and votes would be handled in batches because members were coming and going. HB 2939 would raise the rural qualified facilities tax credit from $20,000 to $25,000 per job for certain projects with initial investment under $2 billion. Lucid Motors supported the change as a tool to attract manufacturing jobs to rural Arizona, while opponents questioned whether the higher credit would actually create new jobs and pointed to a fiscal note that could reach $48 million. The committee later passed the bill 5-2. HB 2950 would authorize municipalities and counties to form tourism improvement areas funded by lodging business assessments for marketing and tourism promotion. The Arizona Lodging and Tourism Association and Visit Phoenix supported the measure, describing TIAs as voluntary, locally controlled tools already used in other states and useful for rural destinations; senators pressed on whether the assessments were truly voluntary and how the districts would be formed and administered. The bill passed 5-2. HB 2780, a technical cleanup bill related to property tax lien foreclosure and excess proceeds sales, was described as conforming changes to a prior law creating a mechanism for delinquent taxpayers to recover equity; it passed 6-1. HB 2502 would allow certain ASRS members who are elected officials to retire at normal retirement age without resigning their elected office, with the employer paying the alternate contribution rate. ASRS said it was neutral, and the sponsor and a lobbyist argued the bill would create parity with non-elected members who can retire and return to work; the committee passed it 5-2. HB 2140, as amended by a striker, would let the state treasurer invest up to 10% of trust and treasury monies in physical gold or silver bullion held in secure U.S. depositories. The sponsor and Sound Money Defense League supported it as a diversification and inflation hedge, while opponents argued gold is volatile, costly to store, and not a better use of taxpayer funds; the committee adopted the striker and passed the bill 4-2. HB 2398 would require commercial liability insurance for watercraft rented or hired in Arizona, including peer-to-peer boat-sharing programs, while not affecting ordinary personal boat ownership. The sponsor, insurers, and rental operators said the bill responds to uninsured boats being rented through apps and to safety and liability problems; some members said training should also be addressed. The committee adopted an amendment and passed the bill 6-1. Finally, HB 2999 would create state affordable infrastructure districts to finance public infrastructure for housing through bonds, taxes, and assessments, with unanimous landowner consent and disclosure requirements. Home builders and contractors said the districts could lower upfront housing costs and improve financing, but contractors sought stronger payment protections and some senators worried the bill could add red tape and costs without guaranteeing savings to homebuyers. After adopting a large amendment, the committee passed HB 2999, though at least one member voted no and another passed on the vote.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
  • Where do they typically go, those fines, fees, or penalties? It's silent. It's silent.
  • So my point is there's some structure to it that makes it significant.
  • HB 4518 allows Texas to do the same while adding thoughtful oversight and structure.
  • So it's a new structure, Senator. Just to be very clear, it is a new structure.
  • I guess the question is, why do they need to have this new structure?
Bills: HB111
Keywords: 1185, senate, all
NH
Transcript Highlights:
  • The bill as amended does not require a separate parking fee or other fees, camping fees, facility rental
  • It only says entrance fees. It's entry fees.
  • fee, the paint tax, and there were over 200 increases in fees in the budget.
  • that we were sent, the battery fee fee that we were sent, the battery fee we<04:04:03.760> were
  • this is a fee much like the all the fees this is a fee much like the all the fees that<04:06:53.359
Summary: The meeting began with unanimous committee approval of amendment 2026-2021S to HB 2. Senator Lang explained the amendment corrected a drafting error so that $2.5 million in state funds, matched with federal money for a total of $5 million, could be spent during the biennium rather than lapse at the end of the fiscal year. The money is intended to stabilize Medicaid per diem rates for county nursing homes, and members agreed without objection to adopt the amendment and continue working from the bill as amended by the Senate. The committee then discussed HB 155 and a proposed amendment, 2026-201H, dealing with the business enterprise tax. The House side described the proposal as a compromise that would raise the filing threshold from $250,000 to $375,000 and create a trigger that would reduce the BET rate by 0.05% for each $100 million in combined business tax surplus, down to a floor of 0.25%. Senate members opposed lowering the rate at this time, arguing that tax relief should focus on the filing threshold, which they said would remove filing burdens for about 3,500 small businesses, and that rate cuts should be considered in a budget cycle rather than an off-year. Concerns were raised that one-time revenues, such as tax amnesty receipts or federal repatriation-related surpluses, could unintentionally trigger reductions. Representative Sweeney later offered a revised approach by moving the effective date of the trigger mechanism to January 1, 2028, and said he was also willing to carve out tax amnesty revenues or adjust the effective date to avoid using one-time funds. The Senate remained unwilling to agree to a rate reduction, though it expressed openness to raising the filing threshold further. The committee ultimately did not resolve the business tax issue and recessed to continue discussions at a later time. The final item discussed was HB 1102, concerning an increase in the research and development tax credit paired with changes to state park fees. House members supported the R&D credit increase but opposed tying it to higher park fees, citing concerns about tourism, especially at border parks, and noting that the Department of Natural and Cultural Resources had said it did not need the increase. Senate members defended the park fee changes as a fairness issue, arguing that New Hampshire residents should pay less than out-of-state visitors and that the department had not raised rates in many years. No vote was taken on this item during the discussion captured here.
HI

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

Room 224 Conference AM - 05-01-2026

Hawaii Senate Floor Meeting

Transcript Highlights:
  • Yeah, I believe anybody who paid the fees, those fees are not going to get it back.
  • The agreed repeal of school impact fees.
  • CD1 abolishes various impact fee CD1 abolishes various impact fee accounts<00:02:50.120> and<
  • Um, had to pay the fees. Um, had to pay the fees.
  • um, who paid the fees, those fees are, um, who paid the fees, those fees are, um, they're<00:03:
MN

Minnesota 2025 1st Special Session

House Commerce Finance and Policy Committee 3/12/25

Commerce Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:
  • These structures are typically older structures that may have some structural issues or other limitations
  • These structures are typically older structures that may have some structural issues or other limitations
  • These structures are typically older structures that may have some structural issues or other limitations
  • These structures are typically older structures that may have some structural issues or other limitations
  • These structures are typically older structures that may have some structural issues or other limitations
Bills: HF1865, HF2014, HF2028
AL

Alabama 2025 Regular Session

Alabama House Boards, Agencies and Commissions Committee Feb 12th, 2025 at 10:30 am

Boards, Agencies and Commissions

Transcript Highlights:
  • There is absolutely inconsistent usage of fines, fees, and... ...inconsistent usage of fines, fees, and
  • Issue number eight concerned charging fees not authorized by law.
  • This is addressed by providing clarity to the regular fees, the late fees, and the delete fees.
  • We're cleaning up penalties and fee structures... ...cleaning up penalties and fee structures.
  • It also cleans up the fee structure on page 14. I'm moving on; I'm not going to take much longer.
MN

Minnesota 2025 1st Special Session

House Workforce, Labor, and Economic Development Finance and Policy Committee 5/6/25

Workforce, Labor, and Economic Development Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:
  • construction codes and licensing fee construction codes and licensing fee alignment<00:24:35.279
  • have not seen fee increases since 2007. have not seen fee increases since 2007.
  • c> levels<00:24:53.520> would Leaving fees at current levels would Leaving fees at current
  • But without these fee of a request.
  • I talked bill. the junk fee ban.
Bills: HF3228, HF2441
CA
Transcript Highlights:
  • Interchange fees are fees that card acceptors pay to card Interchange fees are fees that card acceptors
  • a network fee, or the processor's fee.
  • fees.
  • fee-free.
  • But what is the fee structure? Are they going to receive fees for doing this?
Summary: The Assembly Banking and Finance Committee heard several bills, beginning with AB 407, which would expand the California Pollution Control Financing Authority. The author said the measure would increase flexibility and access to resources, and the bill was approved 7-0 and sent to the Committee on Local Government. The committee also adopted the consent calendar, which included AB 76, by a 7-0 vote. A lengthy portion of the meeting focused on AB 1065, which would prohibit swipe fees on the sales tax portion of credit card transactions. Supporters, including small business owners, restaurant and grocery representatives, and a payments-policy expert, argued the bill would reduce costs for merchants and consumers and rein in dominant card networks. Opponents, including banks, credit unions, and payment industry groups, argued the bill is likely preempted by federal law, would be difficult to implement, and could disproportionately affect community banks and credit unions. After extensive questioning about preemption, fraud, implementation, and consumer impacts, the committee rejected the bill on a 6-0 vote, but then granted reconsideration by a 7-1 vote. The committee then heard AB 1365, which would create the Cal Account Program, a zero-fee, zero-penalty state banking account for unbanked and underbanked Californians. Supporters said the program would help low-income households, survivors of abuse, and others facing barriers to traditional banking, while opponents from community banks and credit unions argued existing low-cost accounts and the Bank On program already address the need and raised concerns about cost, feasibility, and duplication. The bill advanced on a 6-0 vote and later received enough votes on the reopened roll to move forward to the Committee on Labor and Employment. The committee also approved AB 1052, which would create a legal framework for digital assets and address unclaimed digital property and restrictions on public officials issuing or promoting digital assets, and AB 1180, which would create a pilot program for paying state fees with digital financial assets and require a report on broader adoption. Both bills passed with broad support after brief testimony and discussion. Final roll calls later confirmed AB 1052 and AB 1180, along with AB 407 and AB 1365, were moved out of committee.
LA

Louisiana 2026 Regular Session

Commerce May 20th, 2026

Commerce, Consumer Protection, and International Affairs

Transcript Highlights:
  • parking fee.
  • and unfair fees.
  • in lieu of security deposit, pest control fees, month-to-month fees, convenience fees for using online
  • portals, check-cashing fees, trash removal fees, internet and cable fees, eviction fees, even when the
  • Water reimbursement fees, liability insurance fees, parking fees, excessive late fees—the list goes on
Summary: The committee took up several House measures. HCR 66, as amended, asked Louisiana Economic Development and the Governor’s Office of Rural Development to study rural parish assets, infrastructure, workforce, and development opportunities, and it was moved forward without objection. HB 387, a clarification to allow the fire marshal’s office to review architectural and engineering plans equally, also passed favorably without objection. HB 1223, which would have LED promote Louisiana’s clinical trial capacity and adjust internal review board processes, was amended and moved favorably. HB 950, aimed at helping older adults recognize and avoid fraud through materials and resources from the Office of Elderly Affairs, was reported favorably. HB 975, a routine measure to recreate the Public Service Commission, was also reported favorably. HB 1186, which would create a more uniform statewide building code and licensing system for inspectors, was amended and moved favorably. HB 1222, described as a Grocery Initiative Act to let LED identify ways to address food deserts and food insecurity, was introduced near the end of the meeting. The most extensive debate centered on HB 617, a consumer transparency bill requiring mandatory fees to be included in upfront pricing. The author said the bill was intended to curb hidden fees and help consumers compare prices, with examples such as hotel resort fees and automatic restaurant service charges. Supporters argued it would improve transparency, while opponents from grocery, restaurant, hotel, housing, retail, and business groups said the bill was too broad, vague about terms like “total price,” unclear on enforcement and penalties, and could create compliance burdens and litigation risk, especially for small businesses. Housing advocates opposed the bill’s housing carve-out, arguing it could weaken renters’ ability to bring unfair-practice claims. Senator Morris moved to defer HB 617, and the committee agreed without objection. The committee also heard lengthy testimony on HB 797, which would create a Bayou Gold certification for certain transactional gold vendors that meet state-defined standards such as segregation, insurance, and nearby storage. The sponsor said the goal was to give consumers confidence and encourage vendors to keep gold closer to Louisiana, while critics argued the program would amount to a state endorsement of private companies, create misleading consumer impressions, and expose the state to confusion or liability. The bill drew opposition from the Sound Money Defense League and others, but the committee ultimately reported HB 797 favorably, with the understanding it still had to go to Finance. HB 1228, a hearing-aid cleanup bill updating definitions, contracts, testing periods, and licensing rules, was also moved favorably without objection.
NH

New Hampshire 2026 Regular Session

House Committee on Housing (01/22/2026)

Housing

Transcript Highlights:
  • What would their fees be?
  • the fees fee amounts or any the fees fee amounts or any proportionality<01:45:22.000> standard
  • > of structure.
  • That existing structure of structure.
  • end quote means a structure structure end quote means a structure existing<05:14:48.160> on<05
Keywords: 928, house, all
Summary: The committee heard public testimony on HB 1065, a housing bill that would clarify when multifamily and mixed-use housing may be allowed on commercially zoned land, define infrastructure standards, and preserve municipal discretion over where such development can occur. Prime sponsor Representative David Priest said the bill is intended to help address the housing shortage by using already developed commercial areas without overriding local planning. The New Hampshire Municipal Association, through Brody Dees, said it supports the bill and views it as a priority, but noted it is still discussing related language with stakeholders and wants clearer definitions for multifamily development, infrastructure, and adaptive reuse while preserving local control over commercial land use. Testimony was mixed. Ivy Van, a certified planner, opposed the bill because she said the infrastructure language is too restrictive and could exclude properties served by private utilities or septic systems. Chris Freeman, a housing provider, was generally supportive but recommended technical changes, arguing the infrastructure definition may be too broad and that the adaptive reuse language could unintentionally block useful building modifications. He said the bill should be clarified so it does not discourage reuse projects. The committee then moved to discussion of an accessory dwelling unit bill, with Representative Turkot describing changes that would shift some ADU approvals from a matter of right to conditional use or special exception, allow municipalities more control over attached versus detached units, set parking standards tied to single-family dwellings, and adjust size limits. He argued the bill would restore local discretion and prevent ADUs from becoming primarily rental units. Representative Reed pushed back, saying detached ADUs can help meet housing needs and provide opportunities for small landlords, while other members questioned how the bill would affect existing detached structures and breezeways. No votes were taken in the excerpt, and the chair also noted a recess and time limits for later testimony.
MN
Transcript Highlights:
  • um the renewal fee is refundable or not. um the renewal fee is refundable or not.
  • R2 the athletic fee. Um I know chair um R2 the athletic fee.
  • change course on the athletic fee. change course on the athletic fee.
  • program to cover these fees? program to cover these fees?
  • student fee roughly? student fee roughly?
Keywords: 918, senate, all
Summary: The conference committee received a nonpartisan walkthrough of the House and Senate side-by-side for higher education-related legislation, with staff identifying Senate-only, House-only, identical, and technical-difference provisions. Topics included paid blood donation leave for Minnesota State employees, a revised higher education attainment goal, athletic fee restrictions, developmental course disclosures, American Indian Scholars Program eligibility, protections and definitions for pregnant and parenting students, online program management contracts, student aid reporting, work-study and dual training grants, private and out-of-state postsecondary education regulation, private career school licensing and data privacy, college savings plan changes, and several University of Minnesota-related provisions. House-only items also included an unemployment insurance aid adjustment, a $1.5 million ongoing appropriation for an identity verification system to combat enrollment fraud, and $5,000 for Bemidji State University reforestation; Senate-only items included Board of Regents appointment language, limits on for-profit control of medical school curriculum, and reporting on for-profit funding in medical education. After the walkthrough, the committee moved to adopt the same and similar provisions and direct staff to make technical corrections. A senator asked about proposed adjustments to the pregnant and parenting student language, and the chair said amendments would be considered after adopting the same and similar provisions. The motion to adopt prevailed. During public testimony, Sydney Spre of the Minnesota Association of Professional Employees supported the Senate’s paid blood donation leave language, saying it would create parity for Minnesota State employees and encourage blood and plasma donation. Commissioner Dennis Olsen of the Office of Higher Education thanked the committee for adopting most of the agency’s proposed language and said he was available to help clarify remaining differences. In response to questions, he explained the Senate’s higher education attainment goal proposal, saying it would extend and broaden the existing goal, raise the target from 70% to 75%, expand the age range, and use additional metrics and partner agencies; he also said the overall attainment rate had been 63.5 under the prior goal. The transcript ends as the commissioner was being asked whether the proposal would require additional appropriations.
LA

Louisiana 2026 Regular Session

House of Representatives May 6th, 2026

Louisiana House Floor Meeting

Transcript Highlights:
  • , and disposition of fees.
  • They can't threaten with attorney fees.
  • They can't threaten with attorney fees.
  • You go all the way to the checkout, and then they say, oh, $20 mandatory fee. $5 mandatory fee, whatever
  • Representative Cruz says the fees are still there, but the device would make it easier to impose fees
Bills: HR244, HR245, HR246, HR247, HR248, HR249, HR250, HR251, HCR101, HCR102, HR223, HR224, HR225, HR226, HR227, HR229, HR230, HR231, HR232, HR234, HR235, HR236, HR237, HR238, HR239, HR240, HR241, HR242, HR243, HCR94, HCR95, HCR96, HCR97, HCR98, HCR99, HCR100, SCR31, SCR33, SCR35, SCR37, SCR56, SCR57, SB171, SB251, SB252, SB353, SB367, SB433, SB461, HR170, HR191, HR206, HR207, HR208, HR217, HCR11, HCR53, HCR60, HCR66, HCR68, HB66, HB153, HB165, HB326, HB387, HB454, HB455, HB484, HB513, HB603, HB660, HB719, HB762, HB766, HB793, HB802, HB816, HB833, HB940, HB947, HB950, HB975, HB1028, HB1039, HB1051, HB1053, HB1080, HB1201, HB1215, HB1228, HB1251, HB1252, SCR2, SB26, SB28, SB29, SB30, SB41, SB44, SB64, SB84, SB87, SB93, SB98, SB107, SB118, SB142, SB192, SB195, SB199, SB219, SB222, SB234, SB241, SB255, SB275, SB277, SB292, SB294, SB306, SB314, SB482, SB233, SB326, HR171, HCR49, HCR65, HCR72, HR37, HCR64, SCR19, SCR3, SCR6, SCR18, SCR11, SCR22, HB64, HB68, HB92, HB130, HB258, HB633, HB801, HB89, HB341, HB451, HB456, HB579, HB595, HB621, HB818, HB841, HB1064, HB1101, HB1191, SB47, SB82, SB106, SB206, SB210, SB248, SB305, SB376, SB397, SB441, SB2, SB19, SB24, SB50, SB70, SB96, SB101, SB103, SB104, SB114, SB122, SB159, SB160, SB173, SB180, SB182, SB260, SB412, SB418, SB424, SB442, SB460, SB476, SB1, SB23, SB32, SB42, SB43, SB46, SB51, SB110, SB113, SB150, SB154, SB161, SB218, SB220, SB221, SB253, SB289, SB310, SB351, SB399, SB404, SB502, HCR32, HB955, HB284, HB617, HB730, HB926, HB1125, HB1194, HB1203, HB798, HB998, HB1084, HB1223, HB646, HB824, HB901, HB79, HR20, HR74, HB59, HB306, HB366, HB393, HB458, HB577, HB582, HB605, HB614, HB682, HB733, HB752, HB773, HB911, HB996, HB1035, HB1069, HB1113, HB1140, HB1180, HB1234, HB1240, SB89, SB68, SB149
LA

Louisiana 2026 Regular Session

House of Representatives Apr 1st, 2026

Louisiana House Floor Meeting

Bills: HR91, HR92, HR93, HCR44, HR84, HR85, HR86, HR87, HR88, HR89, HR90, HCR42, HCR43, SCR21, HB483, HB484, HB893, HB1087, HB1088, HB1089, HB1090, HB1091, HB1092, HB1093, HB1094, HB1095, HB1096, HB1097, HB1098, HB1099, HB1100, HB1101, HB1102, HB1103, HB1104, HB1105, HB1106, HB1107, HB1108, HB1109, HB1110, HB1111, HB1112, HB1113, HB1114, HB1116, HB1117, HB1118, HB1119, HB1120, HB1121, HB1122, HB1123, HB1124, HB1125, HB1126, HB1127, HB1128, HB1129, HB1130, HB1131, HB1132, HB1133, HB1134, HB1135, HB1136, HB1137, HB1138, HB1139, HB1140, HB1141, HB1142, HB1143, HB1144, HB1145, HB1146, HB1147, HB1148, HB1149, HB1150, HB1151, HB1152, HB1153, HB1154, HB1155, HB1156, HB1157, HB1158, HB1159, HB1160, HB1161, HB1162, HB1163, HB1164, HB1165, HB1166, HB1167, HB1168, HB1169, HB1170, HB1171, HB1172, HB1173, HB1174, HB1175, HB1176, HB1177, HB1178, HB1179, HB1180, HB1181, HB1182, HB1183, HB1184, HB1185, HB1186, HB1187, HB1188, HB1189, HB1190, HB1191, HB1192, HB1193, HB1194, HB1195, HB1196, HB1197, HB1198, HB1199, HB1200, HB1201, HB1202, HB1203, HB1204, HB1205, HB1206, HB1207, HB1208, HB1209, HB1210, HB1211, HB1212, HB1213, HB1214, HB1215, HB1216, HB1217, HB1218, HB1219, HB1220, HB1221, HB1222, HB1223, HB1224, HB1225, HB1226, HB1227, HB1228, HB1229, HB1230, HB1231, SB1, SB54, SB82, SB87, SB92, SB93, SB99, SB104, SB113, SB114, SB115, SB123, SB129, SB133, SB161, SB162, SB224, SB236, SB275, SB280, SB289, SB305, SB310, SB325, SB330, SB339, SB350, SB359, SB382, SB410, SB412, HCR10, HB54, HB55, HB67, HB73, HB125, HB133, HB158, HB168, HB169, HB191, HB195, HB205, HB225, HB245, HB280, HB283, HB296, HB319, HB325, HB339, HB399, HB407, HB448, HB482, HB550, HB591, HB821, HB826, HB992, HB995, HB1085, HB1086, HR15, HR20, HCR14, HCR6, HCR19, HB861, HB889, HB904, HB907, HB908, HB929, HB1009, HB13, HB23, HB25, HB32, HB41, HB90, HB120, HB121, HB122, HB127, HB138, HB139, HB141, HB179, HB187, HB213, HB247, HB286, HB332, HB344, HB357, HB367, HB370, HB462, HB505, HB527, HB537, HB605, HB680, HB681, HB725, HB780, HB782, HB847, HB892, HB911, HB916, HB1012, HB81, HB134, HB154, HB163, HB170, HB194, HB217, HB220, HB254, HB259, HB290, HB308, HB311, HB360, HB382, HB401, HB410, HB417, HB463, HB575, HB592, HB718, HB723, HB750, HB755, HB776, HB812, HB844, HB882, HB888, HB961, HB966, HB980, HB228, HB289, HB735, HB796, HB284, HB301, HB722, HB468, HB546, HB746, HB842, HB923, HB46, HB166, HB349, HB352, HB436, HB588, HB140, HB429, HB827, HB953, HB901, HB9, HB52, HB58, HB193, HB400, HB570, HB577, HB582, HB733, HB747, HB868, HB952
MA

Massachusetts 2025-2026 Regular Session

Joint Committee on Transportation Jun 21st, 2026 at 01:00 pm

Joint Committee on Transportation

Transcript Highlights:
  • Those fees... Those fees raised roughly $18 million last year.
  • And those fees...
  • It's an opportunity to use this bill to revisit those fees.
  • I think this is a worthy opportunity to look at how we structure those fees and who's in charge of them
  • It's a worthy opportunity to look at how we structure those fees and who's in charge of them.
Keywords: 995, all
Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 4987, the administration’s transportation bond bill centered on Chapter 90 roadway funding and related capital programs. Administration officials described the bill as a roughly $5.5 billion package that would continue $300 million per year for Chapter 90 over four years, with part of the funding distributed by the traditional formula and an additional $100 million based solely on road miles to better support rural and smaller communities. They also highlighted authorizations for municipal pavement work, Shared Streets and Spaces grants, accelerated bridge and pavement repairs, MBTA rail modernization and reliability, housing-related transportation improvements, and a new DCR-focused PRISM program for parkways and related infrastructure. Officials emphasized that the bill is financed through the Commonwealth Transportation Fund and Fair Share revenues, and said it would help municipalities plan more predictably, speed project delivery, and support housing, safety, and climate goals. Committee members and witnesses discussed the bill’s broader scope beyond traditional Chapter 90, especially the $200 million for transportation projects that support housing development and the $200 million for MBTA modernization and rail reliability. Members asked about the rationale for a four-year authorization amid fiscal uncertainty, federal funding volatility, and the status of commuter rail electrification. Administration officials responded that the capital authorization is backed by dedicated transportation revenues rather than the operating budget, and said multi-year certainty helps cities and towns make better long-term repair decisions. They also said the MBTA’s rail modernization funds would support locomotive procurements, including battery-electric and Tier 4 diesel locomotives, as part of a longer-term regional rail and electrification strategy. Municipal officials and regional advocates strongly supported the bill. The Massachusetts Municipal Association, along with town and city officials from Sherborn, Conway, and Yarmouth, said the increased Chapter 90 funding and road-mile-based distribution are especially important for small and rural communities with limited local revenue capacity, and that multi-year funding would let them bundle projects, bid at better prices, and address backlogs more proactively. A Better City and MAPC also supported the bill but urged the committee to treat it like a traditional bond bill by adding policy provisions and considering new transportation revenue tools, such as TNC fee changes, road pricing, parking taxes, and other mechanisms. The committee took no vote during the hearing and adjourned after testimony concluded.
CA

California 2025-2026 Regular Session

Assembly Communications and Conveyance Committee Jun 18th, 2025

Communications and Conveyance

Transcript Highlights:
  • There is also a fee that is charged.
  • Do you separately list out, like Uber does, the... booking fee, which is the insurance fee, on Lyft?
  • So how is it, the insurance fee, currently?
  • These are local government fees, insurance, etc. and costs.
  • standard fee, but these are pennies compared to insurance.
Keywords: 988, house, all
MN

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

House Transportation Finance and Policy Committee 3/9/26

Transportation Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:
  • Can you explain the fee structures that we're talking about here, because it looks like we're providing
  • Can you explain the fee structures that we're talking about here, because it looks like we're providing
  • Can you explain the fee structures that we're talking about here, because it looks like we're providing
  • Can you explain the fee structures that we're talking about here, because it looks like we're providing
  • Can you explain the fee structures that we're talking about here, because it looks like we're providing
NH

New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session

Senate Finance (04/15/2025)

Finance

Transcript Highlights:
  • Some states have tiered fee structures; some states have very complicated mathematical formulas to calculate
  • fees.
  • <00:17:57.360> structures, some states have tiered fee structures, some states have tiered
  • fee structures, some<00:17:58.000> states<00:17:58.320> have<00:17:58.480> very
  • charging for fees? charging for fees?
Keywords: 1191, senate, all
NH

New Hampshire 2026 Regular Session

House Ways and Means (03/23/2026)

Ways and Means

Transcript Highlights:
  • And as you can see from the chart, we're the only state in New England not charging a separate fee structure
  • <00:11:05.720> structures<00:11:06.200> for to set separate fee structures for to set
  • So, he or she may, but is not obligated to set separate fee structures for residents. Thank you.
  • Okay, but the fee structure could be increased depending on what park it is and so forth.
  • :33.520> be<00:33:33.640> increased the fee structure could be increased the fee structure
Keywords: 1189, house, all