Transcript Highlights:

• It also adds on a license application fee.
• Chair, Senator Westrom, is that $50 application fee in addition to the regular fee, or is it worked together
• So, currently license application fee.
• <00:36:40.160> entities<00:36:40.800> um application fee for those entities um application
• um Kathy, is it is that $50 application um Kathy, is it is that $50 application fee<00:36:51.680

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So this really clarifies that land donations, fee waivers, fee deferrals—those all can be things a local
• you to completely waive impact fees.
• So while it would be asking the city to forego fees on a project where they're the applicant, there are
• It says if your local government charges an impact fee and you're applying as an applicant or co-applicant
• It says if your local government charges an impact fee and you're applying as an applicant or co-applicant

Summary: The committee opened with the State Controller’s Office May Revision requests, including funding for Fiscal book-of-record stabilization, a Broadcom IDMS licensing adjustment, the California State Payroll System, ACFR reporting automation, and $3 million for unclaimed property outreach. Testimony emphasized progress on Fiscal becoming the state’s accounting book of record in July, faster ACFR publication, and the move to electronic unclaimed property claims. Members asked about the size of the unclaimed property fund and how quickly money is transferred to the General Fund; the Controller’s office said about $15 billion is held, with most excess transferred regularly, and the LAO noted the fund is the General Fund’s fourth-largest revenue source. No concerns were raised by Finance or the LAO, and the item was closed after no public comment. The committee then heard the administration’s proposal to tax prewritten digital software and software-as-a-service, with Finance saying it would modernize sales tax treatment and raise an estimated $450 million General Fund and $560 million local revenue in 2026-27. The LAO supported modernizing the tax but suggested broader digital goods coverage and a business-use exemption; industry and taxpayer groups opposed the proposal, warning of higher costs for consumers and businesses. Members also heard CDTFA’s administrative request tied to the proposal, plus a separate CDTFA budget reduction reflecting lower operational needs; that reduction was presented as a savings item and drew positive reactions. Next, the committee considered federal conformity for “Trump accounts,” which would align California tax treatment with federal rules for tax-deferred children’s accounts and avoid tracking burdens for families. The LAO recommended approval, and the item drew no opposition. The committee also heard a proposal to cut the first-year $800 annual business tax to $400 for LLCs, LPs, and LLPs; Finance argued it would lower startup costs and encourage new business formation, while the LAO said the benefit was not well targeted and could subsidize entities that would form anyway. Members discussed the policy tradeoff, and public commenters split between support for small business relief and concern about revenue loss. The final major revenue item was a permanent business tax credit limitation, capping credits at the greater of $5 million per corporation or 50% of pre-credit liability, while excluding the low-income housing tax credit and personal income tax credits. Finance said it would raise significant revenue from large profitable corporations, and the LAO said it was a reasonable option but noted it would mainly affect the R&D credit and could have future implications for programs like California Competes. Public testimony was sharply divided, with business groups opposing the cap and anti-poverty advocates supporting it as a way to recapture revenue. The committee also heard FTB’s CalFile realignment request, which would return most of the direct-file-related resources to the General Fund while retaining a smaller staff to improve CalFile, and the California Arts Council’s request to reauthorize the Keep Arts in Schools voluntary contribution fund, which members and advocates supported despite relatively modest annual donations. The hearing continued with GoBiz proposals on civic media funding, CA RISE reappropriation, and a semiconductor facility reversion, with the LAO supporting the latter two and members raising questions about the civic media program’s scope, outreach, and inclusion of broadcast and ethnic media.

Transcript Highlights:

• applicant of the revocation. applicant of the revocation.
• >> The flat fee. >> Oh, there's a flat fee.
• >> The the flat fee. >> The the flat fee.
• You have to have a clearly defined dispensing fee and an ingredient fee.
• defined dispensing fees and an ingredient fee.

Keywords: Public Health and Welfare - Room 216, 3 March, 2026; 3:00 PM, 925, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 1622, a strike-all amendment to create a pilot program for certain small-community hospitals to receive limited certificate-of-need exemptions. The bill would allow qualifying hospitals to open a geriatric psychiatric unit without a CON, permit each hospital one additional CON exemption for a service otherwise requiring one, cap dialysis-unit exemptions at eight hospitals, continue existing moratoriums with periodic Department of Health review, allow facilities in Issaquena or Humphreys Counties under limited conditions, and add a loser-pays rule for unsuccessful CON court challenges. Technical corrections were made, the strike-all amendment was adopted, and the bill was reported do pass as amended by voice vote. The committee then moved to House Bill 942, where Senator McMahan offered an amendment to allow a Lee County chiropractor to advertise as a neurologic chiropractor and list related credentials. Members questioned whether chiropractic neurology is recognized in Mississippi and raised concerns about the practitioner’s prior discipline by the board, but the chair ruled the amendment germane. The amendment failed on voice vote, and the bill itself then passed and was reported to the floor. The committee next considered House Bill 1034, but no amendment was offered. It then took House Bill 479 off the table. That bill extends the temporary licensing period for psychology and marriage-and-family-therapy boards from 30 to 60 days to allow more time for criminal background checks. Senator Blackwell offered a clarifying amendment to make clear that temporary licenses must be revoked if required background checks or other licensure requirements are insufficient, and that the temporary license does not replace the underlying education, training, and examination requirements. The amendment was adopted and the bill was reported do pass as amended. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 1067, the Rural Health Transformation Program. Senator Hickman explained that the bill would require procurement procedures and reporting for the state’s rural health transformation funds, prioritize projects tied to the original application, and direct funds toward rural and underserved areas such as health professional shortage areas, low-income counties, and places without hospitals. Senators questioned whether the added state rules would layer on top of existing federal requirements and whether the bill could slow distribution or invite litigation, but supporters said it was meant to add transparency and guardrails rather than change the federal program. The bill was discussed at length, but the transcript ends before a final vote on HB 1067.

Transcript Highlights:

• And we don't think paying the fee.
• you could probably increase the fees. you could probably increase the fees.
• So uh applications this last year.
• are linked to via the permit application are linked to via the permit application tracker.
• and we get more permit applications. and we get more permit applications.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, but there is a required filing fee of $2,500 per application.
• <00:03:00.800> within and approve those applications within and approve those applications
• <00:03:10.959> Um<00:03:11.280> and fee of $2,500 per application.
• Um and fee of $2,500 per application.
• um that required filing fee. um that required filing fee. Thank<00:03:40.720> you.

Bills: SF1832

Keywords: economic development, small business, workforce training, grants, entrepreneurship, equity, community support, 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• . evaluating the application.
• There was a large permit application in Central Texas where an applicant had filed. an application and
• What we're going to do, and by By the way, we paid $100 per well as an application fee, and then we paid
• our applications on the merits and to engage consultants. and pay legal fees.
• to all applications.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• That's the tuition and fee cap for a Winona State student, but the tuition and fee cap for a student
• That's the tuition and fee cap for a Winona State student, but the tuition and fee cap for a student
• That's the tuition and fee cap for a Winona State student, but the tuition and fee cap for a student
• That's the tuition and fee cap for a Winona State student, but the tuition and fee cap for a student
• That's the tuition and fee cap for a Winona State student, but the tuition and fee cap for a student

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The Higher Education Conference Committee reviewed differences among the Governor’s, House, and Senate proposals for state grant parameter changes and their effects on state grant spending, North Star Promise spending, and average student awards. Nonpartisan staff explained that the proposals use different combinations of parameter changes, with the Governor’s and Senate plans modeled to avoid or minimize rationing, while the House plan would require rationing to balance the program. Staff reported projected biennium balances of a positive $29.836 million for the Governor’s proposal, a negative $60.758 million for the House proposal without rationing, a positive $994,000 for the House proposal with rationing, and a positive $3.623 million for the Senate proposal; North Star Promise balances also varied, with the Senate showing a positive balance and the Governor and House with rationing showing negative balances. Staff also said the Senate proposal would extend availability of the state grant appropriation and suspend surplus procedures through fiscal year 2029, allowing the balance to carry forward. The committee then focused on the House-only tuition and fee cap provision, which would limit the tuition recognized for state grant purposes for four-year programs to the University of Minnesota Twin Cities level, with 1% annual increases in fiscal years 2026 and 2027. House members said the cap was intended to address rising tuition, especially at the University of Minnesota, and to produce savings in the state grant program. The governor’s office confirmed the provision was not included in the Governor’s bill. Representatives from the University of Minnesota and the Minnesota Private College Council opposed the cap, arguing it would reduce awards for low-income students and shift costs to students rather than address underlying tuition pressures; they also said it could discourage enrollment at higher-cost institutions. Supporters from Minnesota State argued the cap would improve fairness because students at lower-tuition institutions are effectively capped lower, while students at more expensive institutions receive larger awards, and they said the legislature should intervene in a variable that has grown substantially over time. Committee members questioned how the cap would work and whether it was tied to the Twin Cities campus rate. Testifiers clarified that the state grant formula is tied to the University of Minnesota level, but because Minnesota State institutions are below that level, the cap effectively limits their students to their own lower tuition while allowing higher awards at the University of Minnesota and private colleges. No formal vote or final action was taken in the portion of the meeting provided; the chair indicated the committee would continue with item-by-item review of the remaining parameter changes and hear additional testimony from agencies and institutions.

Transcript Highlights:

• These housing application fees render safe and decent rental housing even more out of reach.
• , standardizing application fees, capping tenant screening fees at $50, and regulating late fees.
• The $50 was due to a national data point around average application fees.
• So you could still charge your application fee and you can still do your background check.
• We are not asking to regulate those types of fees, just the fees associated with processing an application

Transcript Highlights:

• I've seen the applications on multiple occasions.
• We have received close to eight billion dollars worth of applications, almost 300 applications, so we're
• ... ...billion dollars worth of applications, almost 300 applications, and we're in the process of whittling
• But we also took applications from all varying folks, you know, depending on what level that. took applications
• We've received 18 applications.

Summary: The hearing opened with remarks from the chair and members about recent federal cuts to public health, mental health, family planning, and Title X funding, with strong concern about the impact on California programs and providers. The committee then turned to the Department of State Hospitals, which presented its 2025-26 budget proposal of $3.4 billion, including new positions, capital improvements, and funding tied to increased patient costs and incompetent-to-stand-trial services. DSH reported major progress in reducing the IST waitlist and wait times, said it had met the court’s 28-day treatment benchmark for those without extenuating circumstances, and described workforce recruitment and retention efforts such as residency programs, fellowships, outreach, and hiring streamlining. Members asked about future IST referral trends, SB 1323’s effect on diversion and community treatment, and workforce lessons in high-cost regions; public comment urged reconsideration of county IST growth cap methodology in light of new criminal justice initiatives. The committee next received an informational overview of Proposition 1 and its changes to behavioral health funding and governance. The Legislative Analyst’s Office explained that Prop. 1 restructured county MHSA funding buckets, expanded the Commission for Behavioral Health, shifted prevention and early intervention responsibilities, and authorized a $6.4 billion bond, including $4.4 billion for behavioral health facilities through BHCIP. DHCS said it had released guidance for county integrated plans and was receiving extensive public comment. Members focused on BHCIP application requirements, especially letters of support and tribal projects, and raised concerns about whether DHCS’s implementation matched statutory intent. DHCS said it had authority to set application requirements and that tribal entities were treated differently because of sovereignty and funding structure. DHCS then updated the committee on BHCIP, the Behavioral Health Bridge Housing Program, and related bond implementation. The department said BHCIP had awarded about $1.7 billion across five rounds, with more than 130 projects and 223 distinct facilities funded, and that it was preparing to award the new bond funds after receiving nearly $8 billion in applications. The LAO’s assessment found that more than half of awards served at least 80% Medi-Cal enrollees, but also raised concerns that the regional allocation model could reinforce inequities, that the program had not sufficiently addressed the highest-need regions such as the southern San Joaquin Valley, and that smaller counties and less launch-ready applicants faced barriers. For bridge housing, DHCS said more than $1.1 billion had been awarded, serving over 5,000 people and supporting more than 2,000 operational beds, but the Governor’s budget proposes to eliminate Round 4 funding as the administration weighs other statewide investments and Proposition 1 implementation workload. Public commenters and members urged more accountability, better regional equity, stronger labor and community involvement, and caution about funding for for-profit psychiatric facilities. Finally, the committee heard on the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative. CalHHS and DHCS described CYBHI as a broad prevention- and equity-focused effort with more than 1,300 organizations funded, over $2.1 billion awarded, and multiple work streams spanning schools, community programs, workforce, and digital supports. DHCS highlighted school-based services, the fee schedule rollout, and digital platforms BrightLife Kids and Soluna, which it said are reaching users statewide and providing low-barrier access to coaching and support. Members and public commenters raised concerns about delays in school fee schedule implementation, the large share of funding going to digital tools, the need for more in-person services, and whether the initiative is sufficiently tracking outcomes and equity impacts. No formal votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Starting on line 139, this is a new fee increase to the broker dealer agent transfer fee, from $25 to
• language contained a tiered fee system. language contained a tiered fee system.
• Are you talking about line 16.15 or increasing the fee from 25 to 60? The fee from 25 to 60?
• the fee from 25 to 60? Correct. Okay. the fee from 25 to 60? Correct. Okay.
• application to administration of funds. application to administration of funds.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• fees for certain permits and permit applications or permit amendments for the disposal of oil and gas
• and authorize the railroad commission to collect permit application fees ranging from $500 to $3000.
• and how these fees compare to the rest of the fees that cover the cost of regulation for the industry
• I would want to Surcharges and fees to be uniform.
• That there's an appropriate offset on the fee. Not necessarily the surcharge, but the fee.

Bills: HB16

Keywords: judicial administration, court reform, juvenile diversion, court security, mental health services, drug offenses, constitutional amendments

Transcript Highlights:

• application for federal student aid. application for federal student aid.
• This is the annual universal application This is the annual universal application that<00:05:16.080
• from the schools, the tuition and fees from the schools, the tuition and fees which<00:10:12.080
• ,<00:12:58.079> they or the state aid application, they or the state aid application, they
• because things like tuition and fees because things like tuition and fees have<00:13:56.240>

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• talking about here is the $50 annual fee talking about here is the $50 annual fee for<00:05:06.520
• If the inspection fee is $100, do you think the inspection fee is adequate?
• So let's talk... last time the fee was um increased yeah last time the fee was um increased yeah uh<00
• want to represent if the inspection fee want to represent if the inspection fee is<00:11:46.760>
• Insurance carriers can then submit applications—we call them eligibility applications—if an insurance

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first discussed a proposed increase to the annual elevator certificate fee in the Department of Labor. The commissioner said the fee had been $50 for years and generated just under $300,000 annually, while the Inspection Division’s broader revenue far exceeded its expenses. Members noted the fee only covered the certificate, not the inspection itself, which is billed separately at $100 per hour. After comparing the fee to neighboring states and discussing the department’s revenue and staffing, the committee agreed to rewrite the language to set the fee at $75 and to vote on an amendment later. The committee then took up Section 139, which would expand the list of labor-law violations that can be penalized without first issuing a warning. The Department explained the change was meant to align House Bill 157 with other chapters, including youth employment and workers’ compensation provisions, where immediate civil penalties are already allowed. The section was accepted unanimously. A longer discussion followed on the Second Injury Fund. The commissioner explained that the fund reimburses insurers for certain workers’ compensation costs tied to claims involving pre-existing conditions, is financed by assessments on insurers, and requires notice within 100 weeks of injury plus a $10,000 deductible before reimbursement. He said the fund currently holds roughly $16 million to $22 million, one full-time employee administers it, and total staff involvement is about five to six people. Members questioned whether the fund should be sunset, but the department said the current House Bill 2 language does not propose a sunset; instead, it addresses increased hearing and litigation burdens after a recent Supreme Court decision. Sections 140 and 141, dealing with hearings, were then accepted unanimously. The committee also briefly discussed fines for late insurance coverage reporting, with the department noting the current rubric allows up to $50 per day but uses $112 per day, and members suggesting a lower amount.

Transcript Highlights:

• checklist so applicants know what it actually takes to get a complete application.
• a complete application.
• When you have to do multiple reviews, send incomplete or incorrect applications back to the applicant
• Additional measures to avoid fee refunds: we have reasonable fees.
• applications are done.

Summary: The Local Government Committee met in work session and heard a series of presentations on SEPA, permitting reforms, and building code implementation. Department of Ecology staff gave an overview of the State Environmental Policy Act, explaining its role in state and local decision-making, common exemptions, planned actions, and recent housing-related statutory changes such as transit-oriented development exemptions and SEPA appeals protections for certain local ordinances. Committee members asked about repeated SEPA reviews, cultural and historic resource review, and how SEPA relates to NEPA; Ecology responded that repeated reviews usually occur when proposals change and that programmatic EISs can help front-load analysis. Seattle’s Department of Construction and Inspections described how recent SEPA exemptions reduced residential review volume and supported more housing permits, and said the city is considering raising thresholds further. The State Building Code Council provided an update on code adoption timelines and legislative tasks tied to the 2024 codes, including single-stair housing, multiplex housing, dwelling unit size, and temporary emergency shelter standards. Council staff said the content of the codes is largely set, but administrative timelines have been delayed, prompting a motion to postpone final adoption while pursuing ways to preserve the planned implementation schedule. Members asked about the timing of code changes and the impact on housing costs, and staff said the legislative topics remain on track for inclusion in the 2024 code package. Committee staff then reviewed recent permitting legislation, including SB 5290’s permit decision deadlines and fee-refund provisions, later bills limiting pre-application meetings and clarifying that building permits are excluded from those timelines, and project-specific changes affecting middle housing, ADUs, lot splits, passive house projects, self-certification, transit-oriented development, and parking requirements. Commerce’s Dave Anderson reported on SB 5290 implementation, including guidance on permit fees, studies on staffing and statewide permitting systems, grants to local governments, and the first annual performance report, which showed mixed results and highlighted the importance of digital tools, clear checklists, staff training, and coordination across departments. Local officials from Issaquah and Kitsap County described their own process improvements, including code updates, optional pre-application meetings, new staffing, reporting systems, and a phased “Two by Six” review model in Kitsap, while also noting challenges from staffing shortages, agency coordination, and the burden of implementing multiple new mandates.

Transcript Highlights:

• In line with the HAA, AB 712 would provide the project applicant with attorney's fees and costs when
• the existing rights of applicants and other petitioners to recover attorney's fees when they win housing
• And as it creates a right to attorney's fees and costs for any action brought by the applicant for a
• We have mandatory fees, we have optional fees, and we have what are called situational fees, meaning
• Then there are fees authorized by law, such as a fee for a bounced check, parking fees, electric vehicle

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:

• license application.
• There's also the issue of reviewing the applications.
• that get submitted with a license application.
• One of the big... ...with the initial application.
• I believe that Access has failed the fee-for-service members.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The Senate Committee on Health and Human Services held a fourth hearing in its ongoing review of alleged fraud, waste, and abuse involving AHCCCS/Access and DHS, with a major focus on Medicaid eligibility verification for the aged, blind, and disabled (ABD) population, behavioral health and sober living oversight, and payment delays to providers. Senator Shamp presented findings she said showed major gaps in ABD asset verification, including claims that only a fraction of enrollees were checked and that many ineligible members may remain on the rolls. She urged referrals to law enforcement, tighter verification requirements, better PARIS data sharing, and legislative changes to close what she described as a compliance and taxpayer-risk gap. Reva Stewart also testified that patient brokering and fraudulent recruitment of vulnerable people, including Native Americans, continues through social media and other channels, and she called for stronger enforcement and transparency. Heather Dukes, representing behavioral health and sober living operators, argued that the state’s response to fraud has become overly punitive toward legitimate providers. She said ADHS often sends technical paperwork deficiencies straight to enforcement instead of allowing plans of correction, that zoning approvals are being questioned despite not being within ADHS authority, and that long Access approval timelines are creating licensing and billing delays. ADHS Deputy Assistant Director Tiffany Slater said the department has seen a large volume of unlicensed complaints, that it is trying to improve staffing and data systems, and that some enforcement tools have been expanded for sober living homes. She also said many sober living operators are in recovery themselves and provide low-cost housing and support rather than direct billing to Access. Access Director Virginia Roundtree said the agency is trying to balance fraud prevention with support for legitimate providers. She reported steps such as daily internal huddles, live dashboards, added project management support, an outside review of the Division of Fee-for-Service Management, and a new external claims vendor to help reduce backlogs. Senators pressed her on a specific provider’s long-delayed payments and prepayment review, and she said the agency would provide answers early the following week. Access staff also described provider resolution roundtables and said unadjudicated claims had been reduced to zero, though members questioned whether that was due to denials rather than resolution. The hearing ended with the chair announcing legislation to preserve the American Indian Health Plan as a fee-for-service option while requiring Access to contract administrative and care management functions to another entity, citing structural failures in Access’s ability to operate the plan safely and effectively.

Transcript Highlights:

• the fee fair to make sure that the fee the fee fair to make sure that the fee is<02:44:29.359>
• That distinction is very clear: bonds, user fees, and taxes versus user fees.
• And the difference between a tax and a fee is that a fee directly benefits the person paying the fee.
• And the difference between a tax and a fee is that a fee directly benefits the person paying the fee.
• And the difference between a tax and a fee is that a fee directly benefits the person paying the fee.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Yes, uh, the main fee changes the committee is looking for are an increase in the application and renewal
• Our fee is around the initial application fee and the annual renewal fees to cover regulating HMOs.
• > fee<01:03:40.400> and<01:03:40.520> the the initial application fee and the the
• initial application fee and the annual<01:03:41.000> renewal<01:03:41.440> fees<01:03:
• the last time HMO fees uh for application<01:04:11.359> or<01:04:11.559> renewal<01:04

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Health and Human Services Committee met on January 28, 2025, to review Governor’s budget proposals for several health-related licensing boards. The chair said no formal action would be taken and noted that final budget language was not yet available. The committee began with an overview from Bridget Anderson of the health-related licensing boards, who explained that the boards are fee-funded, operate as independent executive agencies, and handle licensing, complaints, rulemaking, and disciplinary matters. She also noted that the Board of Dentistry’s budget includes the Administrative Services Unit and criminal background check program, which can make the budget graphs appear larger than the dentistry board’s own operations. The Board of Dentistry requested funding for a new administrative staff position, estimating about $100,000 in salary, insurance, and fringe costs, to replace support lost when an administrative position was reclassified. Anderson said the board handled more than 300 complaints last year, with cases becoming more complex, especially involving surgical and implant procedures and imaging. Members asked about dental Medicaid access, but Anderson said that issue would be better directed to DHS’s Medicaid oral health division. The Board of Behavioral Health and Therapy requested a full-time position due to rapid growth in the number of regulated professionals, from about 4,000 in 2014 to nearly 10,000 now, and also sought authority to set a fee for out-of-state applicants under the Counseling Compact, with a cap of up to $100 though the board expects to charge much less. The Board of Podiatric Medicine asked to raise its fee ceiling, saying fees had not been increased since 1999 and that the board now faces a structural deficit of about $40,000 per year and declining reserves. Several senators expressed concern about “not-to-exceed” fee authority, calling it too open-ended and suggesting the legislature should scrutinize specific fee needs rather than approve broad ceilings. Similar concerns were raised during the Board of Chiropractic Examiners presentation, where the board sought $100,000 in additional spending authority and a fee increase after 32 years without an adjustment; members questioned the proposed ceiling approach and asked for more historical information before deciding. The Board of Dietetics and Nutrition Practice also discussed fee-setting authority, with the executive director explaining that the board had previously lowered fees without clear authority and later faced audit questions; she requested funding for a vacant administrative position, saying applications and revenues have increased sharply and no fee increase would be needed. The final presentation began with the Board of Pharmacy, which said it serves more than 26,000 licensees and oversees the Prescription Monitoring Program and opioid product registration. The board requested an extension of previously appropriated general fund dollars through fiscal year 2027 to continue paying legal costs tied to the insulin safety net lawsuit, emphasizing that this was not a new funding request but an extension of existing authority. No votes or formal actions were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• such as modifying the fee requirement that currently says the fee is tied to how many licensees you have
• should be assessed on, how to calculate the fee amount, the process for collecting the fee, and where
• The report outlines a range of options associated with the fee.
• And then we also plan that if there was a fee, any fee collected would be distributed as grants.
• It says that the fee may not have a direct nexus between the fee and the service received in each system

Keywords: 985, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Those or not, those are not applicable to Florida.
• So on the fee for service side, you have an up or payment limit.
• What's our plan for the applications?
• And we also used CMS is clinical laboratory fees schedule as well as our own Florida Medicaid, a fee
• The average we fee schedule from 243 biomarkers to 632.