Transcript Highlights:

• charge a non-recording fee for insurance.
• But it is capped at the actual filing fee. So it's not an increase in cost to the borrower.
• So they could uh fee for insurance.
• for that, but paying the uh filing fee for that, but it<00:04:44.960> is<00:04:45.120> capped
• it is capped at the actual filing fee. it is capped at the actual filing fee.

Keywords: Finance - Room 216, 3 March, 2026; 10:30 AM, 925, all

Summary: The committee first considered a committee substitute that would allow on-premises retail or permit holders to let patrons bring wine onto licensed premises for consumption with a meal, if a corkage fee is charged, while continuing to prohibit outside alcoholic beverages other than wine. The substitute also changed wine shipment reporting from quarterly to semiannual for total wine sold and shipped into or within the state, and included a reverse repealer. The motion to report the bill out as amended passed. House Bill 671 was then explained as clarifying when a package retailer’s responsibility ends in alcohol deliveries: the retailer’s duty is satisfied once it transfers possession to a delivery service permit holder or delivery driver, with additional language allocating responsibility between the permit holder, driver, and delivery entity. The committee also heard House Bill 750, which extends the repealer date for a SMART Act tax credit for companies partnering with research institutions to 2029, and House Bill 1219, which allows a fee for non-recording of insurance in lieu of the usual filing process, capped at the actual filing fee so borrowers are not charged more. House Bill 1385, requested by the Department of Revenue, was described as cleanup language reflecting that most applications are electronic and reducing references from quadruple to triplicate; the committee adopted an amendment deleting the words “applications for” on lines 442-443 after a question from Senator Simmons. House Bill 1620 created the Bayou Casad industrial zone in Jackson County and barred annexation of land within that industrial zone. House Bill 1633 expanded site development grants to include energy sources such as electricity and gas serving an industrial site, and the committee adopted a cleanup amendment changing a statutory reference to Chapter 503, Laws of 2025. Finally, House Bill 1761, the Native Winery bill, was taken up with a strike-all amendment replacing the House bill with Senate Bill 2915. The sponsor explained that the House version only extended repealer dates to 2029, while the Senate version also eliminated some repealers and allowed native wineries to have tasting rooms in certain economic projects. The strike-all amendment and the bill as amended were adopted, and the committee then voted to rise and report.

Transcript Highlights:

• And this, would the director have a cap on it, or is it just the one cent?
• Your specific question is about the fee on sports betting.
• It's already a fee in statute, so that fee, the increasing of that existing fee in statute on sports
• It also reduces the cap on the provider assessment.
• those cap rate increases again, and we've had huge increases.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The committee met to review the governor’s fiscal 2027 budget presentation, with the chair repeatedly asking members to keep questions brief and avoid speeches. The discussion focused first on the overall revenue and spending outlook, including concerns from members that the executive forecast was more optimistic than the JLBC baseline and that the budget appeared to front-load revenue and expenditure growth. The governor’s budget team said the forecast was close to JLBC’s, that the budget was structurally balanced, and that differences were roughly $100 million per year on ongoing revenue. Members asked for follow-up calculations in writing, including the total multi-year gap and the amount of revenue enhancements above base revenues. A major portion of the meeting centered on tax and fee proposals tied to data centers, water use, and sports betting. The governor’s team defended eliminating the existing data center tax incentive as the removal of a loophole rather than a new tax, arguing the incentive had already succeeded in attracting major investment. They also described a proposed Department of Water Resources fee-setting authority for data centers to support a new Colorado River Protection Fund, and said the proposal would apply to existing and future facilities without a grandfather clause. Members raised concerns about fairness, competitiveness, and whether the changes would require a supermajority vote. The team also discussed increased sports betting fees, saying the revenue forecast did not include dynamic behavioral effects. The committee then moved through major spending areas, including corrections, public safety, border security, cybersecurity, K-12 education, Medicaid, and developmental disabilities. The governor’s budget includes ongoing funding to prevent correctional officer pay cuts, money to comply with prison health care court orders, probation funding, body-worn cameras, law enforcement staffing, fentanyl task forces, and cyber readiness grants. Members questioned the lack of funding for a prison oversight committee and asked for corrections spending totals over the administration. On border security, the executive said it was seeking about $759.7 million in federal reimbursement for border-related costs and that the governor had met with federal officials, including Secretary Noem and Tom Homan, about the request. In education, the budget proposes renewing Prop. 123, adding K-12 base funding, and issuing $1.5 billion in school facilities bonds over three years; members debated whether the proposal was appropriate and whether Prop. 123 revenues could support the debt service. The meeting also covered AHCCCS cost growth and federal HR1 impacts, with the executive warning of major coverage losses and hospital funding reductions, and DDD funding, where the governor’s team said the budget fully funds services and includes about $120 million in supplemental needs. No votes were taken; the meeting was a presentation and question-and-answer session only.

Transcript Highlights:

• So that's about $44 million over the cap.
• So that's about $44 million over the cap.
• But they did achieve the cap.
• But they did achieve the cap.
• However, it wasn't because of the 3% cap.

Summary: The Budget Section met to approve prior minutes and receive a series of budget, revenue, and program updates from OMB, the Tax Department, DOT, DMR, and DPI. OMB reported that general fund revenues through May were about $76 million below the legislative forecast, driven mainly by individual income tax and sales tax shortfalls, though the biennium is still projected to end with a positive balance. OMB also reviewed oil price and production assumptions, the budget stabilization fund transfer above its cap, Legacy Fund performance, federal grant applications, fiscal irregularities, tobacco settlement proceeds, budget guidelines for agencies, vacancy savings, and the DAPL settlement, noting that most of the settlement funds had been deposited but a small amount of accrued interest would require a future deficiency request. The committee then considered Emergency Commission requests. It approved requests for Public Service Commission abandoned mine lands federal authority, an Attorney General FTE and related funding for criminal investigator work tied to the Office of Guardianship and Conservatorship, and a DPI transfer for bridge software costs. After discussion, the committee also approved DPI’s request for a $500,000 transfer for the food vendor program, despite questions about the program’s savings and cash-flow structure. Later, the Tax Commissioner presented the primary residence credit program, reporting that current biennium costs are expected to exceed the appropriation by about $22 million and explaining how the credit interacts with homestead and disabled veteran credits and the 3% property tax levy cap. The Legacy and Budget Stabilization Fund Advisory Board reported strong returns for both funds, and DOT sought and received approval for two flexible fund highway projects on ND 49 and ND 31. DOT also updated members on Highway 85 construction and said remaining flex fund dollars were essentially fully allocated. DMR reported on the abandoned well plugging and site reclamation fund, noting North Dakota’s relatively small orphan well inventory, current and projected fund balances, rising remediation costs, and a possible need to adjust the fund cap in future sessions. Finally, DPI outlined the new integrated formula gap funding program, explaining that it compensates school districts that cannot reach the assumed 60-mill local contribution because of the 3% levy cap; the first year’s gap funding totaled about $1.8 million, with future costs expected to grow.

Transcript Highlights:

• AB 2236 Chen, digital financial asset fees, hold in committee.
• AB 1031, Jeff Gonzales, fee cap for geothermal waste, holding committee.
• and allow DFW to annually adjust the cap for inflation that's out on an a-roll call.
• Strike the higher cap on reimbursement, that's out on an A roll call.
• AB 556, Patterson, CalVet campus based fee waiver, holding committee.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Most people can't afford the fees.
• We have so many fees.
• We're going to raise fees.
• fees.
• But also this and mandatory fees.

Summary: The Senate Education Committee met to hear several education-related measures. It reported favorably, without objection, on House Bill 1215, which would transfer certain removed historical statues and monuments to the Office of State Parks, prohibit re-erection in the parish where they were removed, and require interpretive signage. The committee also advanced House Bill 682, which creates a school guardian program for honorably discharged veterans employed or contracted by local school systems or charter schools; testimony emphasized that guardians would be unarmed, trained, and used for mentoring and school safety. House Bill 1079, giving enrollment preferences in charter schools to children in early childhood programs, military families, foster children, and children in custody disputes, was also reported favorably, as was House Concurrent Resolution 81, directing the Department of Education to study options for districts facing declining enrollment. The committee then took up House Bill 1084, which would allow public postsecondary institutions to raise tuition and mandatory fees by up to 15 percent annually, with higher increases requiring Board of Supervisors approval. The bill drew extended debate over affordability, TOPS, student retention, and whether universities should have more autonomy to set prices. Members raised concerns about fee burdens on families and whether the state should first study the issue; supporters argued the bill would increase transparency and let institutions respond to funding needs and market conditions. Senator Mazzell offered an amendment lowering the cap from 15 percent to 10 percent, and the committee adopted the amendment before reporting the bill favorably as amended. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 342, which would shift the burden of proof in special education due process hearings from parents to local education agencies. The author and parents testified that the current system places an unfair burden on families of children with disabilities, who often lack access to records and legal resources, and that schools already control the documentation and should have to show compliance with IEP obligations. Jefferson Parish school officials opposed the bill, arguing it would increase legal costs, require more staff and attorney time, and potentially lead to more hearings; they also questioned the fiscal note. The Legislative Fiscal Office said the fiscal impact was indeterminable, and the committee continued hearing testimony from parents and school representatives as the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's not a fee assessed by the department.
• it's an individually chosen stock, and that's capped at 50 percent.
• That's all taken care of by the professional dispensing fee.
• It doesn't cap the copay.
• to the Louisiana Medicaid dispensing fee.

Bills: HB591, HB765, HB826, HB870, HB938, HB1151, HB1162, HB1176, HB1196, HB1236, HB1241

Keywords: family leave, insurance, paid leave, employment benefits, caregiver support, liability insurance, coverage defenses, direct action, judgment enforcement, legal procedures, insurance referrals, compensation, non-licensed agents, consumer protection, insurance products, HB 870, Act 907, Louisiana insurance, health insurance, prescription drugs

Transcript Highlights:

• Multi-fee payers fee schedule. Thank you.
• That's a small mailer fee program, and this proposal has no impact on those existing fees. fees.
• Again, it's the application and site readiness review fees, which are one-time fees, and then a fee associated
• I'm concerned about the 1% fee that DHCS is recommending for the annual maintenance and operation fees
• So the 1% is truly a cap, and we would be setting a fee that would only cover our operating costs, again

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Section 164B, this is a cap. This is the cap on the state and local tax deduction. So, um.
• To the SALT cap, but they didn't end up enacting that.
• You would have to double those fees, right?
• We have a $172 registration fee, while Louisiana's is $504.
• Vehicle registration fees were going to hit UNI.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, last year the legislature imposed a temporary cap on the tuition and recognized tuition and fees
• Um so this revises that cap and sets it at either the lesser of the average tuition and fees charged
• the legislature imposed a temporary cap the legislature imposed a temporary cap on<00:03:03.040>
• equal to the average tuition and fees equal to the average tuition and fees charged<00:03:23.440
• as the cap.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up House File 4252 and first heard a walkthrough of a DE2 amendment that largely incorporated Office of Higher Education technical and statutory cleanup items, including reporting consolidations, updates to postsecondary registration and licensing statutes, and an anti-fraud provision. New provisions in the DE2 would require public postsecondary institutions to explain developmental courses before enrollment and obtain a written acknowledgement, revise the state grant tuition cap, add a $1.5 million ongoing appropriation in FY 2027 for an identity verification system to combat enrollment fraud, and provide $5,000 one-time funding for reforestation at Bemidji State University. Fiscal staff also noted additional special revenue fund revenue and expenditures tied to licensing and registration litigation response. The main debate centered on the A8 amendment offered by Representative Rarick, which would require the governor to appoint University of Minnesota regents only from candidates recommended by the joint legislative committee if the legislature fails to elect regents. Rarick argued the amendment was needed to address what he described as conflicts of interest and pay-to-play concerns in recent gubernatorial appointments. Several members questioned whether the language was constitutional, whether it actually addressed conflicts of interest, and whether it should instead refer to ARCAC-screened or ARCAC-recommended candidates. Nonpartisan staff said the governor’s appointment power is addressed in the university charter, not directly in the constitution, but could not definitively assess constitutionality if challenged. Members were divided: some supported the goal of cleaner governance but said the amendment was not ready or did not match the problem being described; others argued the legislature had failed to complete its own regent appointments and that the amendment was a response to that failure. No vote on the A8 amendment or the bill was reached in the portion provided, though a roll call was requested on the amendment and the chair indicated the bill would continue through amendment consideration before final discussion and vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• administrative and marketing purposes. that's when the fee is paid. that's when the fee is paid.
• York cap-and-invest program.
• a New York cap and invest was joining a New York cap and invest<02:30:22.280> program.
• they pay a 3 and 1/2 cent handling fee they pay a 3 and 1/2 cent handling fee for<03:20:35.560><
• handling fee The container handling fee has<03:21:02.920> remained<03:21:03.240> constant<

Keywords: 926, house, all

Summary: The House first suspended the rules briefly to make announcements, including welcoming former representative Doug Gage to the gallery. It then returned to House Bill 211 on data brokers and personal information, where the Appropriations Committee explained a $50,000 appropriation to the Secretary of State for a consultant-led study on an accessible deletion mechanism for consumers to delete personal data held by data brokers, with interim and final reports due in 2027 and 2028. The committee reported a 9-0-2 vote in favor, and the House agreed to the Commerce and Economic Development Committee’s amendment and ordered third reading. Floor debate on H. 211 focused heavily on the bill’s deletion and exemption framework. Supporters argued the bill is needed to give Vermonters meaningful control over their data and to prevent data brokers from commingling information for unrelated uses. Opponents warned the bill could conflict with existing federal frameworks such as the Fair Credit Reporting Act, Gramm-Leach-Bliley, and the Driver’s Privacy Protection Act, and could make credit, banking, insurance, fraud prevention, and identity verification harder. In response, the sponsor said the bill uses use-case-based exemptions rather than broad entity-level exemptions, noted testimony from banks, insurers, a data broker, a former data broker employee, and the Attorney General, and said no constitutional concerns were raised. The House ultimately adopted the amendment and advanced the bill. After H. 211, the House moved to House Bill 577, establishing the Vermont Prescription Drug Discount Card Program. Committee reports from Health Care, Ways and Means, and Appropriations were read into the record, and the Colchester member described the bill as a way to lower prescription drug costs by joining the multi-state Array Rx program. The bill would let any Vermont resident obtain a free discount card for FDA-approved prescription drugs, with claimed savings up to 80% on generics and 20% on brand-name drugs. The House then proceeded to second reading on H. 577.

Transcript Highlights:

• or a connection fee.
• So you have to start the conversation about impact fees and what's a fair fee with the question of what
• There was a cap of 50% on accessory dwelling units. There was also a cap on co-living units.
• So there are a number of bills that were set out there, impact fee proportionality, there was a cap of
• There was also a cap on co-living units.

Summary: The Senate Housing Committee heard presentations on a range of housing finance, permitting, and affordability tools. Chattanooga described its affordable housing PILOT program, which uses a per-unit property tax abatement tied to the rent loss from providing affordable units, with a 15-year term and annual compliance monitoring. Committee members asked about the program’s structure, whether it had been used elsewhere, and who was participating; the presenter said the first mixed-income project would bring 278 units with 42 affordable units and that the model was attracting private market-rate developers. Shoreline then described its MFTE and inclusionary zoning approach, emphasizing that longer tax exemption periods and station-area zoning changes had helped spur development, with most current pipeline projects concentrated near light rail stations. The committee also heard from the Municipal Research Services Center and the Department of Commerce on tax increment financing, proportional impact fees, and permit timelines. Commerce explained that TIF can fund public improvements such as roads, utilities, broadband, and some affordable housing or child care facilities, while proportional impact fee guidance is intended to help jurisdictions charge fees more closely aligned with actual project impacts. On permit timelines, Commerce presented its first annual report under recent law changes, using 2024 as a baseline year and noting that reported timelines were generally longer than statutory goals; members asked about outliers, paper versus electronic processing, and whether back-and-forth between applicants and staff was driving delays. Commerce said it would follow up with more data, including on CHIP funding and permit reform practices. Several local governments then shared permitting process improvements. Auburn reported relatively short review cycles and described its move to fully electronic permitting, internal performance standards, and a stock plan program that speeds review for repeated home designs. Bellevue described an AI permitting pilot with a local startup to help with pre-application questions, document triage, and plan review, aiming to reduce incomplete applications and revision cycles. Seattle presented a pilot for accessory dwelling unit co-development in which a mission-driven partner would help homeowners split lots, finance, build, and manage ADUs, with the homeowner eventually buying out the partner and retaining ownership; committee members asked about rent setting, management fees, and default risk, and staff said they would follow up. The committee also heard brief overviews of community land trusts and limited equity cooperatives as permanent affordability models, with presenters urging continued state and local funding support and policy recognition for these approaches.

Transcript Highlights:

• bear with me a little bit um but the fee bear with me a little bit um but the fee that's<00:08:54.959
• or an interest rate um addition of a fee or an interest rate um fee<00:10:16.519> based<00:10
• interest rate is and making that a fee interest rate is and making that a fee instead<00:10:28.880
• Um, does that also—I'm assuming the loan origination fee is in addition, is separate from the fee or
• <00:27:06.559> and trying to get it through a a fee and trying to get it through a a fee and

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We're telling them you can't hide fees unless it's one of the state's fees that are being added to this
• But if we're going to say all fees can be disclosed, that's one thing, or no fees can be disclosed.
• Why not make it so that all of the fees are identified?
• Why make it so that the New York State taxes and fees or the fees associated with the CLCPA can't be
• We just didn't add that into the list of fees.

Keywords: 993, senate, all

Summary: The Agriculture Committee met for its first 2026 meeting and took up a full agenda of bills focused on food safety, agricultural programs, consumer transparency, and farm-related policy. Early measures included S.592 on a youth and agriculture entrepreneurship summer employment program, which was reported to finance without opposition, and S.1239E, the Food Safety and Technical Disclosure Act, which would require disclosure of certain food ingredients to the state and public and also ban three substances outright. Senator Kavanaugh described the bill as closing a loophole in federal food safety law; Senator Borrello opposed it as a state-by-state approach that could raise costs and disrupt the supply chain, while Senator O’Rourke supported it as a science-based measure with available substitutes. The bill was reported back to the board with one no vote and one without recommendation. The committee also advanced S.1783A on liquefied petroleum/propane fee disclosures, with supporters saying it would prevent consumers from being charged for improper or hidden fees and opponents arguing it should not single out state-related charges; the bill moved to the board. S.4041, creating a sanitary retail food store grant program, was reported to finance. S.4162, relating to the Fresh Connect program and local produce purchases, prompted discussion about whether state resources should instead be concentrated on the Double Up Food Bucks program; sponsors said both programs are needed and that Double Up has capacity limits, and the bill was moved to finance. Later, the committee advanced S.6286A, establishing an agricultural tax viability pilot program tied to agrivoltaics; supporters said it would address a need raised in recent hearings and work with farm groups, while Senator Borrello voted no. The final bill, S.7618 on food safety and quality date label requirements, drew debate over whether New York should act without a federal standard and whether the bill could create confusion or unintended costs, especially for dairy and other perishables. Supporters said the bill would reduce food waste and simplify the many existing date labels without forcing new labeling on those who do not already use it; members also discussed refrigeration references in the bill, and the sponsor said the language could be adjusted. The committee then adjourned and announced that future meetings will be held on the third floor in the new location.

Transcript Highlights:

• , with tuition and fees being capped at the maximum in state law.
• <00:36:59.920> being<00:37:00.160> capped fees with tuition and fees being capped fees
• And the one change that was recommended was to cap the four-year tuition and fee maximum for all
• What's even more concerning in this proposal is to lower tuition and fees cap for the state grant from
• <01:09:54.000> grant tuition and fees cap for the state grant tuition and fees cap for the

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• He took tens of thousands of dollars in upfront fees, millions of dollars in upfront fees is what it
• fund, our penalties, our attorney's fees, all of that, that's capped at $5 million.
• and we didn't want to exceed the cap without you knowing that.
• fund, our penalties, our attorney's fees, all of that, that's capped at $5 million.
• and we didn't want to exceed the cap without you knowing that.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee heard an update on the Consumer Protection Restitution Account, also called SPRA, from the Minnesota Attorney General’s office and AARP Minnesota. AARP described the fund as a first-of-its-kind consumer fraud restitution program that should encourage scam reporting, give the AG’s office more incentive to pursue cases, and provide financial recovery to victims, especially older adults. The AG’s office explained that the fund is financed by 50% of consumer enforcement recoveries up to $5 million per year, plus unclaimed or undistributable restitution, and said about $4.6 million had been deposited since July 1, 2025, largely from a Johnson & Johnson settlement. Jessica Whitney outlined how claims are processed: consumers file complaints, the office obtains a court order, then determines whether defendants have collectible assets before distributing funds in chronological order based on the date of the court order. She said the first major case is Woodbury Dental Arts, a defunct dental clinic whose patients filed more than 300 claims; the office estimates about 75% are likely valid, is reviewing them, and hopes to issue checks within a month. She also described upcoming cases involving High Road Builders and another home remodeling contractor, along with more than 100 individual fraud complaints, including nine claims totaling more than $5.2 million. Committee members raised concerns about delays, communication with constituents, and whether victims know if their cases are being processed. Whitney said the office is trying to improve outreach through press releases, community visits, senior centers, AARP, and Commerce senior outreach. She also flagged two possible legislative issues: restitution that cannot be distributed may not be subject to the $5 million cap, and the statute’s prohibition on pro rata payments may need reconsideration because available funds appear insufficient to pay all claims in full. The office said it would provide a fuller report in October and continue processing claims this fiscal year.

Transcript Highlights:

• Technology fee fees such as an activity and
• >service fee.
• Technology fee concessions, cetera.
• We have a service fee.
• And fees.