Video & Transcript Research : 'CAP'

Page 4 of 271
OK

Oklahoma 2026 Regular Session

Revenue and Taxation Feb 16th, 2026 at 01:30 pm

Revenue and Taxation

Transcript Highlights:
  • assets and capped at 5% of any retirement account.
  • The limit is 500 billion in market cap, and so currently, there's only one that would actually qualify
  • And so we want to make sure and set those guardrails that 500 billion dollars in cap and a maximum 5%
  • They would only be able to invest in those that have a 500 billion dollar market cap, which at this time
  • Last year, a senator brought This and had no caps.
AZ

Arizona 2026 Regular Session

02/11/2026 - Senate Government

Government

Transcript Highlights:
  • Senate Bill 1745 subjects a city or town that violates the tax rate cap and voter approval requirements
  • Chair, there's an amendment I'd be happy to explain. ...from the rate cap if the increase occurs at an
  • Senate Bill 1745 subjects a city or town that violates the tax rate cap and voter approval requirements
  • It simply requires transparency and voter approval before exceeding a modest cap.
  • It's constitutionally... ...capped.
Summary: The committee approved the February 4, 2026 minutes and held SB 1571 until the following week. It then heard and advanced several measures, beginning with SB 1745, which would cap transaction privilege/excise tax rates in the state’s largest cities at 2.5% per classification unless approved by voters, and would allow enforcement through the attorney general and state-shared revenue withholding. Supporters argued it would protect taxpayers and restrain municipal tax increases; the bill received a technical amendment and a due pass recommendation. The committee also advanced SB 1686, renaming Wesley Bolin Memorial Plaza as the Wesley Bolin and Charlie Kirk Freedom Plaza and authorizing memorial placements for Don Bowles and Charlie Kirk, after brief supportive discussion and no substantive opposition testimony. The committee spent substantial time on SB 1567 and SB 1435, both aimed at restricting public entities, schools, and libraries from exposing minors to sexually explicit materials and from using public facilities for sexually explicit filming or access. Supporters framed the bills as child-protection measures and cited examples of explicit books and materials in libraries and schools; opponents, including the ACLU, warned the definitions were broad, could chill speech, and could criminalize librarians and educators for handling constitutionally protected literature or sex-education materials. Both bills were amended and passed on 4-3 votes, with supporters emphasizing existing obscenity standards and opponents stressing First Amendment concerns and implementation problems. The committee also advanced SB 1433 and SB 1434, which would redraw Maricopa County boundaries and, in the latter bill, create three new counties with a transition board and staggered elections. The sponsor argued Maricopa County had become too large and politically dominant, making government less representative and less responsive; opponents called the proposals expensive, disruptive, and politically motivated, citing concerns about debt division, duplicated county systems, and fiscal impacts. Both bills received due pass recommendations on 4-3 votes. Finally, the committee approved SCR 1024, requiring legislators to live in their district for one year before election, and SCR 1025, moving the legislative session start date from the second Monday to the fourth Monday in January; both resolutions passed unanimously or near-unanimously after sponsor testimony that they would modernize outdated rules and improve use of time.
AL

Alabama 2025 Regular Session

Alabama House Apr 8th, 2025

Alabama House Floor Meeting

Transcript Highlights:
  • There's a cap on this, right? catch it. There's a cap on this, right? catch it.
  • There's a cap on this, right?
  • Cap on the the cap is 20 million the Cap on the the cap is 20 million the Cap on the the cap is 20 million
OK

Oklahoma 2026 Regular Session

County and Municipal Government Apr 8th, 2026 at 03:00 pm

County and Municipal Government

Transcript Highlights:
  • I would disagree with that assertion as the population caps proposed in this bill currently affect zero
  • We're raising the caps, and so anyone that's concerned with that we're making it further away from anyone
  • Members of this bill is just making sure everybody's on that we put a cap on the fines in These small
TX

Texas 89th Regular

S/C on Family & Fiduciary Relationships Apr 28th, 2025

S/C on Family & Fiduciary Relationships

Transcript Highlights:
  • The Texas Family Code has long had what most of us family law attorneys refer to as a soft cap on the
  • The net resources cap is under existing law.
  • We set caps and they start off very reasonable, but then we don't do anything for 10 years, and so that's
TX
Transcript Highlights:
  • Senate Bill 1835 would raise that cap from 5% to 20%. percent, and the committee substitute would clarify
  • So this wouldn't apply; the 5% cap would stay on universities and locations where the population is growing
  • The room was filled with persons in caps and gowns. Y'all would have been so proud as Texans.
  • Today, I stand before you as a DACA recipient in my cap and gown, a month ahead of graduation, as a testament
HI

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

HOU Public Hearing 01-27-2026

Housing

Transcript Highlights:
  • So, if a home buyer wanted to sell their unit in three years, they could, but their price would be capped
  • >> I don't know if they're not requesting any funding, but we're removing the cap of the funding, right
  • <00:42:49.119> we're<00:42:49.359> removing<00:42:49.680> the<00:42:49.920> cap
  • any funding, but we're removing the cap any funding, but we're removing the cap of<00:42:51.119>
Summary: The committee heard five housing measures, with the chair announcing that SB 2060, SB 2063, SB 2062, and SB 2069 were works in progress and that decision-making would be deferred to February 3. SB 2060 would allow HHFDC, with Finance approval, to transfer money within the rental housing revolving fund and its subaccounts without further legislative authorization, including a transfer to the mixed-income subaccount for FY 2026-2027. HHFDC and other supporters said the change would give the agency more flexibility to move projects forward, while Catholic Charities Hawaii and a testifier from Roars and Cares supported the bill but warned that shifting money away from lower-income housing could weaken efforts to serve households under 80% of area median income and people at risk of homelessness. HHFDC said the fund’s uncommitted balance was about $100 million and that demand exceeded available resources. SB 2063 would revise the mixed-income subaccount by changing project priorities, adding new criteria, allowing transfers within the subaccount without legislative approval, and directing conveyance tax revenues into the subaccount. HHFDC, OPSD, LURF, Hawaii Appleseed, Housing Hawaii’s Future, Stanford Carr Development, and Roars and Cares supported the measure, while Catholic Charities urged the committee to keep rental and for-sale housing policy separate and to use other mechanisms for homeownership. Catholic Charities said the rental housing revolving fund should remain focused on rentals, and that for-sale initiatives should be addressed separately. The chair indicated an intent to defer the bill for further edits. SB 2062 would make the dwelling unit revolving fund equity pilot a permanent HHFDC program, allowing the agency to buy equity in for-sale developments to lower initial purchase prices and require repayment through shared appreciation. HHFDC said the pilot had been successful, with 83 units committed and $7.6 million of the $10 million program cap already committed, and said permanence would let the agency pair the program with DERF loans earlier in project financing. The chair said SB 2069 would be used as the vehicle for amendments to the DERF equity program and related changes. SB 2069 would authorize HHFDC to use existing dwelling unit revolving fund balances for the equity pilot; it drew support from HHFDC and several housing organizations. SB 2070 would create a permanently affordable for-sale housing program by replacing the current 10-year buyback restriction with a resale price cap tied to an appreciation index, which HHFDC said would preserve affordability while allowing owners to build equity. In questioning, senators pressed HHFDC on whether the bill was necessary, whether it would remove first-time homebuyer and other ownership restrictions, and whether the new program was truly “permanently affordable” if not tied to AMI. HHFDC said the current statutory restrictions limit flexibility, that the proposal would expand access to local residents, and that the price cap would be based on about 4.5% annual appreciation. Supporters said the approach would help buyers move up the housing ladder, while some senators expressed concern that it could open the program to owners of multiple properties and that the committee should see sales-velocity data on existing restricted units before proceeding.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
  • Transaction limits are changed in the substitute to $3,000 a day with a fee cap of 12%.
  • Additionally, transaction fee caps do not prevent consumer fraud, and in combination with transaction
  • Such restrictions on the transaction limits and the fee caps look forward to working with you all and
  • Vermont has a $1,000 per day transaction limit and a 3% cap. What happened in Vermont?
  • Is it the $1,000 limit there in California, the 15% cap, or...? Both, both equally.
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Business and Commerce Apr 15th, 2025

Business & Commerce

Transcript Highlights:
  • a hypothetical, if a kiosk processes $3,000 worth of Bitcoin in any particular month with a 15% fee cap
  • They cap fees at 15% and a $1,000 per day transaction limit.
  • I mean, examples like the currency exchange brokers and online ticket brokers do not have any caps on
  • Vermont has a $1,000 per day transaction limit and a 3% cap.
  • Vermont has a $1,000 per day transaction limit and a 3% cap. What happened in Vermont?
Summary: The committee took up a long list of pending bills before moving to several bills on the day’s posting. It reported favorably SB 438, SB 512, SB 647, SB 648, SB 715, SB 758, SB 1964, SB 2121, SB 2145, SB 2167, SB 2330, SB 2349, SB 2443, SB 2629, SB 2702, SB 1495, and SB 2268, with several of those adopted from committee substitutes. Some measures were sent to the local and uncontested calendar, while others were reported to the full Senate. Votes on the pending-business bills were generally strong, though SB 715 and SB 2330 drew recorded opposition; SB 647 and SB 648 had one member present not voting because of confusion over the deed-related bills. A major discussion centered on SB 715, which would establish a reliability standard and penalties/incentives for generation resources. Senator Sparks said the committee substitute would avoid unfairly penalizing existing dispatchable generation, allow wind and solar to qualify through storage or backup power, give the PUC flexibility to set standards and phase in the program, and exempt switchable units. Critics raised concerns that it could raise consumer costs and destabilize the market, while supporters argued it would improve reliability. The committee substitute was adopted and the bill was reported out 6-4. The committee also heard testimony on SB 2330, dealing with payroll deduction for association dues, where the author said the bill would end state involvement in dues collection except for first responders covered by meet-and-confer agreements. Members questioned why teachers and other employees were treated differently, and the bill was reported out 6-5. Other notable bills included SB 2864 on building-integrated photovoltaics, SB 1012 on sale of surplus state property, SB 2221 on fraudulent UCC filings, SB 1705 regulating cryptocurrency kiosks with licensing, transaction limits, fee caps, and a 72-hour hold, SB 1181 on combative sports licensing, SB 2586 on HOA transparency, SB 2075 as a TDLR cleanup bill, and SB 383 restricting offshore wind interconnection based on impacts to shipping, wildlife, and coastal interests. Several of these were left pending after testimony, with SB 1705 drawing both law enforcement support and industry concerns over the fee caps and limits.