Video & Transcript Research : 'filing fee'
Page 43 of 500
WY
Transcript Highlights:
- We support Senate File 18.
- We are voting on Senate File 18.
- Senate file 18 has passed. >> Thank you. Senate file 18 has passed.
- >> Senate<00:11:03.360>
file >> Senate file >> Senate file >> 36 >& - tuition and fees and expenses early on. tuition and fees and expenses early on.
MA
Massachusetts 2025-2026 Regular Session
Joint Committee on the Judiciary Jun 21st, 2026 at 01:00 pm
Joint Committee on the Judiciary
Transcript Highlights:
- These fees are long overdue. These fees are long overdue.
- You haven't updated your fees.'
- What that fee goes where?
- We have to incur legal fees, tens of thousands of dollars of legal fees, to defend against these.
- And what we've seen here is they're trying to circumvent the filing fees that they have to pay with the
Summary:
The Joint Committee on the Judiciary held a hearing on bills in the Civil Actions 2 and Court Administration areas, with testimony spanning judicial security, judicial compensation, civil process fees, bar advocate compensation, interstate discovery, defamation protections for sexual assault survivors, and related criminal procedure changes. Chairs Edwards and Day opened with housekeeping rules on testimony limits and written submissions, then called witnesses on each bill in turn.
On H. 1766, judicial officers and the Massachusetts Bar Association strongly supported a judicial security bill that would protect judges’ personal information, citing threats, online harassment, swatting, and violence against judges and their families. On H. 1819, judges and the Massachusetts Judges Conference asked for higher compensation, saying Massachusetts judges rank low nationally after cost-of-living adjustment and that pay affects recruitment and retention. The committee also heard support for H. 1582/S. 1183 to raise civil process service fees, with sheriffs saying the fees have been unchanged since 2003 and are needed to cover rising costs, safety equipment, and operations funded by those fees.
The committee heard from prosecutors on H. 1604 and H. 1846, which would give district courts concurrent jurisdiction over certain school-threat and leaving-the-scene offenses, allowing prosecutors to handle less serious or panic-driven cases more efficiently while preserving mandatory penalties. CPCS and bar advocates supported H. 1876 on bar advocate compensation, describing a continuing shortage and crisis in indigent defense despite recent pay increases and staffing investments. The Boston Bar Association supported H. 1857, a Massachusetts version of the Interstate Depositions and Discovery Act, saying it would simplify out-of-state discovery and reduce cost and delay.
A large portion of the hearing focused on H. 1974/S. 1143, which would protect survivors of sexual assault and harassment from retaliatory defamation suits unless the plaintiff proves actual malice, and would allow fee shifting and damages against abusive suits. Survivors, advocates, and attorneys described threats, legal costs, and chilling effects that silence reporting, while supporters said the bill would protect truthful speech and improve access to counsel. The committee also heard insurance-industry testimony on S. 1101, which would change personal injury protection payment rules to require insurers to tender disputed amounts within 30 days to avoid attorney’s fees; insurers said the bill would curb a growing volume of provider lawsuits and reduce abuse of the no-fault system. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the chair closed after all scheduled testimony was complete.
MN
Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session
Committee on Commerce and Consumer Protection - 03/18/25
Commerce and Consumer Protection
Transcript Highlights:
- We're proposing only to increase transfer fees and exempt reporting adviser fees.
- transfer fees and exempt reporting<00:04:16.280>
adviser <00:04:16.680>fees <00:04:17.040 - >
we're <00:04:17.199>not reporting adviser fees we're not reporting adviser fees we're - 04:19.320>
we'll increasing all licensing fees we'll increasing all licensing fees we'll charge - Senate File 1730 will be laid over. We move on to Senate File 1731. Senator Dibble, thank you, Mr.
MN
Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session
Committee on Commerce and Consumer Protection - 03/27/26
Commerce and Consumer Protection
Transcript Highlights:
- Senate File 4168 does not increase fees that can be charged.
- So, Senate File 4168 will retain the 5% limit on finance lender fees and the limit of prepayment penalties
- So, Senate File 4168 will retain the 5% limit on finance lender fees and the limit of prepayment penalties
- the fee cap. the fee cap.
- . fees. fees.
MN
MN
Minnesota 2025 1st Special Session
Committee on Health and Human Services - 03/19/25
Health and Human Services
Transcript Highlights:
- Our first bill on the agenda is Senate File 2128. Senate File 2128.
- Senate File 2128 is laid over. And next, Senator Seabberger, you have Senate File 1688.
- a uh funding mechanism through a fee a uh funding mechanism through a fee onto<00:09:35.760>
- <00:15:14.240>
per but the 80 cents, the 80 cent fee per but the 80 cents, the 80 cent fee - Um it's not some telecom fees.
MN
Transcript Highlights:
- Pay fee here, pay fee there.
- on fee after fee, and like we're adding on fee after fee, and uh,<01:40:48.120>
you <01:40:48.200 - It's fees or taxes, taxes or fees. So you never know. Okay.
- It's fees or taxes, taxes or fees. So you never know. Okay.
- So >> it's fees or taxes, taxes or fees.
MN
Transcript Highlights:
- Miss Barton: The fees do include things like the filing fees, the classroom fees, the fees for the exam
- /c><01:14:03.760>
2 <01:14:04.000>point collect a filing fee and that is 2 point collect - a filing fee and that is 2 point roughly<01:14:04.640>
2.2 <01:14:05.199>million <01:14 - which they cannot collect a filing which they cannot collect a filing fee.<01:31:27.760>
This - cannot collect a filing fee.
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Assembly Higher Education Committee Jun 24th, 2025
Transcript Highlights:
- Is the fee going to be basically get rid of one fee and then charge the same fee for the new entity?
- Is the fee going to be basically get rid of one fee and then charge the same fee for the new entity?
- or an oversight fee, it's really a registration fee only.
- File Item No. 9, SB 790.
- Fees make sense when one receives a service that primarily benefits the fee payer.
Summary:
The committee heard several higher education bills. It first approved the consent calendar, which included SB 67 and SB 619. The main discussion centered on SB 437, which would direct the CSU system to develop a fair, evidence-based process for verifying whether someone is a descendant of a person enslaved in the United States, as part of the state’s reparations work. Supporters said the bill fills a gap left by the Reparations Task Force and would create a transparent, credible lineage-verification process; opponents argued genealogy methods already exist, the bill would waste money and delay action, and some raised constitutional concerns. The committee took a vote on SB 437, but the roll was left open after the initial tally showed three ayes and three noes.
The committee then heard SB 790, which would allow California to join the interstate reciprocity agreement for online postsecondary education. The author and supporters said the bill would improve consumer protections for California students taking out-of-state online courses and help California institutions compete more effectively by reducing the burden of seeking separate state approvals. Opponents, including University of Phoenix and other groups, argued the bill conflicted with the existing reciprocity framework, could exclude some institutions, and might not actually secure California’s entry into the agreement. The committee voted 3-1 to pass SB 790 as amended to the Business and Professions Committee, with the roll left open.
The committee also heard SB 391, which would authorize the Community College Chancellor’s Office to charge fees for research partners seeking access to data. Supporters said the office is absorbing significant unfunded workload from data requests and that fees would help recover costs; opponents, including the California Teachers Association community college association, warned the fees could create barriers for faculty and smaller researchers. Members discussed possible exemptions and implementation details. The committee voted 5-1 to pass SB 391 as amended to the Appropriations Committee, with the roll left open. Finally, the committee heard SB 685, a pilot program to provide cost-of-attendance assistance at four CSU campuses for students who experienced homelessness in high school. Supporters said it would help students cover housing, food, and transportation costs and reduce dropout risk; members asked about eligibility and implementation, and the author explained the bill would use McKinney-Vento homelessness designations and target students at risk of “summer melt” and college homelessness.
MN
Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session
Committee on Agriculture, Veterans, Broadband and Rural Development - 04/04/25
Agriculture, Veterans, Broadband, and Rural Development
MA
Massachusetts 2025-2026 Regular Session
Joint Committee on Housing Jun 21st, 2026 at 11:00 am
Joint Committee on Housing
Transcript Highlights:
- fees.
- fees.
- , holding fees, payment portal fees, and internet and cable fees—fees that were likely undisclosed at
- can lead to attorney fees and eviction filings.
- It eliminates the following fees: holder fees, lease renewal fees, amenity fees, renter's liability insurance
Summary:
The Joint Committee on Housing held a hybrid hearing on a broad slate of landlord-tenant and home rule bills, with most testimony focused on rent stabilization, tenant opportunity to purchase (TOPA), tenant fees, access to counsel, algorithmic rent fixing, and tenant protections in subsidized housing. Chairs Cyr and Haggerty outlined the hearing procedures and noted that written testimony could also be submitted. Several members and invited speakers emphasized that the committee was hearing from both local officials and residents affected by housing instability, especially in Somerville and other communities facing high rents and displacement.
Supporters of rent stabilization and local-option rent control argued that Massachusetts needs tools to prevent displacement while new housing is built. Senator Eldridge, Senator Jalen, Somerville officials, tenant organizers, and residents described steep rent increases, no-fault evictions, and the loss of naturally occurring affordable housing. Somerville’s home rule petition was described as allowing annual increases tied to CPI plus 2%, capped at 5%, with exemptions for owner-occupied two- and three-family homes and a 15-year exemption for new construction. TOPA supporters said it would let tenants or their designees buy buildings before speculative buyers, preserving affordable housing stock; opponents, including small landlords and property managers, argued rent control would reduce supply, discourage investment, and that TOPA could delay sales and harm properties.
The committee also heard testimony on bills to curb junk fees and regulate tenant charges, including limits on late fees, lease renewal fees, payment portal fees, attorney’s fees, and other add-on charges. Advocates said these fees can add hundreds of dollars a month and disproportionately harm low-income renters and renters of color. Another major topic was algorithmic rent fixing: Senator Moore and Representative Sabadoza said landlords should not use software such as RealPage to coordinate pricing, citing federal antitrust actions and arguing that competition is essential to lowering rents. Additional testimony supported a statewide right to counsel in eviction cases, with legal services providers saying representation dramatically improves outcomes and can save the state money, and a bill to create an office of tenant protections to better enforce sanitary code violations. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing.
MN
Transcript Highlights:
- Senate file 2809 from Senator Kunesh. Senate file 2809 from Senator Kunesh.
- examination fees are.
- examination fees are.
- examination fee is in addition to the licensing fee.
- fee is in addition to the licensing fee. fee is in addition to the licensing fee.
NH
New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session
House Finance Division I (02/19/2025)
Transcript Highlights:
- Our filing fees could never be self-funded.
- The filing fees were based on how many owners. Then it went to a $40 fee in 1992.
- <04:24:33.319>
are The fee is $250—the filing fee is $250. - For equipment, I'm hoping to get a lockbox for the filing of in-person fees for filing a case.
- fees for filing a case my in-person uh fees for filing a case my fees<05:24:55.558>
are <05:24
Summary:
The committee first reviewed House Bill 1, focusing on the legislative branch budget, especially the Senate and House lines. Members discussed that the Senate’s fiscal year 2025 adjusted authorized amount was higher than 2024 actual spending, largely due to personnel, benefits, and travel, and one member proposed a $500,000 annual cut. Staff explained that any reduction would need to be allocated across specific line items such as personnel, benefits, and travel, and noted that the Senate budget is entirely General Funds. After discussion of how the adjusted authorized figures were calculated and why the branch no longer staffs some joint committees as it once did, the committee moved on without taking a vote on that section.
The committee then heard a detailed presentation from the New Hampshire Retirement System. NHRS officials described their statutory administrative budget, which is funded through the retirement trust rather than the General Fund, and said the FY 2026-2027 increase is driven by IT modernization, cybersecurity, a new strategic plan, and additional staff positions. They also reviewed the system’s funding progress, clean audit opinions, investment performance, and changes to asset allocation, while noting that several recent pension-related laws required major database changes. Members questioned the large increase in salaries and benefits, the need for new employees versus contractors, the purpose of training costs, and the source of the Group Two benefit funding. NHRS said the governor’s budget includes General Funds for Group Two benefit changes, with $5 million in FY 2026 and $27.9 million in FY 2027, and that the figures reflect the governor’s recommendation and related HB 2 provisions.
Committee members also asked about employer and employee contribution rates for Group Two police and fire members, which NHRS said were not included in the budget document but were about 31.2% for police and 30.35% for fire, with employee shares around 11.55% and 11.8%. The committee did not make a decision on the NHRS budget during this exchange and indicated it would review the details further before returning to it later.
The committee then heard from the Community Development Finance Authority on the State Treasury Department budget line for the required state match to administer the federal Community Development Block Grant program. CDFA explained that its $280,000 annual request for FY 2026 and FY 2027, totaling $560,000, supports administration, technical assistance, contracting, and monitoring of roughly $19 million in annual federal CDBG funds. Members asked about the leverage of the state match, oversight of projects, staffing, and grant prioritization. CDFA said it has 18 employees, uses public hearings and a scoring system to prioritize awards, and conducts both desk and on-site monitoring, with annual audits to ensure compliance. No vote was taken on the CDFA item in the portion provided.
MN
Transcript Highlights:
- Senate File 966.
- We also want to support the idea in Senate File 2092 of the per kilowatt hour fee.
- We also want to support the idea in Senate File 2092 of the per kilowatt hour fee.
- We also want to support the idea in Senate File 2092 of the per kilowatt hour fee.
- So, first, does Senate File 2092 deal with the existing registration fee for electric vehicles at all
MN
Transcript Highlights:
- Senate File 1480's proposal to adopt a distance-based user fee is a step in the right direction toward
- Senate File 1480's proposal to adopt a distance-based user fee is a step in the right direction toward
- included in Senate File 2092. included in Senate File 2092.
- Collecting fees at registration fee.
- in addition to the $175 per year EV fee and $75 hybrid fee.
MN
Minnesota 2025 1st Special Session
Senate Floor Session - Part 2 - 05/18/25
Minnesota Senate Floor Meeting
Transcript Highlights:
- Now, filing fees.
- increases civil filings and motion fees. increases civil filings and motion fees.
- Now,<00:48:50.400>
filing <00:48:50.880>fees. - If you want the Now, filing fees.
- uh you have to pay a filing uh you have to pay a filing fee.<00:48:58.160>
Not <00:48:58.400
VT
Transcript Highlights:
- Section 858, fees. This section changes the existing statutory fee structure.
- Section 858, fees. This section changes the existing statutory fee structure.
- Section 858, fees. This section changes the existing statutory fee structure.
- Section 858, fees. This section changes the existing statutory fee structure.
- Fees will be annual. The CCB may prorate fees over a longer period of time.
Summary:
The House took up Senate Bill 323, suspending the rules to consider it immediately. The bill was described as a broad agricultural measure with committee amendments and fiscal implications, and it was reported favorably by the Agriculture, Food Resiliency, and Forestry Committee, Ways and Means, and Appropriations. Members outlined sections dealing with milk market corrections, farm-to-school language, repeal of the obsolete pest control compact, pesticide applicator licensing changes, seed law updates, the Vermont Agricultural Credit Program, hemp regulation, and CAFO-related provisions. The Agriculture committee reported the bill out 7-0-1, and the effective date was described as July 1, 2026, except for the hemp provisions, which would take effect upon passage.
Much of the discussion focused on the hemp sections. Supporters said the bill updates Vermont law to reflect federal changes and shifts hemp oversight from the Agency of Agriculture to the Cannabis Control Board. The hemp provisions would create registration and licensing requirements for hemp producers, processors, and certain hemp products; set fees; authorize testing, inspections, stop-sale orders, and administrative penalties; and allow rulemaking on product standards, labeling, insurance, additives, and age restrictions. Speakers said the changes were intended to help Vermont’s hemp industry maintain access to banking, insurance, and interstate commerce while improving consumer safety and regulatory clarity.
Other agricultural provisions were also explained in detail. The bill would clarify milk producer hearing rights, update farm-to-school grant/contract language, remove outdated pest-control compact language, and adjust pesticide applicator exam and fee rules, including removing the limit on retakes and eliminating certain government applicator fees. It would also modernize seed labeling and definitions, transfer the Vermont Agricultural Credit Program into a new statutory structure under VEDA, and make conforming cross-reference changes in tax and cannabis fund statutes. The final sections would add a CAFO permit working group and require consultant training for state agencies on CAFO inspections, with those provisions contingent on future funding. Ways and Means noted the bill’s fee changes could affect state revenues, including an estimated hemp-related impact of roughly $10,000 to $90,000, though the exact effect was uncertain.
MN
Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session
Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety - Part 1 - 04/17/26
Judiciary and Public Safety
Transcript Highlights:
- . fees. fees.
- our concerns with Senate File 4739. our concerns with Senate File 4739.
- Senate File 4667 is sent to Finance. Excellent. Senate File 4667 is sent to Finance.
- Senate File 325. Senate File 325.
- File 325. File 325. Thank<02:26:16.840>
you <02:26:16.880>Mr.
MN
Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session
House Human Services Finance and Policy Committee 4/8/25
Human Services Finance and Policy
Transcript Highlights:
- Next, House File 2434. I will move that House File 2434 be laid over for possible inclusion.
- Nor renews his motion that House File Nor renews his motion that House File 295<00:02:08.479>
- The motion is approved and House File The motion is approved and House File 295<00:02:16.640>
- into the Medicaid program through fees. into the Medicaid program through fees.
- House File 2434 as amended be laid over. House File 2434 as amended be laid over.
MN
Transcript Highlights:
- The next bill on consideration is Senate File 5. Senate File 5.
- witness um seeing none um Senate file witness um seeing none um Senate file five<00:13:10.160>
- uh filers file on a monthly quarterly or uh filers file on a monthly quarterly or annual<00:19:33.799
- Senate file Senate file 1082<00:20:25.840>
the <00:20:26.000>scor <00:20:26.480>- > file 8 Senate file 837 is a senate file file 8 Senate file 837 is a senate file that<00:59:24.200><