Video & Transcript Research : 'fee phaseout'
Page 38 of 416
TX
Texas 89th Regular
S/C on Telecommunications & Broadband May 2nd, 2025
S/C on Telecommunications & Broadband
Transcript Highlights:
- A cable franchise fee is an annual fee charged by local governments to a private cable television company
- They are suing to try to collect this fee, but they cannot currently collect this fee.
- . franchise fees to the cities.
- They paid a franchise fee.
- ...and franchise fees annually?
Keywords:
broadband, internet access, digital equity, tax reduction, government funding, rural counties, fiber-optic, state funding, infrastructure, digital divide, economic development, fiber-optic cable, excavation, utilities, civil penalties, municipal regulations, video services, regulation, public right-of-way, franchise authority
ND
North Dakota 2025-2026 Regular Session
Government Finance Committee Jun 25th, 2026
Transcript Highlights:
- We do have the 52 fee types. The fees are set in Century Code.
- We do have the 52 fee types. The fees are set in Century Code.
- The fee varies based upon that. We do have fees.
- hair removal fees.
- fees.
Summary:
The committee began with roll call, introductions of a new fiscal analyst and a new member, and approval of the March 19 minutes. The first major presentation was from the Office of Management and Budget on the state’s general fund and special fund status through May. OMB reported general fund revenues were running below the legislative forecast by about $76 million, driven largely by weaker individual income tax and sales tax collections, though the projected ending balance remained positive and above the budgeted level. The budget stabilization fund was above its cap and would transfer excess earnings to the general fund, and the legacy fund balance continued to grow. Members also asked about federal funding uncertainty and mineral leasing revenue variability.
The committee then reviewed compliance reports and trust fund analyses, followed by discussion of a bill draft for the fixed-route city transportation network study. The draft would create a $15 million general fund grant program with a formula-based distribution to eligible fixed-route transit cities, intended to support operating and capital needs and help match federal transit funds. Transit officials from Minot and Fargo testified in support, explaining local fare and match structures and the difficulty of replacing aging buses and securing federal matching dollars. Several members questioned whether the program should be limited to the current four cities or broadened to future eligible urban areas, and whether local funding sources should be explored further. The committee did not finalize the bill draft at that point and planned to continue discussion at a later meeting.
The committee also approved a bill draft repealing obsolete language related to approval of a bi-state authority with South Dakota, after staff explained that no agreements had ever been implemented and the provision appeared outdated. A roll call vote was taken and the motion carried. Later, the Department of Commerce and the Northern Plains UAS Test Site presented updates on uncrewed aircraft systems initiatives, including the Vantis radar data enclave, the drone replacement program, and efforts to build a revenue model for Vantis. Test site officials said FAA approval had been secured for the radar data program, replacement of noncompliant drones was underway, and future revenue could come from state and external users once pricing and intellectual property arrangements are finalized. Members asked about Chinese-made drones, supply chain issues, automation, and how the system would manage beyond-visual-line-of-sight operations.
The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation then presented on the design of a new minimum-security prison and a reentry housing study. Officials said the proposed facility would relocate the minimum-security prison to the penitentiary campus, reduce costs from an earlier estimate, and provide more beds and programming space, with construction potentially beginning in 2027 and opening around 2031. They also described staffing needs, the planned move of women to the New England facility, and possible expansion of men’s housing there. The parole and probation chief described a reentry housing task force studying housing needs for people leaving incarceration, with a goal of developing data-driven recommendations for subsidies and support services; a representative from Protection and Advocacy closed by expressing general support for fixed-route and paratransit funding.
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee Jun 10th, 2026
Housing and Community Development
Transcript Highlights:
- with the Mitigation Fee Act.
- and prohibiting impact fees on ADUs that are 750 square feet or smaller. and prohibiting impact fees
- Because many times they're avoiding impact fees, school fees, and they're already having to pay.
- ADU and you have a 4,000-square-foot house, the fee for the ADU would be one-quarter of the fee for
- So your fee under current law would be 25% of whatever the fee is, right? Yes.
Summary:
The Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee heard several housing-related bills, with most of the discussion focused on streamlining housing production, preserving affordable housing, and reducing barriers to ADUs and EV charging in HOAs. SB 457 would direct HCD to develop statistical formulas based on historical development data to help cities complete housing element site inventories; supporters said it would replace costly parcel-by-parcel analysis with a more realistic, data-driven approach, while the California Building Industry Association raised concerns. SB 1091 would create a Community Anti-Displacement and Preservation Program to help acquire and preserve unsubsidized affordable rental housing; it drew broad support from housing nonprofits, local governments, and committee members who emphasized prevention and preservation, and it was advanced with a motion and second. SB 1117 would clarify that ADU impact fees above 750 square feet are charged only on the portion above that threshold; supporters said current practice creates a fee cliff that discourages ADUs, while cities, counties, special districts, and fire groups opposed it over infrastructure and service funding concerns. The committee members were split, but the bill ultimately advanced on a 10-0 vote with two not voting.
The committee also considered SB 904, which would codify and expand reporting and coordination practices used after wildfire disasters to speed rebuilding and identify permitting or code barriers. The author and supporters argued that future wildfire recoveries should not depend on ad hoc executive orders, while some members questioned whether the bill was duplicative of existing streamlining laws; it passed on a roll call after discussion. SB 1267 would require EV charger installers in HOAs to indemnify associations during installation and make homeowners liable for costs arising from use of a privately owned charger; HOA representatives and EV advocates supported it, the California Association of Realtors said it would remove opposition once amendments were in print, and the bill advanced unanimously. SB 1361 would prevent local governments from taking actions to avoid SB 79 transit-oriented housing requirements at existing or planned transit stops; L.A. Metro, labor groups, and housing advocates supported it as protecting transit investments and jobs, while the City of Burbank opposed it, and it was approved on a 9-0 vote. The committee also took up consent items SB 722 and SB 1426, which were approved without controversy.
FL
Florida 2025 Regular Session
March 20, 2025 - 02:00 PM
Transcript Highlights:
- It brings us back to one-way fees.
- If I win, my fees get paid.
- It is basically a written offer that can be inclusive of fees or exclusive of fees.
- How are the fees determined?
- That is one-way attorney's fees.
Summary:
The committee met to hear five banking and insurance-related bills. HB 1549, an Office of Financial Regulation agency bill to help more efficiently regulate financial institutions, was amended to match Senate companion language and then passed unanimously. HB 1231 would extend physician payment and prior-authorization protections similar to a prior dental law, including limits on virtual credit card payments as the sole payment method; physicians and medical groups supported it as a way to reduce fees and retroactive denials, while insurers were not heard in opposition, and the bill passed unanimously.
The committee then heard HB 999, which would make gold and silver legal tender and allow transactions in bullion through electronic debit mechanisms. The sponsor and several proponents framed it as an inflation hedge and economic freedom measure, while questions focused on definitions, transaction costs, and vendor participation. The bill passed on a mostly party-line vote, with one member voting no. The committee also approved HM 4363, a memorial urging Congress to establish a sovereign wealth fund; the sponsor described it as a way to steward national wealth, and the memorial passed with one dissenting vote.
Finally, the committee took up HB 1551, which would create a prevailing-party attorney fee framework in insurance contract disputes. The sponsor argued it would restore balance, deter meritless litigation, and help consumers with valid claims recover fees, while insurers, business groups, and defense attorneys warned it would revive one-way fee shifting, increase litigation, and raise premiums. Consumer advocates and some members supported it as necessary to give policyholders meaningful recourse. After debate, the bill passed favorably, with one member voting no.
NH
New Hampshire 2026 Regular Session
JLCAR Administrative Rules (02/20/2026)
Transcript Highlights:
- So obviously, registration fees, different application fees, were increased.
- So obviously um for all fees.
- registration fees uh different registration fees uh different application<00:41:05.359>
fees< - We're changing a fee.
- We're changing a fee.
Summary:
The committee convened after briefly waiting for a quorum, approved the minutes and consent agenda, and then moved through several agency rule items. The Department of Transportation’s outdoor advertising rule filing was approved after staff noted the department had addressed substantive comments, though the rules had been expired since 2021 and the agency said it had been operating under statute. Members asked about a denied digital sign proposal, and DOT said that decision was based on statute rather than the rule. The Department of Safety’s administrative license suspension item was postponed with a waiver so the agency could submit conditional approval materials and resolve issues between its forms and rules. The Board of Architects item was conditionally approved, with the condition that the board later approve updated incorporation-by-reference materials at its April 3 meeting or the matter would return as a preliminary objection.
The Department of Agriculture’s expired rules prompted extended discussion. Staff and committee members questioned why the department was seeking to adopt rules that had been expired for many years and whether the statutes already provided enough authority to operate without them. Agriculture officials said they were working through a broader modernization effort, focusing on statutes that use mandatory language and updating outdated rules to match current practices, federal standards, and current products such as apples, cider, eggs, and other agricultural commodities. They said the rules before the committee were part of that effort and recommended approval, but members remained concerned about whether some rules were unnecessary. The committee ultimately granted a waiver and postponed the agriculture item for one month so staff could review the underlying statutes and determine whether rulemaking is actually required.
Under other business, the committee took up an emergency Department of Safety rule to update DMV forms to reflect statutory fee changes enacted in the 2025 budget. DMV officials said the new fees were already in effect, but the corresponding forms still showed old amounts, causing confusion for customers and elected officials who were fielding complaints. They argued the forms needed immediate updating because the affected forms are widely used, and they said the department had already tried to treat the changes as editorial before being told full rulemaking was required. The department emphasized it was trying to follow the process while avoiding continued use of incorrect fee forms, and asked the committee to allow the emergency rule to proceed.
ND
North Dakota 2026 1st Special Session
Government Finance Committee Jun 25th, 2026
Government Finance Committee
Transcript Highlights:
- We do have the 52 fee types. The fees are set in Century Code.
- The fee varies based upon that. We do have fees.
- hair removal fees.
- fees.
- We have ambulance service license fees and EMS training institution fees.
Summary:
The committee first received a general fund and revenue update from the Office of Management and Budget. Staff reported that the state started the biennium about $176 million above prior estimates, but year-to-date revenues were now running below legislative forecast, mainly due to lower individual income tax and sales tax collections. The budget stabilization fund was above its cap, the legacy fund continued to grow, and oil revenues were slightly above forecast overall. Members also asked about federal funding uncertainty and mineral leasing variability, and OMB said agencies would be asked to address potential federal reductions case by case during budget preparation.
The committee then reviewed compliance reports and trust fund analysis materials, followed by a bill draft for a fixed-route city transportation grant program. Testimony from transit officials in Fargo and Minot supported the proposal, saying state aid would help match federal transit funds and support operations, but members raised questions about the funding source, fare structures, and whether the program should be limited to the current four fixed-route cities or allow future eligible cities. Several members asked for more time to study the formula and possible funding options before moving the bill forward.
Next, the committee approved a bill draft repealing obsolete language related to a proposed North Dakota-South Dakota bi-state authority. Staff explained the provision had been unused for about 30 years and that existing law likely already allowed joint powers agreements without the specific language. The committee voted to adopt the repeal bill draft.
The Department of Commerce and the Northern Plains UAS Test Site then provided an update on uncrewed aircraft system initiatives, including the Vantis radar data enclave, the drone replacement program, and future revenue models. Officials said North Dakota had received FAA approval to operate the radar data pathfinder, had begun replacing non-compliant drones from restricted foreign sources, and was working on phased procurement and cost-recovery plans. Members asked about deadlines, funding, supply-chain issues, and how the system would be used; staff said the federal restrictions were already in effect and that Vantis was being positioned as infrastructure for future beyond-visual-line-of-sight operations.
Finally, the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation presented on the design of a new minimum-security prison and on a reentry housing task force. The new facility is planned for the penitentiary grounds, with a reduced estimated cost of about $263 million, 600 beds initially, possible expansion to 732 beds, and completion projected around 2031 if funded in 2027. The reentry housing task force described a data-driven effort to identify housing needs for people leaving incarceration, with the goal of reducing homelessness and recidivism through targeted housing support and possible subsidies. Members asked about staffing, site selection, housing duration, and whether employment and transportation needs would be included in the assessment.
MN
Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session
Committee on Health and Human Services - 02/18/25
Health and Human Services
Transcript Highlights:
- Madam Chair, Senate File 1503 would eliminate facility fees and facility fees allow systems to add on
- has banned facility fees for preventative care, Ohio has banned facility fees for telehealth services
- ><00:07:15.560>
tele Ohio has banned facility fees for tele Ohio has banned facility fees for of amount of the fee at the time of amount of the fee at the time of scheduling<00:07:49.360>- notification requirements facility fees notification requirements facility fees are<00:08:28.319
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 4 on State Administration and General Government May 20th, 2026
Transcript Highlights:
- and the road fee and the transit fee, for must waive the sewer impact fees and the road fee and the
- Some cities might want to do fee deferral. Some cities might want to do fee waivers.
- Right now, we charge fees independently, so SIDLAC has their fees and TCAC has their fees, and we made
- changes to that fee structure.
- Both programs are funded through application fees and then reservation fees.
Summary:
The subcommittee heard May Revision proposals focused on housing, homelessness, and related administrative changes, and took no votes, holding items open for later action. Item 1 would realign staff positions and resources as part of the Governor’s housing and homelessness reorganization, including shifting two Cal ICH positions to HCD, moving one Cal ICH position for communications/external affairs, and authorizing a chief deputy director at the new Housing Development Finance Committee. Administration witnesses said the changes were technical and net zero-cost, while the LAO recommended approval but asked for clarification on funding for the chief deputy. Several senators questioned whether the staffing shifts would weaken Cal ICH’s homelessness work and whether adding communications capacity was appropriate without new housing funding.
Item 2 proposed creating a $100 million Disaster Rebuilding Fund at CalHFA, with $56 million General Fund and $44 million in existing National Mortgage Settlement funds, to support disaster-impacted homeowners through tools such as loan loss guarantees and interest rate buy-downs. CalHFA said the fund would help homeowners bridge the gap between insurance proceeds and rebuilding costs and would work through approved lenders. The LAO raised concerns about the lack of alternatives in the proposal, the broad discretion left to CalHFA in program design, and the General Fund cost. Senators pressed for more detail on eligibility, equity safeguards, lender oversight, and how many homeowners would actually benefit, with some warning the proposal was too open-ended and could miss the most vulnerable households.
Item 3 addressed trailer bill language for HAP Round 7, including a proposed $500 million General Fund allocation tied to new accountability measures, pro-housing designation requirements for 14 large cities and 11 counties, local match requirements, streamlined system performance metrics, and recapture/reallocation of unspent funds. HCD said the proposal would avoid a new application process by treating Round 7 as additional disbursements of Round 6 and would provide technical assistance to jurisdictions. The LAO and several senators questioned the timing, the burden of pro-housing designation and local match requirements, the vagueness of some standards, and whether the proposal would delay rather than speed up funding. Members also debated whether the trailer bill preserved or weakened existing homelessness accountability metrics and whether the approach was too complicated given local budget pressures and ongoing homelessness needs.
MN
Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session
House Health Finance and Policy Committee 2/10/25
Health Finance and Policy
Transcript Highlights:
- So we are requesting a fee increase to our public water supply fee.
- So we are requesting a fee increase to our public water supply fee.
- fees.
- fees.
- <00:24:38.159>
allow <00:24:38.679>us fees right now our current fees allow us fees
Summary:
The committee met for a Health and Finance Policy hearing, began with member and staff introductions, and noted that Representative Keeler was participating as a non-voting member. The chair outlined committee rules on decorum and then introduced the day’s first agency presentation from the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH), with Commissioner Cunningham appearing to present the department’s budget priorities.
Commissioner Cunningham described MDH’s broad public health role and emphasized that public health is underfunded relative to health care, with significant reliance on federal dollars. The department’s main budget request was for infectious disease prevention and response to offset anticipated federal funding losses. MDH also outlined several fee increases tied to public water systems, wells, licensing and certification, assisted living and health care facilities, HMO regulation, food/pools/lodging inspections, radioactive materials, X-ray equipment, and asbestos abatement. The commissioner said these changes were needed because costs, workload, and regulatory complexity have increased, while many fees have not been updated in years.
MDH also presented budget-neutral proposals, including continuing the Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Advisory Committee, converting the Maternal and Child Health Advisory Task Force into a standing advisory committee, restoring some local and tribal public health cannabis and substance misuse prevention grants, creating direct American Indian Health Special Emphasis Grants, reauthorizing the State Trauma Advisory Council, and extending firefighter PFAS biomonitoring work. The department also requested an operations adjustment for rising employee, insurance, fuel, utility, and legal costs, and referenced additional Clean Water Legacy Fund proposals. No votes or formal actions were taken in the portion provided. Representative Bierman then offered supportive comments, praising MDH’s work and backing the funding and fee proposals, especially the restoration of local public health prevention grants.
MN
Minnesota 2025 1st Special Session
Committee on Health and Human Services - 01/28/25
Health and Human Services
Transcript Highlights:
- Is that where the fee changes are?
- fees for our DPM licenses.
- Those are our proposed fees. It's page nine, but there's the proposed fee for the fiscal year 26.
- Um, yes, I see the proposed fees.
- Our fee is around the initial application fee and the annual renewal fees to cover regulating HMOs.
Summary:
The Senate Health and Human Services Committee met on January 28, 2025, to review Governor’s budget proposals for several health-related licensing boards. The chair said no formal action would be taken and noted that final budget language was not yet available. The committee began with an overview from Bridget Anderson of the health-related licensing boards, who explained that the boards are fee-funded, operate as independent executive agencies, and handle licensing, complaints, rulemaking, and disciplinary matters. She also noted that the Board of Dentistry’s budget includes the Administrative Services Unit and criminal background check program, which can make the budget graphs appear larger than the dentistry board’s own operations.
The Board of Dentistry requested funding for a new administrative staff position, estimating about $100,000 in salary, insurance, and fringe costs, to replace support lost when an administrative position was reclassified. Anderson said the board handled more than 300 complaints last year, with cases becoming more complex, especially involving surgical and implant procedures and imaging. Members asked about dental Medicaid access, but Anderson said that issue would be better directed to DHS’s Medicaid oral health division. The Board of Behavioral Health and Therapy requested a full-time position due to rapid growth in the number of regulated professionals, from about 4,000 in 2014 to nearly 10,000 now, and also sought authority to set a fee for out-of-state applicants under the Counseling Compact, with a cap of up to $100 though the board expects to charge much less.
The Board of Podiatric Medicine asked to raise its fee ceiling, saying fees had not been increased since 1999 and that the board now faces a structural deficit of about $40,000 per year and declining reserves. Several senators expressed concern about “not-to-exceed” fee authority, calling it too open-ended and suggesting the legislature should scrutinize specific fee needs rather than approve broad ceilings. Similar concerns were raised during the Board of Chiropractic Examiners presentation, where the board sought $100,000 in additional spending authority and a fee increase after 32 years without an adjustment; members questioned the proposed ceiling approach and asked for more historical information before deciding. The Board of Dietetics and Nutrition Practice also discussed fee-setting authority, with the executive director explaining that the board had previously lowered fees without clear authority and later faced audit questions; she requested funding for a vacant administrative position, saying applications and revenues have increased sharply and no fee increase would be needed.
The final presentation began with the Board of Pharmacy, which said it serves more than 26,000 licensees and oversees the Prescription Monitoring Program and opioid product registration. The board requested an extension of previously appropriated general fund dollars through fiscal year 2027 to continue paying legal costs tied to the insulin safety net lawsuit, emphasizing that this was not a new funding request but an extension of existing authority. No votes or formal actions were taken during the meeting.
MN
Transcript Highlights:
- That’s the virtual inspection fee.
- <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.
- That fee that you'd pay, that same fee, to have the home inspected.
UT
Utah 2025 Regular Session
Transportation Interim Committee - November 20, 2025
Transportation Interim Committee
Transcript Highlights:
- Then the next fee on here was a $2.50 driver education fee.
- And then the actual registration fee is just a portion of all the fees, and then these additional fees
- payment 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
- The registration fee is the same thing. Those fees, while we call them fees, are really taxes.
AL
Transcript Highlights:
- This bill will set fees for the license.
Bills:
SJR 39, SB 22, SB 30, SB 33, SB 34, SB 37, SB 75, SB 209, SB 310, SB 505, SB 552, SB 618, SB 626, SB 636, SB 732, SB 747, SB 762, SB 769, SB 819, SB 825, SB 870, SB 926, SB 964, SB 1030, SB 1080, SB 1099, SB 1124, SB 1177, SB 1208, SB 1233, SB 1314, SB 1325, SB 1333, SB 1405, SB 1455, SB 1506, SB 1524, SB 1541, SB 1577, SB 1579, SB 1596, SB 1646, SB 1667, SB 1727, SB 1750, SB 1758, SB 1760, SB 1791, SB 1804, SB 1806, SB 1869, SB 1923, SB 1927, SB 1951, SB 1960, SB 1962, SB 2023, SB 2024, SB 2056, SB 2078, SB 2122, SB 2129, SB 2180, SB 2183, SB 2185, SB 2207, SB 2252, SB 2361, SB 2365, SB 2368, SB 2405, SB 2411, SB 2420, SB 2425, SB 2569, SB 2717, SJR 36, SJR 50, SJR 39, SJR 63, SJR 68, SCR 12, SCR 39, SCR 38, SCR 37, SCR 42, SCR 29, SB 762, SB 1596, SB 62, SB 666, SB 847, SB 284, SB 854, SB 1073, SB 810, SB 1539, SB 1505, SB 583, SB 957, SB 1502, SB 507, SB 1026, SB 1349, SB 1433, SB 1434, SB 310, SB 505, SB 264, SB 1364, SB 1376, SB 1585, SB 1772, SB 2016, SB 1163, SB 619, SB 1122, SB 1877, SB 732, SB 731, SB 397, SB 508, SB 1333, SB 1436, SB 964, SB 287, SB 2143, SB 261, SB 1247, SB 1882, SB 618, SB 393, SB 2243, SB 2226, SB 1919, SB 1791, SB 22, SB 651, SB 1080, SB 826, SB 1079, SB 1243, SB 1504, SB 1851, SB 1879, SB 2237, SB 1257, SB 2034, SB 1522, SB 1151, SB 596, SB 1191, SB 226, SB 570, SB 870, SB 991, SB 60, SB 1401, SB 1728, SB 586, SB 529, SB 217, SB 209, SB 1923, SB 1839, SB 387, SB 1874, SB 1872, SB 1873, SB 1921, SB 1883, SB 1620, SB 1838, SB 2024, SB 2429, SB 1999, SB 511, SB 2309, SB 2166, SB 510, SB 33, SB 2420, SB 1860, SB 1541, SB 1314, SB 1398, SB 1869, SB 1750, SB 855, SB 1233, SB 2425, SB 2037, SB 1758, SB 1759, SB 2365, SB 1924, SB 1818, SB 1405, SB 1762, SB 1968, SB 1977, SB 2077, SB 2321, SB 1662, SB 1663, SB 2124, SB 2204, SB 1855, SB 863, SB 37, SB 819, SB 2078, SB 2252, SB 1962, SB 2253, SB 825, SB 1577, SB 1184, SB 2018, SB 2206, SB 1901, SB 1030, SB 2368, SB 1963, SB 1960, SB 1643, SB 1625, SB 1299, SB 841, SB 668, SB 584, SB 231, SB 2411, SB 1085, SB 2431, SB 2231, SB 1490, SB 530, SB 34, SB 1261, SB 552, SB 1099, SB 1646, SB 2180, SB 1804, SB 1937, SB 1936, SB 2569, SB 1372, SB 1208, SB 1124, SB 1506, SB 1806, SB 1868, SB 2361, SB 2314, SB 769, SB 1409, SB 2122, SB 434, SB 1214, SB 1951, SB 2183, SB 2046, SB 1667, SB 1870, SB 1727, SB 2405, SB 2127, SB 1975, SB 1760, SB 1734, SB 1335, SB 2066, SB 2129, SB 2246, SB 2439, SB 1624, SB 1244, SB 1468, SB 2717, SB 1612, SB 1262, SB 604, SB 2395, SB 2185, SB 1832, SB 1745, SB 1746, SB 2207, SB 2023, SB 1784, SB 1524, SB 626, SB 528, SB 437, SB 269, SB 1137, SB 968, SB 636, SB 747, SB 1325, SB 1789, SB 1455, SB 2056, SB 75, SB 1940, SB 2052, SB 1927, SB 2010, SB 1579, SB 2068, SB 3034, SB 844, SB 1920, SB 1177, SB 1558, SB 1236, SB 1044, SB 926, SB 884, SB 463, SB 331, SB 227, SB 240, SB 517, SB 1200, SB 1410, SB 1626, SB 1845, SB 1863, SB 2216, SB 2681, SB 1717, SB 2053, SB 546, SB 2141, SB 2949, SB 2323, SB 2200, SB 2332, SB 2199, SB 1642, SB 1150, SB 1757, SB 2050, SB 1138, SB 2051, SB 2626, SB 2458, SB 1864, SB 30, SB 2201, SB 1862, SB 1583, SB 1583, SB 1055, SB 2660, SB 1898, SB 2662, SB 2662, SB 2161, SB 2161, SB 2964, SB 2881, SB 1065, SB 1065, SB 801, SB 2743, SB 2533, SB 2533, SB 1413, SB 1413, SB 1, SB 34, SB 310, SB 819, SB 1030, SB 1124, SB 1208, SB 1233, SB 1333, SB 1405, SB 1541, SB 1750, SB 1758, SB 1869, SB 2078, SB 2365, SB 2411, SB 762, SB 33, SB 37, SB 505, SR 402, SR 409, SB 2695, SB 2695
Keywords:
constitutional amendment, veto override, legislature power, governor, Texas Constitution, Texas, moving image industry, incentive program, film production, grant funding, job creation, economic development, wildfire, wildfire mitigation, wildfire prevention, volunteer fire department, Texas A&M Forest Service, West Texas A&M University, prescribed burning, fuel loading
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- It allows the PUC to assess a fee to cover the cost of reviewing the applications, and it restores.
Bills:
SJR39, SB22, SB30, SB33, SB34, SB37, SB75, SB209, SB310, SB505, SB552, SB618, SB626, SB636, SB732, SB747, SB762, SB769, SB819, SB825, SB870, SB926, SB964, SB1030, SB1080, SB1099, SB1124, SB1177, SB1208, SB1233, SB1314, SB1325, SB1333, SB1405, SB1455, SB1506, SB1524, SB1541, SB1577, SB1579, SB1596, SB1646, SB1667, SB1727, SB1750, SB1758, SB1760, SB1791, SB1804, SB1806, SB1869, SB1923, SB1927, SB1951, SB1960, SB1962, SB2023, SB2024, SB2056, SB2078, SB2122, SB2129, SB2180, SB2183, SB2185, SB2207, SB2252, SB2361, SB2365, SB2368, SB2405, SB2411, SB2420, SB2425, SB2569, SB2717, SJR36, SJR50, SJR39, SJR63, SJR68, SCR12, SCR39, SCR38, SCR37, SCR42, SCR29, SB762, SB1596, SB62, SB666, SB847, SB284, SB854, SB1073, SB810, SB1539, SB1505, SB583, SB957, SB1502, SB507, SB1026, SB1349, SB1433, SB1434, SB310, SB505, SB264, SB1364, SB1376, SB1585, SB1772, SB2016, SB1163, SB619, SB1122, SB1877, SB732, SB731, SB397, SB508, SB1333, SB1436, SB964, SB287, SB2143, SB261, SB1247, SB1882, SB618, SB393, SB2243, SB2226, SB1919, SB1791, SB22, SB651, SB1080, SB826, SB1079, SB1243, SB1504, SB1851, SB1879, SB2237, SB1257, SB2034, SB1522, SB1151, SB596, SB1191, SB226, SB570, SB870, SB991, SB60, SB1401, SB1728, SB586, SB529, SB217, SB209, SB1923, SB1839, SB387, SB1874, SB1872, SB1873, SB1921, SB1883, SB1620, SB1838, SB2024, SB2429, SB1999, SB511, SB2309, SB2166, SB510, SB33, SB2420, SB1860, SB1541, SB1314, SB1398, SB1869, SB1750, SB855, SB1233, SB2425, SB2037, SB1758, SB1759, SB2365, SB1924, SB1818, SB1405, SB1762, SB1968, SB1977, SB2077, SB2321, SB1662, SB1663, SB2124, SB2204, SB1855, SB863, SB37, SB819, SB2078, SB2252, SB1962, SB2253, SB825, SB1577, SB1184, SB2018, SB2206, SB1901, SB1030, SB2368, SB1963, SB1960, SB1643, SB1625, SB1299, SB841, SB668, SB584, SB231, SB2411, SB1085, SB2431, SB2231, SB1490, SB530, SB34, SB1261, SB552, SB1099, SB1646, SB2180, SB1804, SB1937, SB1936, SB2569, SB1372, SB1208, SB1124, SB1506, SB1806, SB1868, SB2361, SB2314, SB769, SB1409, SB2122, SB434, SB1214, SB1951, SB2183, SB2046, SB1667, SB1870, SB1727, SB2405, SB2127, SB1975, SB1760, SB1734, SB1335, SB2066, SB2129, SB2246, SB2439, SB1624, SB1244, SB1468, SB2717, SB1612, SB1262, SB604, SB2395, SB2185, SB1832, SB1745, SB1746, SB2207, SB2023, SB1784, SB1524, SB626, SB528, SB437, SB269, SB1137, SB968, SB636, SB747, SB1325, SB1789, SB1455, SB2056, SB75, SB1940, SB2052, SB1927, SB2010, SB1579, SB2068, SB3034, SB844, SB1920, SB1177, SB1558, SB1236, SB1044, SB926, SB884, SB463, SB331, SB227, SB240, SB517, SB1200, SB1410, SB1626, SB1845, SB1863, SB2216, SB2681, SB1717, SB2053, SB546, SB2141, SB2949, SB2323, SB2200, SB2332, SB2199, SB1642, SB1150, SB1757, SB2050, SB1138, SB2051, SB2626, SB2458, SB1864, SB30, SB2201, SB1862, SB1583, SB1583, SB1055, SB2660, SB1898, SB2662, SB2662, SB2161, SB2161, SB2964, SB2881, SB1065, SB1065, SB801, SB2743, SB2533, SB2533, SB1413, SB1413
Keywords:
constitutional amendment, veto override, legislature power, governor, Texas Constitution, Texas, moving image industry, incentive program, film production, grant funding, job creation, economic development, wildfire, wildfire mitigation, wildfire prevention, volunteer fire department, Texas A&M Forest Service, West Texas A&M University, prescribed burning, fuel loading
FL
Bills:
SJR39, SB22, SB30, SB33, SB34, SB37, SB75, SB209, SB310, SB505, SB552, SB618, SB626, SB636, SB732, SB747, SB762, SB769, SB819, SB825, SB870, SB926, SB964, SB1030, SB1080, SB1099, SB1124, SB1177, SB1208, SB1233, SB1314, SB1325, SB1333, SB1405, SB1455, SB1506, SB1524, SB1541, SB1577, SB1579, SB1596, SB1646, SB1667, SB1727, SB1750, SB1758, SB1760, SB1791, SB1804, SB1806, SB1869, SB1923, SB1927, SB1951, SB1960, SB1962, SB2023, SB2024, SB2056, SB2078, SB2122, SB2129, SB2180, SB2183, SB2185, SB2207, SB2252, SB2361, SB2365, SB2368, SB2405, SB2411, SB2420, SB2425, SB2569, SB2717, SJR36, SJR50, SJR39, SJR63, SJR68, SCR12, SCR39, SCR38, SCR37, SCR42, SCR29, SB762, SB1596, SB62, SB666, SB847, SB284, SB854, SB1073, SB810, SB1539, SB1505, SB583, SB957, SB1502, SB507, SB1026, SB1349, SB1433, SB1434, SB310, SB505, SB264, SB1364, SB1376, SB1585, SB1772, SB2016, SB1163, SB619, SB1122, SB1877, SB732, SB731, SB397, SB508, SB1333, SB1436, SB964, SB287, SB2143, SB261, SB1247, SB1882, SB618, SB393, SB2243, SB2226, SB1919, SB1791, SB22, SB651, SB1080, SB826, SB1079, SB1243, SB1504, SB1851, SB1879, SB2237, SB1257, SB2034, SB1522, SB1151, SB596, SB1191, SB226, SB570, SB870, SB991, SB60, SB1401, SB1728, SB586, SB529, SB217, SB209, SB1923, SB1839, SB387, SB1874, SB1872, SB1873, SB1921, SB1883, SB1620, SB1838, SB2024, SB2429, SB1999, SB511, SB2309, SB2166, SB510, SB33, SB2420, SB1860, SB1541, SB1314, SB1398, SB1869, SB1750, SB855, SB1233, SB2425, SB2037, SB1758, SB1759, SB2365, SB1924, SB1818, SB1405, SB1762, SB1968, SB1977, SB2077, SB2321, SB1662, SB1663, SB2124, SB2204, SB1855, SB863, SB37, SB819, SB2078, SB2252, SB1962, SB2253, SB825, SB1577, SB1184, SB2018, SB2206, SB1901, SB1030, SB2368, SB1963, SB1960, SB1643, SB1625, SB1299, SB841, SB668, SB584, SB231, SB2411, SB1085, SB2431, SB2231, SB1490, SB530, SB34, SB1261, SB552, SB1099, SB1646, SB2180, SB1804, SB1937, SB1936, SB2569, SB1372, SB1208, SB1124, SB1506, SB1806, SB1868, SB2361, SB2314, SB769, SB1409, SB2122, SB434, SB1214, SB1951, SB2183, SB2046, SB1667, SB1870, SB1727, SB2405, SB2127, SB1975, SB1760, SB1734, SB1335, SB2066, SB2129, SB2246, SB2439, SB1624, SB1244, SB1468, SB2717, SB1612, SB1262, SB604, SB2395, SB2185, SB1832, SB1745, SB1746, SB2207, SB2023, SB1784, SB1524, SB626, SB528, SB437, SB269, SB1137, SB968, SB636, SB747, SB1325, SB1789, SB1455, SB2056, SB75, SB1940, SB2052, SB1927, SB2010, SB1579, SB2068, SB3034, SB844, SB1920, SB1177, SB1558, SB1236, SB1044, SB926, SB884, SB463, SB331, SB227, SB240, SB517, SB1200, SB1410, SB1626, SB1845, SB1863, SB2216, SB2681, SB1717, SB2053, SB546, SB2141, SB2949, SB2323, SB2200, SB2332, SB2199, SB1642, SB1150, SB1757, SB2050, SB1138, SB2051, SB2626, SB2458, SB1864, SB30, SB2201, SB1862, SB1583, SB1583, SB1055, SB2660, SB1898, SB2662, SB2662, SB2161, SB2161, SB2964, SB2881, SB1065, SB1065, SB801, SB2743, SB2533, SB2533, SB1413, SB1413, SB1, SB34, SB310, SB819, SB1030, SB1124, SB1208, SB1233, SB1333, SB1405, SB1541, SB1750, SB1758, SB1869, SB2078, SB2365, SB2411, SB762, SB33, SB37, SB505, SR402, SR409, SB2695, SB2695
Keywords:
constitutional amendment, veto override, legislature power, governor, Texas Constitution, Texas, moving image industry, incentive program, film production, grant funding, job creation, economic development, wildfire, wildfire mitigation, wildfire prevention, volunteer fire department, Texas A&M Forest Service, West Texas A&M University, prescribed burning, fuel loading
ND
North Dakota 2025-2026 Regular Session
SB 2133 Conference Committee Apr 3rd, 2025 at 05:30 pm
Transcript Highlights:
- Yeah, so members of the committee, the House, we just amended from the fee, the initial fee of $15.
- Yeah, so members of the committee, the house we just amended from the fee, the initial fee of $15, we
- It's $60 and a $25 fee. It's an initial fee, $35 in Iowa and a $10 fee.
- The fee that's in the bill now.
- But our question is, how would the fee—would the fee...
Summary:
The conference committee on Senate Bill 2133 met to discuss the blackout license plate bill after House amendments changed the fee structure. The House explained it had removed the initial $15 fee and reduced the additional fee from $25 to $10, saying that better matched the cost of producing the plates. Senators and representatives debated whether the fee should remain at $25 annually, be set at $15, or keep the House’s lower amount, with members citing production and shipping costs, comparisons to other specialty plates, and how the bill should align with existing plate fees and personalization charges.
The committee also discussed an amendment to allow blackout versions of collector, antique, and pioneer plates. DOT staff said the proposal would affect separate code sections for antique and collector plates and raised questions about printing, costs, and whether owners would need to turn in existing plates or pay duplicate-type fees. Some members supported making the blackout option available consistently across plate types, while others objected to the bill entirely, saying black plates reduce the state’s identity and are unnecessary.
No final agreement was reached on the fee or the collector/antique plate amendment. The committee decided more drafting and cost review were needed and planned to reschedule another meeting. The meeting adjourned without taking a final vote on the conference committee changes.
CA
Transcript Highlights:
- The registration fee, not a true licensure fee, would go to $10,000, which would... ...fee, not a true
- with the fees themselves.
- I think with respect to the fee analyses we've done, we have for all of the outlined fees in terms of
- Is there an additional workload analysis that is kind of fee by fee?
- But there's a minimum fee.
Summary:
The joint Sunset Review Oversight Hearing focused on the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education (BPPE) and its reauthorization, operations, enforcement, fiscal condition, and student protections. Committee leaders and DCA officials praised the Bureau’s recent improvements in data systems, licensing, inspections, and enforcement, while noting the Bureau’s role has become more important as federal higher education oversight weakens. Bureau Chief Deborah Cochran said the agency has met its inspection mandate for the first time since the law was enacted, increased citations and disciplinary actions, reduced pending complaints, and used data tools to identify risk and monitor institutions more effectively.
A major portion of the hearing centered on student harm, especially school closures, transcript access, predatory recruiting, and the Student Tuition Recovery Fund (STRF). Members asked how the Bureau protects students when schools close, whether bad actors can reopen under new entities, and whether enforcement tools are strong enough. Cochran said the Bureau can cite, fine, place schools on probation, revoke licenses, and order refunds, but it is seeking new authority to deny approval to operators who previously closed schools improperly or failed to refund students. She also said the Bureau is tracking ownership data and is concerned about institutions targeting immigrant and visa students. On STRF, Cochran explained that the fund is currently healthy, assessments are at zero because the balance is above the statutory target, and the Bureau paid about 1,100 claims totaling roughly $17 million over the last four years. Several members questioned the fairness of the assessment structure and discussed alternatives such as surety bonds, but the Bureau said STRF is working well and no change is needed at this time.
Fee increases and the Bureau’s structural deficit were another major topic. Cochran said the Bureau reduced costs by eliminating positions, streamlining inspections, improving data analysis, and shifting some student-relief costs to STRF, but that legislative action is still needed to address the deficit. She said the proposed fees were based on workload analyses and that application fees generally match service costs, while annual fees are designed to cover most of the Bureau’s revenue needs. Some members and stakeholders criticized the proposed increases as too high, especially for out-of-state registration and campus fees, while others argued the Bureau needs sufficient resources to regulate effectively. Public commenters from private schools, Northeastern University, San Joaquin Valley College/Carrington College, and TICAS generally supported the Bureau’s mission and reauthorization, but urged changes such as risk-based oversight, better transcript protections, stronger limits on repeated provisional approvals, and more targeted fee and STRF reforms. No votes were taken, and the hearing ended with no formal action beyond discussion and receipt of testimony.
MN
Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session
Electronic driver's licenses 3/9/26
Minnesota House Floor Meeting
Transcript Highlights:
- And so that per transaction fee.
- setting and establishes that executive branch or state agency can't institute a fee or increase a fee
- ><00:41:58.240>
without <00:41:58.600>approval fee or increase a fee without approval fee - <00:42:14.160>
Um department to set a fee for this. Um department to set a fee for this. - provided in the bill for setting a fee provided in the bill for setting a fee in<00:42:25.960>
Summary:
The committee took up House File 1335, a bill to authorize Minnesota digital/mobile driver’s licenses and related electronic credentialing. Chair Tapkey moved the bill as amended to Ways and Means, and the committee adopted the A2 author’s amendment changing the effective date. Tapkey described the bill as a modernization measure modeled on other states, intended to add convenience and security for ID checks at bars, restaurants, airports, hotels, and car rentals, while keeping physical IDs in place. Chair Kosnick objected that the bill’s subject matter should be heard in other committees, especially Commerce, Public Safety, and Judiciary, citing privacy and law-enforcement concerns, but the hearing continued.
Several testifiers supported the broader move toward digital credentials and e-titling. Brian McDaniel of the Minnesota Licensed Beverage Association said the hospitality industry supports tools that make it harder for minors to access alcohol, while noting privacy concerns and wanting a role in developing the system. Amanda Doerr of the Minnesota Automobile Dealers Association supported the A3 amendment as an incremental step toward electronic titles and electronic signatures, saying Minnesota is behind other states and that the transition should be gradual. Jim Hurst of the Minnesota Deputy Registrars Association said deputies support moving toward e-titling but raised concerns about liability for fraudulent electronic documents and strongly opposed the A4 revenue-sharing amendment, warning it could put deputy registrars out of business. Sam Krieger, representing private deputy registrars, said the A4 amendment could exclude private deputies and close about half the offices in the state.
Chair Tapkey said the A3 and A4 amendments were intended to improve customer service, digital access, and future title transfers, but after hearing objections, both amendments were withdrawn. The committee then considered the A5 amendment offered by Rep. Anderson, which would bar electronic driver’s licenses for people not lawfully present in the United States. Anderson argued it would prevent issuing credentials to people in the country illegally, including suspected terrorists. Opponents, including Rep. Kegel and Rep. Lucero Nicolai, argued it would create unequal treatment and could wrongly affect refugees or asylum seekers. DVS Director Pong Xiong testified that current applications do not include NCIC checks and that standard credentials are validated through document review rather than broader database screening. The transcript ends amid continued debate over the A5 amendment and related privacy and eligibility questions.
NH
New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session
House Finance Division II (03/17/2025)
Transcript Highlights:
- fee.
- These are habitat fees, an additional fee on top of a license.
- <00:24:33.720>
so a fee of some kind or great fees so a fee of some kind or great fees so - power to waive a fee.
- power to waive a fee.
Summary:
The Finance Division II work session focused on Fish and Game’s budget-revenue proposals and several statutory changes the department said it needs to support its operations. The department recommended raising the fisheries habitat fee and wildlife habitat fee to $5 each, estimating additional annual revenue of about $640,000 and $144,000 respectively. Members clarified that these are habitat fees added on top of licenses, not reduced by senior or youth license categories, and discussed the need for RSA changes to allow the revenue to be transferred into the Fish and Game Fund. The department also said it would work internally on any broader license fee increases through the commission process.
The committee then reviewed proposals to cap several dedicated accounts and transfer excess balances to the unrestricted Fish and Game Fund. Those accounts included the fisheries and wildlife habitat funds and the game management account, with the department proposing a $750,000 cap on each and transfer of amounts above that threshold. The department said the cap was based on several years of expenditures and the fact that dedicated funds are often used as match for federal funds. Members asked for reports on fund activity and questioned whether the cap and mandatory transfer language should be “shall” or “may,” with the department indicating it would prefer “may” for flexibility. The committee also discussed a Pheasant Management Program account, where the department said current law limits use of the money to buying and propagating pheasants and it wants authority to use it for broader program management.
A substantial portion of the meeting addressed Fish and Game’s environmental review unit and the transfer of ARPA-funded positions to DEES under the governor’s initiative. The department said four positions are currently ARPA-funded, that DEES supports keeping them in place through the end of the year, and that the transition will require time because environmental review work is intertwined across the agency. The department explained that before the ARPA positions, biologists handled the work and that current staffing has helped eliminate a backlog and meet deadlines. Members also discussed a proposal to expand environmental review fees beyond private developers to state, federal, municipal, and local governments, with the department saying it would need rulemaking and stakeholder input. Additional requests included authority to conduct raffles to raise funds, creation of a revolving account for donations and raffle proceeds, and repeal of the obsolete fish food sales statute because the vending machines are no longer functional and the account generates no revenue.
MA
Massachusetts 2025-2026 Regular Session
Future of Payments and Sales Transactions by Credit Card and the Impacts for Small Businesses Jun 21st, 2026 at 11:00 am
Transcript Highlights:
- , including interchange fees, even when those fees are set by or in consultation with a third party,
- be set in a competitive environment, whether that be annual account fees, ATM fees, et cetera, and that
- and the network processing fee.
- and the network processing fee.
- to change fee?
Summary:
The Special Commission on the future of payments and sales transactions by credit card heard extensive testimony from credit union, banking, retail, restaurant, and payments-industry representatives about proposals to limit interchange fees, especially on the tax and tip portions of transactions. Several witnesses opposed state-level restrictions, arguing they would create a patchwork of rules, burden state-chartered institutions, raise compliance complexity, and ultimately reduce resources for fraud prevention, cybersecurity, rewards, and access to credit. Others, including retail and merchant advocates, said swipe fees are a significant and growing cost for small businesses and that states should consider reforms such as limiting fees on taxes and tips, allowing surcharging, improving transparency in merchant contracts, and studying collection costs more closely.
Witnesses also discussed recent legal and regulatory developments, including Illinois’s interchange-fee law, OCC and NCUA interim rules, and the ongoing Visa/Mastercard antitrust settlement. Industry representatives said the Illinois law has been delayed and is likely preempted for most transactions, while merchant advocates argued the state efforts and court rulings show that networks and banks do not set fees competitively. The proposed antitrust settlement was described by some as a meaningful but limited merchant victory, with temporary fee reductions and expanded surcharge/steering rights, while others said it still falls short of structural reform.
The commission members pressed witnesses on the practical effects of fees, the cost of cash, whether merchants can pass costs through, and whether small businesses are actually seeing benefits from the current system. Members repeatedly emphasized the need for a fair middle ground that protects both small businesses and the payment system. No substantive votes or policy actions were taken beyond accepting testimony, and the meeting ended with adjournment after all scheduled witnesses had spoken.