Transcript Highlights:

• fee.
• I would lower the registration fee fee.
• fee and remit it directly to the state. fee and remit it directly to the state.
• It has caps on it.
• It has caps believe is extremely robust. It has caps on<01:09:27.440> it.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I think this year we need to think about whether we raise the per parcel fee.
• It actually has to count toward that revenue cap.
• It actually has to count towards that revenue cap.
• I just wanted to ask for clarification on that cap. Is that CPI or 5%?
• But it does not actually change the wording of the CPI or 5% cap. Okay.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• or they can choose a an accredited attorney who's going to charge fees and then what those fees are
• are capped at 33%, 33% by law.
• Because there's something called the Equal Access to Justice Act, which is a federal fee fee-shifting
• cap.
• If you don't get a favorable win at the court, you don't get your hourly fee.

Transcript Highlights:

• I just had a question in regards to the licensing fee.
• There may be additional county fees, but these are the fees that we charge our licensees to get a license
• And so that's why we arrive at gallon caps.
• Like, is there a cap?
• What I ask is, like, is there a cap on distribution licenses?

Summary: The committee met to hear an overview of Florida’s alcoholic beverage regulatory structure and a panel discussion on the state’s three-tier system. Emily Oglesby of DBPR explained the department’s licensing and enforcement roles, described common license types, and outlined the three tiers—manufacturers, distributors, and retailers—along with tied-house restrictions and several statutory exceptions for certified Florida farm wineries, breweries with tap rooms, brew pubs, and craft distilleries. Members asked about licensing fees, the number and classification of distributors and craft producers, and how the exceptions fit within the broader system. Panelists from craft breweries, craft distilleries, wholesalers, and retailers then discussed how the system affects market access, pricing, and product selection. Craft producers argued that Florida’s rules make it difficult for small brands to reach retailers because they must rely on distributors that often prioritize larger, higher-volume products; they said limited self-distribution or other reforms could help small businesses grow without eliminating wholesalers. Wholesalers and retailers defended the three-tier model as a public-safety and anti-monopoly framework, emphasizing investment in warehousing, sales, compliance, and product vetting, while noting that they already carry some craft products and make selections based on demand, quality, and shelf space. Members also explored related issues such as direct-to-consumer sales, the role of excise-tax audits and inspections, and the emerging market for hemp-derived THC beverages and other alternative drinks. DBPR and industry witnesses said alcohol and hemp products are regulated differently, and several speakers urged the Legislature to consider clearer rules for these products. The meeting ended with no bill vote or formal action; the chair thanked the panel and adjourned after Representative Yeager moved to rise, with no objection.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, you know, we often talk about the jet fuel fee and the cap and the million-dollar cap.
• fee and the cap talk about the jet fuel fee and the cap and<00:09:25.200> um<00:09:25.519>
• It's I and um the million-dollar cap.
• And um million dollar cap also now.
• > was the ownership ownership fee was the ownership ownership fee was established<00:49:53.440

Keywords: 00:01 Call to Order and Roll Call 00:47 Approval of Minutes 01:07 Airport Projects 12:17 Riverport Projects 38:27 Electric Vehicle Charging Program 54:10 Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The Budget Review Subcommittee on Transportation met on July 15, 2025, approved the June 4 minutes, and heard updates on aviation and riverport funding programs. Commissioner Mark Carter of the Kentucky Department of Aviation reported on the $200,000 grants for general aviation airports included in House Bill 1, saying the money is being used mainly for hangar projects, fuel trucks, parking lot resurfacing, airport equipment, crew cars, and public education efforts. He said about 25 hangar-related projects were reported, with an estimated 60 T-hangars and four or five box hangars supported, and noted that the grants are often used to match federal funds. He also said the state’s jet fuel tax revenue generates about $23 million annually, up from about $19 million in 2021, and that most airports are now compliant with the ADS-B/VOR-related reporting system required in budget language, which has improved reported operations and may help airports qualify for FAA grants. Members asked about the pace of airport projects, the limited number of contractors for hangar construction, and whether airports could finance hangars themselves. Carter said timing has generally been good, though federal projects have slowed somewhat and contractor capacity remains a challenge, and he said there is no statute preventing airports from financing part or all of a hangar project. Questions also focused on the long-term need for hangars and the effect of the jet fuel cap, with Carter saying general aviation airports still have significant hangar demand and rely on state assistance because hangars are a key revenue source. Jeremy Edgeworth of the Transportation Cabinet and Brian Wright of the Kentucky Association of Riverports then reviewed riverport projects funded through House Bill 265 and House Bill 1. Edgeworth said the cabinet’s riverport grant program awarded $500,000 in each of fiscal years 2025 and 2026 for 13 projects under an 80/20 match, and that House Bill 1 provided $7.5 million per year for public riverports with no local match. He described completed or underway projects at multiple ports, including equipment replacements, dock and road repairs, material handling upgrades, mooring cell rehabilitation, and a waterline loop at Owensboro. He said $12.6 million of the KPRCM funds had been awarded across 20 projects, with about $2.4 million still to be awarded later in the fall. Wright said the riverport investments are helping ports replace aging assets, expand capacity, and match federal dollars, but he also said the statewide capital need remains large, with the current list of top projects already in the $90 million range and longer-term needs still estimated at $60 million to $90 million. Members asked about timelines and future needs, and Edgeworth said many of the larger projects will take two to five years because of permitting and coordination with the Army Corps of Engineers. No additional votes or formal actions were taken beyond approving the minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• The attorney's fees, if you are the plaintiff, you can. Ask for attorney's fees.
• That's just 10% of last year's cap.
• On property caps, appraisal caps, and so.
• Even if there were to be a local appraisal cap put in place.
• We have different appraisal caps.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The only two services that will not be covered in fee-for-service because they're not currently federally
• But everything else is the same in fee-for-service as it is in managed care in terms of services and
• And finally, we look forward to continuing the conversations on the UIS transition for fee-for-service
• We support the fair share contribution program, as well as a permanent cap on corporate tax credits.
• Also for the adoption of the alternative fee-for-service UIS transition proposal.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee heard AB 109, the Budget Act of 2026, and related discussion of the legislative budget agreement. Committee staff and the Department of Finance described a two-year balanced plan with about $253 billion in General Fund spending, roughly $5.5 billion in higher assumed revenues than the May Revision, and about $36.5 billion in combined reserves. They said the package preserves or expands funding for schools and community colleges, child care, IHSS, Medi-Cal-related county administration, housing and homelessness programs, public hospitals, courthouse construction, and some criminal justice and prison-closure savings, while delaying or modifying several prior health care reductions and some Medi-Cal changes. Much of the member discussion focused on Medi-Cal, H.R. 1, and the impact on low-income and immigrant Californians. Several Democrats argued the budget protects vulnerable residents by delaying some cuts, funding county eligibility work, indigent care, public hospitals, and food banks, and rejecting the Governor’s IHSS cuts and asset-limit proposal. Republicans criticized the budget for assuming future revenues, relying on new taxes, and not doing enough to address the structural deficit or improve accountability. Members also raised concerns and support around homelessness funding, Prop. 36, judgeships and courthouse funding, transit and GGRF allocations, local journalism, Caltrans fleet spending, and a proposed “fair share” revenue measure that was not yet before the committee. Public testimony was largely supportive of the budget’s health and human services provisions, especially the rejection of IHSS cuts and the asset-limit proposal, and the inclusion of funding for child care, sickle cell centers, domestic violence services, trauma recovery centers, distressed hospitals, county eligibility work, and transit programs. Some witnesses representing hospitals and health plans cautioned about the effects of moving certain Medi-Cal populations to fee-for-service and about proposed tax changes affecting health care providers. The chair said revenue trailer bills were still being finalized and would likely come back later in the week; the committee then moved to public comment, with the chair limiting speakers to about one minute each.

Transcript Highlights:

• And let’s say your fee of—let’s say your fee on that was what? Five percent? What’s your fee on?”
• “Yeah, so the Rainy Day Fund actually has a cap.
• that there's a lot of interest in raising the cap at this time.
• Let's say we're near that cap now. We're near that cap. Is that correct?” “We will be.
• We're over the cap. What happens to the amount that's over the cap?”

Summary: The House convened with a quorum, offered an invocation, led the pledges, and approved a series of routine motions, including excusing absent members and granting permission for several committees to meet while the House was in session. Members also adopted several memorial and recognition resolutions, including H.R. 1023 honoring Christian Beerbill, H.R. 1033 recognizing International Bereaved Mother’s Day, and H.R. 877 recognizing Urban League Advocates Day. The House also recommitted SB 17 and HB 4211 to committee and postponed SCR 27 and HB 2145 for later consideration. The chamber then took up a long third-reading calendar of bills covering a wide range of topics, including Sunset review measures, health care workforce and pricing, child custody and family law, Medicaid, rural ambulance grants, energy reporting, public information requests, trail development, virtual meeting disruptions, occupational licensing, protective orders, county leave pools, animal cruelty, infrastructure, and higher education. Most bills were explained briefly by their authors and passed with broad support, though several drew notable opposition, including HB 5265, HB 2402, HB 3000, HB 3237, HB 3326, HB 1056, HB 281, HB 3308, HB 1043, HB 1234, HB 1193, HB 294, HB 809, HB 334, HB 2037, HB 285, HB 1353, HB 3960, HB 4044, HB 4264, HB 2807, HB 3349, HB 4406, HB 1593, HB 1899, HB 1201, and others. Several bills prompted extended debate or amendments. HB 3237, extending public energy-use reporting for state and higher-education buildings, passed after questions about its public-sector-only scope and energy savings. HB 3326, addressing public service loan forgiveness credit for adjunct professors, initially failed on a 69-70 vote but later passed after verification and machine corrections. HB 3211, concerning optometrists in managed care plans, adopted a Buckley amendment before passing. HB 2213 on Texas Windstorm Insurance Association board composition adopted a Metcalf amendment requiring certain board members to be Texas residents. HB 412, dealing with harmful materials and sexual performance of a child, generated extensive questioning about its scope, existing legal standards, and effects on educators and medical professionals; the excerpt ends during that debate.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then also we'll go over fees.
• spending can be reduced by 9% and fees spending can be reduced by 9% and fees can<00:07:55.840><
• fees.
• mathematical formulas to calculate fees. mathematical formulas to calculate fees.
• charging for fees? charging for fees?

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We've seen. fees, all of those things are important, but it doesn't always make it happen.
• Recording is a fee-for-service operation, meaning that they rely on fees that they charge to provide
• This is clear evidence that existing fees do not reflect actual costs.
• While the base recording fee is increased under this bill, several other fees are eliminated compared
• West Valley Water District frequently reached their compensation cap by the middle of the month.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um adjusting fees for certain decals.
• And I also think over the cap severance, just over the cap severance that we're not talking about the
• And I also think over the cap<01:11:01.280> severance cap severance cap severance uh<01:11:04.239
• blank here uh on the over the cap blank here uh on the over the cap on<01:15:36.640> the<
• Go raise fees for it or we what?

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• illegally solicited and do not enter formal contracts, they can be misled into paying outstanding legal fees
• Through this study, we can evaluate how establishing a telecom service fee or other funding mechanism
• amendments change the language with regards to the Secretary of State being able to charge a reasonable fee
• bill that expands access to cottage foods. in Texas by redefining cottage foods, increasing the income cap
• The House enhanced the $100,000 income cap to address... just for inflation using the consumer price

Bills: SJR60, SB203, SB317, SB397, SB511, SB524, SB731, SB781, SB801, SB867, SB1071, SB1232, SB1319, SB1444, SB1483, SB1633, SB1798, SB1944, SB1978, SB2082, SB2233, SB2363, SB2603, SB2607, SB2717, SB2797, SB2841, SB2919, SB2928, SB2969, SB3038, SB3063, HB102, HB107, HB130, HB132, HB148, HB647, HB668, HB677, HB694, HB748, HB754, HB923, HB1193, HB1240, HB1318, HB1397, HB1584, HB1639, HB1875, HB1893, HB1922, HB2071, HB2187, HB2254, HB2350, HB2510, HB2513, HB2516, HB2522, HB2559, HB2712, HB2713, HB2733, HB2775, HB2788, HB2789, HB2894, HB2960, HB3033, HB3126, HB3211, HB3370, HB3376, HB3751, HB3805, HB3810, HB4187, HB4219, HB4238, HB4273, HB4325, HB4344, HB4384, HB4506, HB4529, HB4643, HB4753, HB4783, HB4850, HB4885, HB5342, HB5424, HB5560, HCR90, HCR98, SJR5, SJR34, SB9, SB27, SB40, SB458, SB482, SB493, SB529, SB541, SB693, SB841, SB843, SB912, SB963, SB1173, SB1241, SB1350, SB1383, SB1388, SB1559, SB1646, SB1734, SB1789, SB1833, SB1883, SB1951, SB1968, SB2143, SB2544, SB1, SB17, SB260, SB509, SB1506, SB1637, SB1833, SB2308, HB2525, SJR36, SJR50, SJR63, SJR60, SCR12, SCR39, SB2023, SB511, SB62, SB666, SB847, SB284, SB854, SB810, SB1505, SB583, SB507, SB1434, SB1772, SB2016, SB1122, SB731, SB397, SB508, SB1436, SB287, SB1882, SB393, SB1791, SB209, SB2429, SB1085, SB1975, SB2717, SB1262, SB636, SB2056, SB884, SB1200, SB1845, SB2458, SB801, SB3014, SB3013, SB758, SB2797, SB2076, SB2876, SB1640, SB1449, SB1181, SB1234, SB2926, SB2841, SB1528, SB1854, SB317, SB1250, SB2082, SB1237, SB2819, SB629, SB2608, SB1602, SB2009, SB867, SB640, SB1698, SB2680, SB913, SB1071, SB1086, SB1087, SB1483, SB1444, SB1553, SB1556, SB1703, SB2133, SB2297, SB2298, SB2622, SB2955, SB2334, SB1367, SB2044, SB2363, SB2565, SB1888, SB3036, SB3057, SB3043, SB3063, SB3035, SB203, SB2688, SB2522, SB2459, SB2655, SB2251, SB1884, SB2928, SB2566, SB1749, SB2549, SB2553, SB2919, SB1944, SB1232, SB1798, SB2603, SB2607, SB2233, SB2683, SB1319, SB1978, SB3038, SB3045, SB1633, SB1538, SB719, SB3071, SB3065, HJR34, HB1393, HB26, HB3810, HB388, HB2712, HB1633, HB685, HB4753, HB762, HB2286, HB1606, HB132, HB1458, HB1240, HB2788, HB2791, HB3146, HB1893, HB4850, HB4187, HB1397, HB3751, HB2061, HB647, HB2522, HB4738, HB3033, HB2563, HB128, HB581, HB766, HB2259, HB2358, HB4384, HB748, HB793, HB1734, HB2340, HB2350, HB3104, HB5180, HB1584, HB4219, HB3806, HB3804, HB3803, HB1522, HB3597, HB1612, HB4224, HB1314, HB2254, HB4643, HB1237, HB3126, HB2856, HB3114, HB3505, HB4205, HB5652, HB3687, HB5424, HB4506, HB3370, HB2025, HB4273, HB3395, HB3376, HB2733, HB2495, HB4325, HB2071, HB2510, HB138, HB18, HB107, HB694, HB923, HB1639, HB1700, HB2187, HB3211, HB4529, HB4655, HB5342, HB2516, HB4783, HB1894, HB1965, HB102, HB300, HB1875, HB2513, HB2713, HB39, HB114, HB24, HB3088, HB4163, HB3479, HB2842, HB519, HB609, HB1275, HB1592, HB3348, HB120, HB6, HB247, HB1533, HB2421, HB2273, HB2464, HB2011, HB3575, HB3788, HB4370, HB4809, HB5057, HB5084, HB5534, HB5668, HB3424, HB2715, HB2564, HB2760, HB2765, HB2898, HB3260, HB3800, HB4396, HB5195, HB4341, HB43, HB5686, HCR90, HCR98, SJR60, SB1633, SB2233, HB102, HB107, HB132, HB694, HB923, HB1639, HB1875, HB1893, HB2071, HB2187, HB2510, HB2513, HB2522, HB2733, HB2788, HB3033, HB3211, HB3370, HB3376, HB3751, HB3810, HB4187, HB4219, HB4273, HB4325, HB4506, HB4529, HB4643, HB4753, HB4783, HB4850, HB5342, HB5424, SB511, SB1978, SR533, SR554, HCR90, HCR98, HCR144, SJR34, SB529, SB541, SB693, SB1173, SB1646, SB1734, SB1833, SB3074, HB1233, HB1285, HB1828, HB1876, HB2091, HB2301, HB2725, HB3063, HB3177, HB3483, HB4662, HB5606, HCR9, HCR10, HCR40, HCR76, HCR118, HCR127, HCR135, HCR141, SB3074, HB1233, HB1285, HB1828, HB1876, HB2091, HB2301, HB2725, HB3063, HB3177, HB3483, HB4662, HB5606, HCR9, HCR10, HCR40, HCR76, HCR118, HCR127, HCR135, HCR141

Keywords: SJR 60, Texas constitutional amendment, property tax exemption, ad valorem taxation, rainwater harvesting, graywater system, water conservation, water reuse, residential tax incentive, local government finance, county commissioners court, appraisal value, environmental incentive, November 2025 ballot, Article VIII, tax relief, student privacy, numerical class rank, education policy, academic programs

Transcript Highlights:

• All fees, percentages, commissions, and fees, percentages, commissions, and fees, percentages, commissions
• levied on the other taxes or fees levied on the other taxes or fees levied on the products.
• levied on the other taxes or fees levied on the other taxes or fees levied on the products.
• The director fees, or interest payments. The director fees, or interest payments.
• Four, whether penalties or fees will be whether penalties or fees will be whether penalties or fees will

Bills: HJR 1, HB 9, HB 21, HB 26, HB 30, HB 37, HB 116, HB 630, HB 879, HB 913, HB 1151, HB 1318, HB 1593, HB 1899, HB 2703, HB 2809, HB 2890, HB 2970, HB 3307, HB 3526, HB 5092, SB 128, SB 203, SB 317, SB 393, SB 397, SB 644, SB 731, SB 801, SB 913, SB 1071, SB 1073, SB 1086, SB 1087, SB 1232, SB 1250, SB 1262, SB 1285, SB 1310, SB 1359, SB 1444, SB 1483, SB 1705, SB 1782, SB 1861, SB 1897, SB 1944, SB 2023, SB 2043, SB 2082, SB 2133, SB 2215, SB 2297, SB 2298, SB 2309, SB 2532, SB 2549, SB 2566, SB 2617, SB 2619, SB 2639, SB 2688, SB 2696, SB 2717, SB 2790, SB 2841, SB 2847, SB 2850, SB 2857, SB 2891, SB 2919, SB 2928, SB 2972, SB 3052, SB 3053, SB 1, SB 260, SB 1506, SB 1637, HB 37, HB 109, HB 334, HB 1130, HB 1238, HB 1327, HB 1610, HB 1615, HB 1620, HB 1689, HB 2081, HB 2809, HB 2884, HB 2890, HB 4215, HB 5092, HCR 7, HCR 75, HCR 86, HCR 92, HCR 93, HCR 126, SB 644, SB 1086, SB 1230, SB 1310, SB 1361, SB 1553, SB 1778, SB 1790, SB 2344, SB 2460, SB 2515, SB 2600, SB 2747, SB 2751, SB 2785, SB 2790, SB 3047, SB 3048, SB 3050, SB 3051, SB 3052, SB 3053, SB 3056, SB 3058, SB 3061, HJR 1, HB 1130, HB 1689, HB 2884, HB 1393, HB 2559, HB 26, HB 3012, HB 1327, HB 109, HB 1238, HB 2890, HB 9, HB 4215, HB 2970, HB 37, HB 1899, HB 1593, HB 2607, HB 3526, HB 3810, HB 5092, HB 388, HB 2809, HB 1151, HB 913, HB 3307, HB 879, HB 116, HB 12, HB 2703, HB 1610, HB 1615, HB 1620, HB 30, HB 21, HB 2712, HB 2692, HB 1633, HB 1318, HB 685, HB 630, HB 4753, HB 2742, HB 303, HB 198, HB 1535, HB 762, HB 148, HB 1520, HB 5061, HB 2286, HB 1606, HB 1041, HB 132, HB 11, HCR 7, HCR 75, HCR 86, HCR 92, HCR 93, HCR 126, SJR 36, SJR 50, SJR 63, SCR 12, SCR 39, SB 2023, SB 1310, SB 2972, SB 1073, SB 2847, SB 2532, SB 2619, SB 62, SB 666, SB 847, SB 284, SB 854, SB 810, SB 1505, SB 583, SB 507, SB 1434, SB 1772, SB 2016, SB 1122, SB 731, SB 397, SB 508, SB 1436, SB 287, SB 1882, SB 393, SB 1791, SB 209, SB 2429, SB 511, SB 2309, SB 1085, SB 1975, SB 2717, SB 1262, SB 636, SB 2056, SB 884, SB 1200, SB 1845, SB 2458, SB 801, SB 3014, SB 3013, SB 758, SB 2797, SB 2076, SB 2876, SB 1640, SB 1449, SB 1181, SB 1359, SB 1234, SB 2926, SB 2841, SB 1528, SB 2891, SB 1854, SB 317, SB 1250, SB 2082, SB 1285, SB 1237, SB 2819, SB 629, SB 2608, SB 1602, SB 2009, SB 2460, SB 867, SB 640, SB 1698, SB 2680, SB 2994, SB 2747, SB 913, SB 1071, SB 1086, SB 1087, SB 1483, SB 1444, SB 1553, SB 1556, SB 1703, SB 2133, SB 2297, SB 2298, SB 2622, SB 2955, SB 2334, SB 1861, SB 2043, SB 1367, SB 2857, SB 128, SB 3058, SB 2044, SB 2363, SB 2565, SB 1888, SB 3048, SB 3052, SB 3053, SB 3036, SB 3057, SB 3056, SB 3043, SB 3050, SB 3063, SB 3035, SB 1790, SB 1778, SB 203, SB 3061, SB 2799, SB 2790, SB 2688, SB 2515, SB 1230, SB 2522, SB 2639, SB 2459, SB 3051, SB 2655, SB 2251, SB 1884, SB 2617, SB 2751, SB 2928, SB 2566, SB 1897, SB 1749, SB 1361, SB 2549, SB 2553, SB 2919, SB 1782, SB 1705, SB 2696, SB 1944, SB 2215, SB 644, SB 1232, SB 2850, HB 45, HB 48, HB 1261, HB 1465, HB 1778, HB 2596, HB 5238, HB 33, HB 1188, HB 210, HB 1022, HB 1458, HB 5560, HB 1240, HB 1950, HB 2027, HB 2768, HB 2788, HB 2791, HB 3146, HB 3698, HB 3699, HB 1893, HB 3700, HB 4850, HB 4187, HB 1397, HB 4885, HB 4804, HB 3751, HB 3611, HB 2775, HB 2061, HB 2003, HB 1729, HB 1242, HB 791, HB 2029, HB 647, HB 2522, HB 4738, HB 3033, HB 3594, HB 3474, HB 2563, HB 2802, HCR 90, SJR 87, SB 2969, SB 3073, SB 2497, SB 1798, SB 2603, SB 2607, SB 781, SJR 34, SB 17, SB 314, SB 455, SB 509, SB 529, SB 541, SB 693, SB 761, SB 963, SB 1023, SB 1968, SB 2122, SB 2308, SB 2371, SB 2420, SB 2544, SJR 87, SB 1285, SB 1359, SB 2857, SB 3073, HJR 1, HB 9, HB 21, HB 116, HB 913, HB 1151, HB 1899, HB 2970, HB 3307, SB 1073, SB 1310, SB 2532, SB 2619, SB 2847, SB 2972, SB 128, SB 2043, SR 393, SR 511, SR 518, SR 520, SB 314, SB 455, SB 761, SB 1023, SB 2122, SB 2371, SB 2420, SB 17, SB 509, SB 644, SB 1230, SB 1361, SB 1778, SB 1790, SB 2460, SB 2515, SB 2747, SB 2751, SB 2790, SB 3048, SB 3050, SB 3051, SB 3052, SB 3053, SB 3056, SB 3058, SB 3061, HB 37, HB 109, HB 1130, HB 1238, HB 1327, HB 1610, HB 1615, HB 1620, HB 1689, HB 2809, HB 2884, HB 2890, HB 4215, HB 5092, HCR 7, HCR 75, HCR 86, HCR 92, HCR 93, HCR 126, SB 1086, SB 1553, HJR 182, HB 4, HB 24, HB 46, HB 101, HB 146, HB 170, HB 214, HB 305, HB 426, HB 549, HB 551, HB 594, HB 722, HB 824, HB 1119, HB 1579, HB 2215, HB 2458, HB 2530, HB 2674, HB 2713, HB 2974, HB 3015, HB 3151, HB 3180, HB 3221, HB 3359, HB 3556, HB 4088, HB 4211, HB 4396, HB 4413, HB 4580, HB 4609, HB 4864, HB 5088, HB 5154, HB 5263, HB 2294, HJR 182, HB 4, HB 24, HB 46, HB 101, HB 146, HB 170, HB 214, HB 305, HB 426, HB 549, HB 551, HB 594, HB 722, HB 824, HB 1119, HB 1579, HB 2215, HB 2458, HB 2530, HB 2674, HB 2713, HB 2974, HB 3015, HB 3151, HB 3180, HB 3221, HB 3359, HB 3556, HB 4088, HB 4211, HB 4396, HB 4413, HB 4580, HB 4609, HB 4864, HB 5088, HB 5154, HB 5263, HB 2294

Keywords: constitutional amendment, property tax, ad valorem tax, tax exemption, tangible personal property, income-producing property, business personal property, equipment exemption, machinery, local government finance, school district revenue, county taxes, Texas Constitution, Article VIII, tax relief, commercial property, appraisal district, chief appraiser, rendition statement, property tax relief

Transcript Highlights:

• One is there is the potential for the associated licensor fees or the fees to be considerable and potentially
• One is there is the potential for the associated licensor fees or the fees to be considerable and potentially
• One is that in existing law, there are fees and penalties. Where do those fees and penalties go?
• SB 40 is a meaningful step forward by capping insulin cost and improving access.
• It's time to cap the co-pay, and I respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you.

Summary: The Assembly Health Committee heard several bills focused on health care access, oversight, and affordability. The first major item was SB 306 by Senator Becker, a prior authorization reform bill. Becker and supporters, including the California Medical Association and California Hospital Association, argued that prior authorization delays care, adds administrative burden, and can lead to serious patient harm. The bill was substantially amended late in the process to have DMHC and CDI identify services and drugs to exempt from prior authorization based on utilization data, with safeguards for fraud, waste, abuse, and patient safety. Health plans and insurers opposed the measure as written, saying prior authorization remains an important utilization-management tool and raising concerns about the 90% threshold, drug inclusion, and how modifications are counted. The committee also heard SB 35 by Senator Umberg, which would let cities or counties inspect unlicensed sober living homes if DHCS does not act promptly on complaints. Supporters said the bill would address weak enforcement and protect residents, while one behavioral health directors group opposed it unless amended. Members generally supported the measure, citing problems with unlicensed facilities and the need for local enforcement backup. The committee then heard SB 62, which would codify California’s updated essential health benefits benchmark if approved by the federal government. Senator Wiener said the package would add hearing aids, durable medical equipment, and infertility treatment including IVF, acknowledging that premiums could rise but arguing the benefits were worth it. Health Access California and other advocates supported the bill, while the California Family Council opposed it. The committee also took up SB 596 by Senator Menjivar, which would tighten the rules for hospitals claiming an on-call list as a defense to nurse staffing ratio penalties. Supporters, including nurses and SEIU, said hospitals have used vague or ineffective on-call practices to avoid accountability and that the bill would improve enforcement and patient safety. Hospital groups opposed it, arguing that staffing is highly dynamic, that hospitals need flexibility to manage acuity and emergencies, and that the bill could increase costs and interfere with collective bargaining arrangements. Finally, the committee heard SB 40 by Senator Wiener, the Insulin Affordability Act, which would cap insulin copays at $35 for a 30-day supply and restrict step therapy unless a plan covers at least one insulin in each drug type. Supporters, including physicians, diabetes advocates, nurses, students, and patient groups, said insulin is life-saving and too often unaffordable, forcing patients to ration or choose between medication and basic needs. There was no formal opposition testimony, though one member questioned why insulin remains so expensive. The committee also began discussion of SB 363, but the transcript cuts off before that bill’s full presentation or any action on the measures. No votes are recorded in the portion provided, and several bills were noted as consent items earlier in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• , it requires marketplace facilitators to remit this fee to the Department of Tax and Fee Administration
• For the film tax credit expansion, it increases the allocation cap under the Film Tax Credit Program
• Thank you. requires marketplace facilitators to remit this fee to the Department of tax and fee administration
• This allows the department to sustain existing enforcement activities without imposing fee increases
• During upcoming cap-and-trade negotiations, we urge the Legislature to support this funding.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Committee held an informational hearing on the final three-party budget agreement and related trailer bills, with the Department of Finance outlining the major budget bill and omnibus measures. Finance described a package built around balancing the state budget amid economic uncertainty, preserving core health and safety-net programs, and making significant ongoing reductions in some state programs. The budget bill included major items such as shifting $1 billion from the General Fund to the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund for Cal Fire, funding universal transitional kindergarten, deferring some UC and CSU funding, supporting foster care and homelessness programs, providing Proposition 36 implementation funding, and achieving Medi-Cal savings through changes to benefits and eligibility. The committee also heard that votes on the budget bills were expected later in the week and the following Monday. Finance then walked through the trailer bills, including health, human services, early learning, education, resources, energy, transportation, labor, housing, tax, public safety, courts, general government, cannabis, and energy-related measures. Notable provisions included a Medi-Cal enrollment freeze for certain adults, new premiums and benefit changes for some immigrants, child care COLA changes, education funding for literacy, teacher support, universal meals, and community college student support, as well as resource and climate measures affecting Cal Fire staffing and energy permitting. The housing trailer bill drew the most discussion, with provisions on CEQA streamlining, a vehicle miles traveled mitigation banking program, a renters’ credit trigger, and a six-year moratorium on new residential building standards. Members also discussed a film tax credit expansion, cannabis enforcement funding, a tribal police pilot program, and changes to tax policy, including military retirement income exclusions and wildfire settlement payment exclusions. Committee members largely praised the staff and the budget process, but several raised concerns and asked detailed questions, especially about the housing trailer bill’s new wage standards, tribal consultation provisions, and possible effects on prevailing wage protections. Finance explained that the housing language was intended to set wage floors for market-rate projects receiving CEQA streamlining, with different county-based tiers and a notwithstanding clause preserving existing prevailing wage laws. Members also questioned the size and timing of funding for the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative, Clean Cars for All, Proposition 36, and the film tax credit expansion. Other members highlighted support for public safety, veterans’ tax relief, child care providers, housing production, and higher education, while some expressed concern that the budget’s policy changes were being negotiated too quickly or without enough stakeholder input.

Transcript Highlights:

• We capped it at 50 million.
• My second question is, is there a program cap currently?
• Madam Chair, Senator, there's currently not a program cap.
• Vice Chair, the program cap would still be, or the project cap.
• So it could be grazing fees on state land, but it's mostly From oil and gas fees.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So, another impressive bullet in New Mexico's cap. Impressive bullet in New Mexico's cap.
• fees for out-of-state attendees.
• In FY25, OSI collected over $35 million in assessments and fees. $31.4 million was from license fees,
• So we don't have any cap on what the legal fee could be? Mr.
• And even the attorney fees are capped in the Workers' Compensation Fund.

Transcript Highlights:

• To address this, the board seeks to adjust statutory fee caps, allowing greater flexibility to raise
• fees as necessary.
• As far as just raising the caps for all fees that have reached their statutory caps, we've had stakeholder
• We are right now at the cap, so we have no request from the Legislature to increase it, so fees will
• If you guys are concerned about fees, just make sure the fees stay at 300.

Summary: The joint sunset oversight hearing reviewed five regulatory entities: the Board of Behavioral Sciences, the Board of Psychology, the Physician Assistant Board, the Podiatric Medical Board, and the California Massage Therapy Council. Across the hearing, each entity described recent accomplishments, licensing and enforcement workload, workforce shortages, and efforts to modernize processes. Common themes included streamlining licensure, expanding access to care, addressing telehealth or emerging technology, and balancing consumer protection with workforce needs. For the Board of Behavioral Sciences, members discussed workforce shortages in mental health, supervision barriers, telehealth confidentiality, AI in therapy, interstate compacts, school-based services, and military spouse licensure. The board said it has expanded outreach, improved licensing processes, and created temporary practice authority tracking, while also expressing concern about counseling compacts and emphasizing California-specific law, ethics, and cultural competency. Public commenters supported the board’s work and the possible move to a national MFT exam, while also urging more resources. The Board of Psychology highlighted fee adjustments, streamlined licensure pathways, enforcement process improvements, new CPD requirements, and proposed changes including a psychotherapist-client privilege exception for investigations. Committee members and public witnesses focused heavily on that privilege proposal, with some members opposing it as too broad and privacy-invasive, while the board argued it is needed to obtain records in bias and sexual misconduct cases. The board also discussed workforce shortages, processing improvements, and the use of inactive status for psychological associates. The Physician Assistant Board reported growth in the PA workforce and education programs, SB 697 implementation, and financial pressure from rising enforcement costs. The main policy debate centered on physician-to-PA ratios and practice agreements, with board representatives and many public commenters arguing that current restrictions limit access to care, especially in rural areas, while the California Medical Association defended the need for explicit ratios and agreements. The board also discussed AI, fee increases, and tracking temporary practice authority. The Podiatric Medical Board described licensing and renewal reforms, residency expansion, enforcement support, and budget constraints, while public testimony raised concerns about a proposed fee increase and about reimbursement parity and practice recognition for podiatrists. Finally, the California Massage Therapy Council defended the certification model over licensure, citing lower costs, local government collaboration, anti-trafficking work, and its role in vetting applications and disciplining bad actors; no formal votes or final actions were taken during this portion of the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• We do not charge students lab fees.
• In a traditional high school, those lab fees are covered. We do not charge students lab fees.
• And when came home with a lab fee bill.
• So whether some charged a lab fee.
• <04:28:27.680> anytime we're going to reach that cap anytime we're going to reach that cap

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 292, which would authorize a governor’s warrant to cover special education aid shortfalls from the education trust fund, and from the general fund if needed, so local school districts would not have to absorb prorated costs or raise local property taxes. Senator Lang said the bill was prompted by a prior $15 million special education funding shortfall caused by higher-than-expected catastrophic aid claims, including more qualifying students and the recent increase in the special education age limit to 22. He emphasized that the bill is intended to ensure the state meets its funding commitment and avoid shifting costs to towns. Members asked about how the bill interacts with House Bill 742 and House Bill 773, including whether the language should be merged or whether the state should fund 100% versus an 80% floor. Lang said he was open to improving the bill and to adding a study committee or performance audit on special education costs, but maintained that the state should not push costs to local taxpayers when it has available funds. The hearing on SB 292 was then closed, with no vote taken. The committee then opened Senate Bill 98, which would extend for five more years a tax credit program for donations to regional career and technical education centers. Senator Waters said the program has been successful in building partnerships between CTE centers and employers, especially through equipment donations that support training and apprenticeships. He cited examples including automotive, marine trades, and advanced manufacturing programs, and said the five-year extension would let lawmakers continue to review whether the incentive is working as intended. Several members questioned whether the credit is effectively a 100% subsidy and how the cap works. Waters and another member explained that the underlying program has an aggregate cap of $500,000 and that credits are prorated if requests exceed that amount; they also said the donations are primarily equipment, not cash. Some members raised concerns about whether businesses could also claim other tax deductions or credits, but the sponsor said the existing structure has been in place for years and has been revisited periodically. No vote was taken during the hearing excerpt provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• The legislation required that applicants for registration pay a fee, and the fee wasn't designated in
• The fee structure remained largely the same. The fee structure remained largely the same.
• It's the same similar fees.
• The promoters still pay the same fees for their promoter's license and for the event fee.
• We want to pay for your registration fees, pay for those fees that have required you to get in.

Summary: The Administrative Rules Subcommittee reviewed a long agenda of agency rules, with most items approved without objection after brief presentations and no public comment. Early items included Department of Energy and Environment rules on landfill post-closure trust fund spending thresholds and liquefied petroleum gas standards, DFA’s electronic odometer disclosure rule, and several Department of Health rules covering ionizing radiation, mobile home and RV parks, lead-based paint, counseling board revisions, hearing instrument dispensers, athletic training, dental examiners, nursing, pharmacy, medical board, speech-language pathology and audiology, radiologic technology, massage therapy, community health workers, doula certification, and cosmetology/body art. Most of these changes were described as updates to match recent acts, federal standards, compact participation, fee adjustments, or cleanup/clarification, and the committee repeatedly approved them without objection. A substantial portion of the meeting focused on the Arkansas State Board of Nursing’s broad set of rule changes implementing multiple 2025 acts. Those changes included creating a dialysis patient care technician registry, updating contact information requirements, expanding APRN authority to delegate certain tasks, clarifying death certificate and pronouncement authority, allowing substitution of therapeutically equivalent medications, permitting purchase of compounded products, and updating certified medication assistant rules and training standards. Members asked detailed questions about the meaning of therapeutically equivalent substitutions, delegation limits, compounded products, and how often medication lists would be updated; the board said it would review rules annually and use future rulemaking as needed. The committee also approved new nursing rules for declaratory orders and the new dialysis registry. The Department of Education’s rules drew the most discussion, especially the Arkansas Children’s Educational Freedom Account Program. The department said the revisions, based on Act 920 of 2025, were intended to add guardrails, clarify eligible expenses, and streamline approvals. Changes included defining core educational expenses, limiting sports-related spending, adding an intentional misuse standard, restricting certain technology purchases and requiring extra justification over $1,000, capping carryover funds at $8,500, and creating a reconsideration process for denied expenses. Members raised concerns about oversight, appeal timelines, sports equipment, provider credentialing, and whether the rules were too restrictive; department officials said the rules were meant to protect taxpayer funds while preserving flexibility, and they noted the program had received extensive public comment. The committee also approved Education rules for scholarships, residency classification, teacher programs, accelerated learning, and graduate medical education, as well as Labor and Licensing rules on wage and hour standards, boiler rules, motor vehicle commission requirements, professional wrestling regulation, appraiser qualifications, and military recruiting incentives.