Transcript Highlights:

• There's a list on page 17 of many increased fees.
• The fee increase increases for escrow and CRMLA are based on the recommendations from the fee study conducted
• costs, the increases in fees aim to cover program costs going forward.
• Last year I think this came up because they had done, the fees had been... proposed to increase, and
• as a result, it wasn't during a budget proposal, but there was discussion about a fee increase.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• That $605 million in wage increases for our system represents an increase of 38%.
• With fees held constant for many years, these activities have faced rising costs with no means to increase
• It could be done in a way to keep the total tuition fees the same, as I mentioned, if one fee were increased
• It has been 13 years since out-of-state fees have been increased, and there are a number of states that
• It has been 13 years since out-of-state fees have been increased, and there are a number of states that

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Higher Education met to examine how Florida’s state universities are funded and to begin discussing a possible university funding model. The panel included the State University System chancellor and CFOs from FSU, UF, FAMU, FAU, UNF, and UCF. Members first reviewed major cost drivers, which the universities said are broadly similar across institutions: wages and benefits, equipment and supplies, financial aid, professional services, utilities, IT, and maintenance. Several institutions noted unique pressures from geography, growth, research intensity, and mission, such as UCF’s size and engineering focus, UF’s land-grant and research enterprise, FAMU’s need to recruit top talent while serving a high-Pell student population, and FSU’s large facilities and research obligations. The chancellor also summarized systemwide cost growth since 2012-13, including higher health insurance, retirement, and salary costs, while noting tuition had been held flat. The committee then discussed other revenue sources, including auxiliaries, restricted funds, capital projects, and component units such as foundations and health systems. University leaders explained that many of these funds are restricted to specific purposes, and some, like UF Health, account for a large share of operating expenses. Members also discussed the current performance-based funding process. University representatives generally praised it for transparency, accountability, and its focus on student success, but said the heavy use of one-time funds, nonrecurring appropriations, and unfunded mandates makes long-term planning difficult. FSU and others argued that rising employee costs, waivers, and facilities expenses are not fully covered, while FAMU said performance funding has improved outcomes but can disadvantage institutions serving more low-income students. In response to questions about improvements, the universities suggested more recurring and predictable funding, better coverage of mandated costs, more flexibility in fees, and continued investment in research and strategic priorities. The chancellor said the Board of Governors is considering a version 3.0 of performance funding that would benchmark institutions against peers and Carnegie classifications. The committee also explored whether universities should have more flexibility to set out-of-state tuition and professional school tuition. Most university leaders favored giving boards of trustees more authority, while the chancellor cautioned that increasing out-of-state enrollment or tuition too much could affect legislative support. No votes were taken; the meeting ended with the chair thanking the panel and adjourning the committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• It looks like the electric fee is $110 and the hybrid fee is $60.
• So we’ve got a $4.50 fee that has not been increased since, I think, 2005. OMV.
• It just stops us from having to go up on fees statewide for increases in a particular area.
• costs have increased.
• So we increase this fee.

Bills: HB214, HB217, HB514, HB593, HB618, HB732, HB908, HB961, HB1010

Keywords: property tax, blighted properties, urban rehabilitation, tax exemption, local government, financial incentives, blighted property, derelict property, property tax exemption, local redevelopment plans, rehabilitation standards, ad valorem tax, community development, senior citizens, homestead exemption, Louisiana Constitution, motor vehicles, local fees, transaction fees, funding

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, the subsurface fee increases—well, the rest of these fee increases, largely except for subsurface
• So, some of these fee increases I'm I'm So, some of these fee increases I'm I'm assuming<01:12:10.800
• We brought forward increases in fees.
• We brought forward increases in fees.
• We brought forward increases in fees.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• raise fees.
• And we gave authority to allow increases on fees up to a certain percent to the university.
• fees.
• That was the reason why fees started increasing—the state was for ways to get around the lack of funding
• If this is going to increase hearings, If this is going to increase hearings, it increases the cost to

Keywords: 974, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The fees will pay for the program.
• And so that's a substantial increase in what dispensing fees would be traditionally paid in a private
• into their PBM fee.
• up their dispensing fee to nine.
• It just increases their funding.

Summary: The Senate Finance Committee met with eight members present and deferred HB 127. It then considered a series of bills, most of which were reported favorably without opposition. HB 22 revised COLA rules for the clerks of court retirement system, allowing more frequent COLAs when the system is better funded; HB 324 made judicial stipends permanent and added future COLAs subject to available funding; HB 233 increased jury mileage reimbursement; HB 47 reorganized assessor retirement COLA statutes; HB 533 allowed St. Tammany Parish to transfer unused witness-fee account balances to the 22nd Judicial District Court; HB 980 adjusted eligibility for the Firemen’s Supplemental Pay Board; HCR 45 urged Congress to clarify ARPA deadlines for water projects; HB 559 increased court costs in the 4th Judicial District; HB 290 recreated the Department of Treasury and related entities in statute; and HB 382 addressed Joint Legislative Committee on the Budget review authority over Group Benefits plans. The committee also reported HB 1157 favorably, creating a financing bank mechanism for infrastructure projects, and HB 575 favorably, giving youth aging out of foster care preferred access to surplus state vehicles through the Louisiana Property Assistance Agency. Several measures drew more discussion. HB 1236, dealing with pharmacy benefit managers and professional dispensing fees, prompted extensive testimony from the sponsor, the Legislative Fiscal Office, the Department of Insurance, independent pharmacies, and PBM representatives. Supporters said it clarifies and strengthens enforcement of existing PBM law and protects independent pharmacies; opponents argued the bill’s requirement that PBMs bear dispensing-fee costs would be difficult to implement and could raise premiums. The sponsor said he would work on amendments, including clarifying language and a delayed effective date, and the bill was nevertheless moved favorably. SB 25, on registrar of voters compensation, was amended to a revised pay structure and then reported favorably. HB 47 and HB 533 were also presented as funding and administrative cleanups for retirement and court-related accounts, with local support noted. The committee also heard HB 233 on jury duty mileage reimbursement, which the sponsor said updates a 1961 rate and would be funded locally at an estimated average increase of about $4,000 per judicial district. HB 324 on judicial salaries was described as self-funded by the judiciary and subject to available funding, with no budget impact. HB 575 on foster youth transportation was presented as a non-appropriation measure aimed at helping youth aging out of foster care by giving them preferred access to surplus vehicles. HB 382, which concerns the Joint Legislative Committee on the Budget’s role in approving Group Benefits plans, was reported favorably with little discussion. The meeting ended after a motion to adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• On the one hand, we definitely want to avoid increasing fees as much as possible.
• It's been almost 20 years since application fees were increased, and nearly a decade since annual fees
• Some schools have expressed concerns about increasing the maximum campus fee in particular.
• So, if someone were saying, no, don't touch that; instead, increase these other fees, increase these
• So we had significant fee increases just shy of 10 years ago.

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.

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill is written to increase that fee to $60 a year.
• The existing $25 fee would be increased not to $60 but to $85.
• /c><00:16:25.199> to<00:16:25.360> make increasing fees, we really try to make increasing
• The majority of the fees that are increased in this proposal have not been increased or touched since
• fee increases and operating pay these fee increases and operating increases.<01:00:32.960> And

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• fees.
• And we gave authority to a lot... ...and we gave authority to allow increases on fees up to a certain
• And we gave authority to allow increases on fees up to a certain percent to the university.
• fees.
• That was the reason why fees started increasing.

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:

• Those fees range from $1 in the fisheries to $250 for the wildlife habitat fee.
• Those fees range from $1 in the fisheries to $250 for the wildlife habitat fee.
• Those fees range from $1 in the fisheries to $250 for the wildlife habitat fee.
• I don't pay any fee; just the boat owner pays the fee, whatever the set fee is. That's correct.
• c><01:05:47.240> problem increased do we increase the problem increased do we increase the problem

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This increased funding will support salary and benefit increases for L.A.
• increases for L.A.
• Our goal is to increase the overlap of network providers that also accept fee-for-service to the greatest
• They will have their rate increases maintained since the 2024 rate increases.
• So we have not estimated any increase to managed care or fee-for-service related to a change in the dental

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Health held a May Revision hearing covering several health-related budget proposals and broader concerns about the state’s budget structure. The Chair opened by praising some May Revision changes, such as added health IT funding, county administration support tied to Medi-Cal changes, a delay in Medi-Cal cuts for some lawfully present immigrants, and additional support for Covered California subsidies, while criticizing proposed increases in Medi-Cal premiums, changes to senior eligibility, the lack of a Medi-Cal dental solution, and other reductions affecting counties, mobile crisis units, workforce incentives, and physician shortages. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the state’s budget condition remains weak despite progress on the structural deficit, and the Department of Finance said the May Revision uses a mix of reductions, reforms, revenue proposals, and fund shifts to cut out-year deficits. The committee first heard Department of State Hospitals proposals, including adjustments to county bed billing authority, contract exemption language for online clinical/pharmacy subscriptions, reversion of unspent funds, a revised Metro Central Utility Plant replacement project, electronic health record implementation, and workforce development funded partly through Behavioral Health Services Act resources. DSH also described savings and realignments in incompetent-to-stand-trial and conditional release programs, including extending the independent placement panel program and shifting funds to support additional bed capacity and a mental health rehab center. Members asked about the use of BHSA funds for workforce programs, and the department said the proposal would replace General Fund support with BHSA reimbursements. The Emergency Medical Services Authority proposed funding for statewide behavioral health crisis response guidance and for enterprise system development, and the Department of Managed Health Care proposed modernization of its complaint system and claims-settlement data system to improve oversight and comply with AB 3275. The largest discussion centered on the administration’s BHSA spending plan under Proposition 1, including state-directed prevention, workforce, and other uses, plus General Fund offsets for existing programs. The LAO questioned whether some proposed offsets fit Proposition 1’s non-supplant and eligible-use requirements, while the administration argued the uses were consistent with the measure and that the state-directed share can be adjusted annually. The Commission for Behavioral Health’s proposals drew the most public and member concern. The administration proposed cutting the commission’s Innovation Partnership Fund from $20 million to $10 million and reducing the Community Advocacy Program by $6.7 million, while redirecting BHSA dollars to other state purposes and direct services. Commissioners, advocates, and several members argued the cuts would weaken community voice, reduce support for underserved populations, and disrupt grants already in process; they also objected to using BHSA funds to backfill General Fund commitments. Public commenters, including youth, disability, behavioral health, LGBTQ, tribal, veteran, immigrant, and community-based organization representatives, overwhelmingly opposed the cuts and urged preservation of prevention, advocacy, mobile crisis, and innovation funding. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• /c> either new or increased fees uh we have either new or increased fees uh we have a<00:28:36.080>
• increases so we we've talked about fees increases so we we've talked about fees but<00:52:51.160
• c> to that fee would be increased to that fee would be increased to $50<01:05:46.319> um<01
• fee increases to offset gave us around fee increases to offset General<03:09:50.160> funds<03
• They wanted to do a 10% fee increase, and this is currently a 50% fee increase.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee heard a presentation from the Department of Environmental Services on proposed changes in House Bill 2 and related technical changes in House Bill 1 tied to the governor’s permitting realignment initiative. The proposal would move environmental review staff from Fish and Game and DNCR to DES to create a more centralized “one-stop shop” for applicants needing DES permits, especially for wildlife and natural heritage reviews. DES said the goal is to speed permitting, support a 60-day review clock, and improve coordination among agencies while keeping the substantive review work in place. Members asked about staffing impacts, the scope of the transferred duties, and whether the change would create redundancy or weaken the other agencies. DES said most of the affected staff work primarily on these reviews, though Fish and Game staff also handle other state and federal reviews, which is why the proposal was adjusted to keep one of the four Fish and Game positions there and move three to DES, along with two positions from DNCR. DES also described a new supervisory position in HB 2 to manage the transferred staff within its land resources bureau. Officials said the reviews would still be done by specialists, but under DES supervision, and that the agencies would continue to coordinate recommendations on species impacts and mitigation. The committee also discussed fee increases intended to offset costs, including a 50% increase in wetlands fees and a 100% increase in alteration-of-terrain fees, with the department saying the changes would cover the new positions. Members raised concerns about impacts on private homeowners, possible incentives to work without permits, and whether fines should be used more as a revenue source or for mitigation. DES said wetlands permits are roughly split between homeowner-related and commercial projects, that permit-by-notification already creates a two-tier structure for smaller projects, and that enforcement relies partly on public complaints and online permitting systems. The department also said most fines currently go to the general fund and vary widely year to year, with about $75,000 budgeted, and that the proposal would also create permit-by-notification authority for alteration-of-terrain projects between 100,000 and 150,000 square feet, mirroring language in Senate Bill 110. No vote or final committee action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Primary funding sources: insurance fees, or insurer fees.
• Increasing access to reproductive care, $4 to $8 million increased premiums.
• As such, the fees...
• after fee.
• Increasing the number of complex claims will also increase local government...

Keywords: 981, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Part of that was the tab fees in that, and we've been hearing across the state very loudly that tab fees
• Part of that was the tab fees in that, and we've been hearing across the state very loudly that tab fees
• Part of that was the tab fees in that, and we've been hearing across the state very loudly that tab fees
• Part of that was the tab fees in that, and we've been hearing across the state very loudly that tab fees
• reduce those increased costs if we can. reduce those increased costs if we can.

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: Legislators and reporters discussed the final contours of a Minnesota bonding and tax package centered on a $1.2 billion capital investment bill. Supporters said the bill would fund state and local infrastructure projects, maintain state assets, and include anti-fraud measures such as electronic verification for service providers and a 100% excess tax on fraud proceeds to prevent offenders from profiting. They also said the package would backfill road-and-bridge funding so the fee reduction would not reduce transportation dollars. A major point of emphasis was a temporary reduction in tab fees, described as a $254 million savings for taxpayers in 2027. Republicans said the reduction was a top priority and that it was secured through negotiations, though they acknowledged it is only a one-year reprieve unless changed in a future session. They estimated the average savings at about $145 on a $50,000 vehicle, with larger savings for households with multiple vehicles. They also noted that the first proposal had included both a depreciation change and a rate change, but only the rate cut remained in the final compromise. In response to questions, lawmakers said the tab fee cut was driven by constituent complaints and that they would try to extend it next year. They also discussed related transportation issues, including accelerating collection of an auto parts sales tax and concerns about greenhouse gas-related costs for roads and bridges. On other topics, one lawmaker said gun control proposals in the House were not part of these negotiations and urged continued movement on the broader package. No formal vote was taken in the exchange, but participants expressed confidence that the bonding portion of the deal was largely settled, while some details of the full package still needed to be finalized.

Transcript Highlights:

• and the road fee and the transit fee, for must waive the sewer impact fees and the road fee and the
• It's an option for the city to waive or reduce fees to potentially increase the scoring for that project
• 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
• Both programs are funded through application fees and then reservation fees.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

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.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's not the direction we want to be going. property tax increases. property tax increases.
• you're paying that same fee. you're paying that same fee.
• license tab fees, and gas tax. license tab fees, and gas tax.
• Would adding tax increases be a negotiation point for you guys? Did you say adding tax increases?
• to reduce the property taxes increases to reduce the property taxes increases here?

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: Minnesota Senate Republicans held a press conference unveiling a package of affordability and tax-relief bills aimed at property taxes, taxes on tips and overtime, and vehicle registration costs. Leader Mark Johnson said the proposals were meant to counter rising costs for wages, homeownership, and driving, and argued that Democrats’ policies had made life more expensive. Several senators echoed that theme, saying Minnesotans need immediate relief and that the state has room to act because of a reported surplus. Senator Michael Kunesh described a property-tax cap bill that would limit increases for cities and counties to inflation plus 50% of population growth, with higher increases requiring voter approval. He said constituents, including seniors, a disabled veteran, and young people, are seeing unsustainable property-tax hikes, and he argued that state and federal mandates have driven local costs. In response to a question about added county workload from federal SNAP and Medicaid changes, he said the solution is both to pause new mandates and to cap property-tax growth. Senator Karin Housley outlined a proposal to end state taxes on tips and overtime, with deductions up to $25,000 for tips and $12,500 for overtime, phased out at $150,000 for individuals and $300,000 for families. She said the measure would help workers keep more of what they earn and would not cost small businesses directly. Senator John Jasinski proposed rolling back vehicle registration tab fees to pre-2023 levels, saying Minnesota’s fees are far higher than neighboring states and that the change would save drivers money over time. Senator Julia Coleman also supported the package, saying the bills would provide practical relief for families facing high housing, driving, and work-related costs. No votes were taken; the event ended with questions from reporters about fiscal impacts, offsets, and whether the proposals would worsen the state’s structural budget imbalance.

Transcript Highlights:

• Dickey County was an increase of 14.2%. Divide County was an increase of 18.5%.
• I know over the last few bienniums, there's been a couple of bills to increase the fees for the driver's
• There's been a couple of bills to increase the fees for the driver's license division, and both of those
• fees on this list.
• One is for data processing fees. The other is for telecommunication fees.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I saw the fee increases were about 70 million, a little over 200 million in the 11% provider tax increase
• I saw the fee increases in the bill?
• Tax and tax increase is in this bill? Tax and fees. fees. fees.
• <01:42:05.760> fees, other fund um tax increases and fees, other fund um tax increases and
• So, I look tax and fee increases are.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• time or increasing the fees, yet rent when it comes time for an eviction.
• costs due to variable or increasing fees.
• When they sign the rental agreement, you can never increase the electricity fees are going up.
• We all know utility fees are going up. You're saying there's no increase allowed?
• We all know utility fees are going up. You're saying there's no increase allowed?

Summary: The committee heard several bills, beginning with AB 1521, the Judiciary Committee’s civil law omnibus measure. The bill makes a number of minor, mostly clarifying changes, including repealing obsolete Government Code provisions, allowing juvenile courts to hear petitions to establish records of birth, death, or marriage, requiring notice of probate petitions to the Department of Child Support Services, and correcting typos in existing law. It had no opposition and was moved on a do-pass basis to Appropriations, though it was later placed on call pending additional votes. Members then heard AB 57, which would reserve at least 10% of California’s Home Purchase Assistance Program funds for descendants of formerly enslaved people. The author and supporters framed it as a reparative, race-neutral-by-lineage effort to address historic housing discrimination and the racial wealth gap, while opponents argued it was an unconstitutional racial proxy and should instead be based on individual injury. The bill drew strong support and opposition testimony, was amended, and was approved on a do-pass as amended vote to Appropriations, then placed on call. AB 495, the Family Preparedness Plan Act, was heard next. The bill would expand and standardize caregiving and guardianship tools for families facing immigration-related separation, including broader use of caregiver authorization affidavits, recognition of non-relative extended family caregivers, and a new short-term guardianship process that preserves parental rights. Supporters said it would reduce trauma and help children remain with trusted caregivers; there was no opposition testimony. The committee approved it on a do-pass to Human Services vote and placed it on call. The committee also heard AB 392, which would address non-consensual sharing of sexually explicit media by requiring uploader consent certifications, faster takedown procedures, and civil remedies against uploaders and hosting sites. A survivor testified in support, and members discussed implementation details and possible amendments; the bill was moved on a do-pass as amended basis to Appropriations and placed on call. AB 692, which would prohibit employer “stay-or-pay” debt agreements that require workers to repay training or other costs if they leave or are terminated, also advanced despite opposition from business and industry groups concerned about impacts on signing bonuses and voluntary training programs. It was sent to Appropriations on a do-pass as amended vote and placed on call, along with AB 1234, a wage-claim enforcement bill aimed at reducing Labor Commissioner delays and adding consequences for employers who fail to participate in the process. The committee also heard AB 394, which expands protections for transit workers and allows transit agencies to seek restraining orders against violent riders; it received broad support, some concern about system-wide bans, and was discussed with amendments that preserved judicial discretion.

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill provides that the Parkways Authority may only make a proposed increase in tolls, rents, fees
• The bill also provides that tolls, rents, fees, charges, or increases, and all other revenue, as well
• The way it's written, as I understand it, you know, currently there are automatic fee increases, and
• this would require that before any fee increase there be public hearings.
• This would require that before any fee increase there be public hearings.

Keywords: 994, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Infrastructure Committee took up several bills involving the West Virginia Parkways Authority and work-zone safety. On House Bill 4563, which would allow E-ZPass single-fee transponders to be used with multiple vehicles, members debated amendments that would have limited or codified restrictions on transferring transponders between vehicles. Testimony from Parkways Authority CFO Samuel indicated the current agreement already ties a transponder to one vehicle but allows users to update vehicle information online, and that the authority is considering a sticker-based system in the future. Delegate Daniel Linville also testified in support of the bill’s broader intent, arguing the revenue risk was limited and that the authority’s existing practices and bond obligations would not be harmed. The committee rejected the Wetzel amendment and then voted to report House Bill 4563 to the full Senate. The committee then considered House Bill 4419, which would require public hearings and notice before the Parkways Authority could raise tolls, rents, fees, or charges, and would subject related revenues and sinking funds to audit. Counsel noted possible constitutional and fiscal concerns, and Senator Randolph moved to send the bill to the Finance Committee for further review. That motion passed, and the committee then reported the bill to the Senate with a recommendation that it do pass, but first be referred to Finance. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 4538, which increases fines and penalties for speeding and other violations in highway construction work zones and adds penalties tied to distracted driving provisions. Jason Pizzatella of the Contractors Association testified in support, saying the bill was a safety measure in response to recent work-zone fatalities. Senators from Fayette, the 13th district, and Randolph also spoke in favor, emphasizing worker safety and the dangers of speeding through active construction areas. The committee reported the bill to the full Senate with a recommendation that it do pass, and the meeting adjourned.