Video & Transcript Research : 'developer fees'
Page 52 of 500
OR
Oregon 2026 Regular Session
Joint Task Force On Municipal Solid Waste in the Willamette Valley 07/10/2026 1:00 PM
Transcript Highlights:
- And then there is a percentage fee that, say— Across it, and then there is a percentage fee that, say
- Counties and cities could decide what that fee could be. I mean, it could be a fee on haircuts.
- Counties and cities could decide what that fee could be. I mean, it could be a fee on haircuts.
- A lot of entities use system fees, like Lane County, where it's kind of a tack-on: they develop a disposal
- fee, and then they put a system fee on top that they kind of glean off of that.
Summary:
The task force met to focus on funding systems and incentive structures for a proposed regional waste infrastructure effort, including how a future WIPA framework might support solid waste planning in the Willamette Valley. Staff and members heard presentations from DEQ on the Clean Water State Revolving Fund, from Business Oregon on the Special Public Works Fund, and from Oregon State Treasury on state bonding capacity and the bond issuance process. Presenters explained how their programs are structured, how projects are scored or approved, what kinds of public entities and projects are eligible, and how interagency coordination and co-funding can work. DEQ emphasized that its revolving loan fund is driven by water-quality benefits and public-health criteria, while Business Oregon described a broader infrastructure loan program for public entities with no scoring system, and Treasury outlined the state’s debt-capacity process and the differences between general obligation and lottery bonds.
Members used the presentations to discuss whether similar funding tools could support solid waste infrastructure, especially for transfer stations, regional hubs, and related facilities that may need to be built before Coffin Butte reaches the end of its lifespan. Several questions centered on whether public-private partnerships could qualify, whether equipment inside facilities could be financed, how repayment would work, and whether planning costs could be covered. DEQ and Business Oregon both said they could potentially collaborate on scoring or co-funding, but noted eligibility limits and the need for public ownership in many cases. Treasury said bond capacity is limited and competitive, especially for lottery bonds, and that project authorization generally runs on a two-year cycle, though unused authority can sometimes be reauthorized.
In task force discussion, members debated whether the group should pursue a dedicated funding lane for the seven-county region rather than having local governments compete with other statewide needs. Some members stressed the importance of criteria to avoid stranded assets and to ensure funding is available when projects are ready, while others raised concerns about how cities and counties would generate revenue to repay debt during construction and early operations. The group also discussed flow control, system fees, and the need for regional collaboration among counties, cities, and haulers to create enough waste volume to support new infrastructure. Staff noted that pre-session filing materials for the legislature are due September 11, and the chair said the August meeting will focus on organizational structure and identifying partners.
During public comment, Representative Kevin Mannix submitted written testimony supporting the WIPA concept and urging the task force to endorse it. Commissioner Bubba King of Yamhill County urged the task force to compare alternatives objectively and warned against adding bureaucracy before evaluating existing infrastructure and costs. Commissioners Kevin Cameron and Roger Nyquist of Marion and Linn counties described regional hub-and-spoke concepts, transfer stations, and intermodal options, emphasizing the need for planning, strategic siting, and collaboration with haulers and local governments.
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee Jul 14th, 2025
Transcript Highlights:
- These changes to the hazardous waste generator fee have had a significant impact on development and have
- The hazardous waste generator fee have had a significant impact on development and have increased costs
- delays in the development process.
- In some cases, developers had to pay the fee twice, stopping projects in their tracks.
- The issue is not simply the fee, but the unanticipated increase in fees without a cap.
Summary:
The Assembly Committee on Revenue and Taxation heard several bills focused on transit funding, veterans’ tax relief, clean energy incentives, housing development costs, and tax conformity. SB 63 would authorize a Bay Area regional sales tax measure for transit agencies facing fiscal shortfalls; supporters said it was needed to avoid major service cuts, while the California Taxpayers Association opposed it on Proposition 13/218 concerns. SB 56 would exclude veterans’ disability compensation from income calculations for the disabled veterans’ property tax exemption, and SB 296 would expand property tax relief for 100% disabled veterans and certain surviving spouses; both drew broad veterans’ support. SB 86 would extend and expand the California Alternative Energy and Advanced Transportation Financing Authority sales and use tax exemption program, including fusion energy, and SB 302 would conform state tax law to federal clean energy credit monetization provisions; both were backed by industry, labor, and clean energy advocates. SB 328 would cap Department of Toxic Substances Control fees on contaminated-soil remediation for infill and master-planned housing projects, with housing groups arguing the current fee structure can make projects infeasible. SB 711 would update California’s tax conformity date to January 1, 2025 to reduce complexity and inconsistencies with federal law, and was supported by tax professionals and business groups.
Several bills were held or sent to suspense, while others advanced with amendments. After quorum was established, SB 63 passed the committee 4-2 and SB 86, SB 302, SB 328, and SB 711 were referred to suspense, with SB 86 and SB 302 later approved out of suspense with amendments. SB 56 was held in committee, SB 296 was made a two-year bill, and SB 284 and SB 723 were held. The committee also approved a number of additional suspense-file bills, including SB 293, SB 359, SB 419, SB 587, SB 603, SB 663, SB 710, and SB 785, while SB 591 was approved with amendments and SB 353 was made a two-year bill. The hearing concluded with the committee adjournment after final roll calls and bill actions.
MN
Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session
Committee on Housing and Homelessness Prevention - 03/13/25
Housing and Homelessness Prevention
Transcript Highlights:
- <00:30:27.679>
G Balden um the Community Development G Balden um the Community Development - and we're happy to work with developers and we're happy to work with developers<00:42:04.640>
to< - <00:42:50.240>
would accommodated um many developers would accommodated um many developers - resident asked about the adjuster's fee resident asked about the adjuster's fee he<01:26:21.520>
- <01:29:49.679>
high up ho fees HOA fees to historically high up ho fees HOA fees to historically
MA
Massachusetts 2025-2026 Regular Session
Joint Committee on Financial Services Jun 21st, 2026 at 10:30 am
Joint Committee on Financial Services
Transcript Highlights:
- You mentioned the fees.
- That’s a separate fee, interchange... ...That’s a separate fee.
- , not the processor fee, not the acquiring fee, just that.
- They publish fee schedules, which have hundreds of categories of fee rates for interchange fees.
- other fee that they charge—interest rates or late fees or things like that—each bank sets its own fee
Summary:
The Joint Committee on Financial Services heard testimony on several bills focused on financial security, banking regulation, and payment-card fees. Treasurer Deborah Goldberg supported the Massachusetts baby bonds proposal (H. 48) and also endorsed bills on matched savings (H. 1158/S. 737) and retirement planning/Secure Choice (H. 1143/S. 722), arguing these measures would help address wealth inequality, build assets, and improve retirement readiness. Supporters of baby bonds included policy experts and health advocates from Children’s Health Watch and Boston Medical Center, who said early-life asset building could improve long-term economic and health outcomes for children in low-income families. AARP also urged passage of the retirement planning bill, citing the large share of private-sector workers without access to an employer retirement plan. Representative Donato testified for H. 1143, describing it as a voluntary retirement-savings opportunity for workers at small employers.
The committee also heard testimony on H. 3933, concerning the Massachusetts Credit Union Share Insurance Corporation, from former Bank Commissioner Mike Hanson, who defended the state’s full deposit insurance system for credit unions and savings institutions as a longstanding consumer-protection model. The Massachusetts Bankers Association raised concerns about the bill’s technical provisions and broader credit union/bank competitive issues, while the Cooperative Credit Union Association supported related legislation allowing modest compensation for credit union directors (S. 821/H. 1338) and flexibility for state financial institutions to grow through partnerships (S. 723). Bankers opposed those credit union bills, arguing they would upset a level playing field and blur long-standing distinctions between banks and credit unions.
A major portion of the hearing focused on H. 1259/S. 688, which would prohibit card interchange fees on the tax and gratuity portions of restaurant transactions. Restaurant owners and the Massachusetts Restaurant Association testified in favor, saying the fees are a significant and growing expense, especially as most customers now pay by card; they argued the bills would save restaurants money without affecting state revenue. Credit union, banking, and payments-industry representatives opposed the bills, saying interchange helps fund fraud protection and payment infrastructure, that the proposal would create compliance burdens and likely litigation, and that it would mainly affect Massachusetts-chartered institutions while national banks could be preempted. Committee members noted that a commission on payment-card fees is being established and said the issue would be studied further. The hearing also included support for a separate bill on virtual credit cards for dental providers, with dentists saying automatic virtual-card payments impose hidden processing fees and fraud risks.
UT
Utah 2025 Regular Session
Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Interim Committee - November 19, 2025
Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Interim Committee
Transcript Highlights:
- 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
- As we're developing this unified water infrastructure plan, we are in the process of developing a ranking
MA
Massachusetts 2025-2026 Regular Session
Joint Committee on Housing Jun 21st, 2026 at 01:00 pm
Joint Committee on Housing
Transcript Highlights:
- When state funds for new public housing developments ceased to exist in the early 1990s, we developed
- Longer development timeframes mean longer gaps in developer fees.
- We're encouraged about brokers' fees being banned, but want to continue to see other junk fees being
- late fees, renewal fees, to pay online when there is no other option.
- We also support the real estate transfer fee. We strongly support that fee.
Summary:
The Joint Committee on Housing held its second introductory hearing to frame the session’s housing agenda. Chairs Cyr and Haggerty described the hearing as a chance to hear a wide range of perspectives on Massachusetts’ housing crisis, including underbuilding, zoning and permitting barriers, rising costs, and the need for both state and local action. The committee heard from court, municipal, advocacy, and regional housing leaders, with recurring themes of increasing supply, preserving existing housing, preventing displacement, and expanding resources for renters and homeowners.
Chief Justice Diana Horan of the Housing Court said the court is handling more than 40,000 new filings annually with only 15 judges, and estimated the court would need about 21 judges to meet demand. She described complications from RAFT-related stays, mental health and guardianship issues, aging housing stock, and the new eviction sealing law, which she said was being implemented smoothly but may require additional resources if filings continue to rise. The Massachusetts Municipal Association and MAPC emphasized that municipalities need flexibility, funding, and better tools such as MassWorks, Housing Works, H-DIP, 40R reforms, inclusionary zoning changes, and a local option transfer fee; they also said local control concerns and long permitting timelines remain major barriers. MAPC and others stressed that supply growth alone will not solve the crisis and urged continued support for subsidized housing, access to counsel, and modular/off-site construction.
Advocates and housing providers focused on displacement, preservation, and tenant protections. Homes for All Massachusetts and Mass Law Reform Institute called for rent stabilization, stronger tenant protections, foreclosure prevention, elimination of junk fees, continued funding for RAFT and HomeBASE, and expanded access to counsel. Mass Union of Public Housing Tenants said the state needs far more extremely low-income housing, more operating subsidy, and major investment to repair public housing, while also supporting tenant technical assistance during redevelopment. Franklin County’s housing authority warned that rural communities are being left out of many state programs and asked for a rural LIHTC set-aside, a permanent rural credit boost, and a review of housing choice programs. A Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation researcher presented findings that communities that add housing generally see stronger municipal finances, and that housing growth can improve property tax and state aid outcomes.
Seasonal community representatives from Cape Cod, Martha’s Vineyard, and Nantucket described extreme affordability pressures and the need for tailored tools. Nantucket’s housing trust chair said the island has made progress through local funding, inclusionary zoning, and deed-restricted units, but still needs a real estate transfer fee and faster ways to preserve year-round housing. Across the hearing, members and witnesses repeatedly returned to the need for a mix of production, preservation, tenant protections, and local flexibility, rather than relying on any single policy solution.
MO
Transcript Highlights:
- Did you collect fees from that property? No. Why not?
- Yet, those landowners and/or business owners do not pay a fee similar to the fee demanded by the local
- HB 1917 facilitates the largest economic development investment in... ...the largest economic development
- So when we talk about a fee, there are two different fees or payments in this scenario.
- So when we talk about a fee, there are two different fees or payments in this scenario.
TX
Texas 89th Regular
Trade, Workforce & Economic Development Mar 12th, 2025
Trade, Workforce & Economic Development
Transcript Highlights:
- ... great economic development into the workforce system.
- to pay an assessment or a fee? That number is pretty low.
- Association's fee, you know, so that's good to learn that. The fact is...
- And some of those fees do really add up.
- My name is Matt Abel with the Texas Economic Development Council.
Bills:
HB406
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 5 on State Administration May 20th, 2026
Transcript Highlights:
- This proposal aims to reduce local development impact fees on state-funded affordable housing projects
- First, it prohibits local governments from charging development impact fees on the specific affordable
- And then, secondly, it incentivizes local governments to reduce or waive development impact fees by considering
- So this really clarifies that land donations, fee waivers, fee deferrals, all of those things can be
- If you're a developer in a low resource community, could you be questions if you're a developer in a
Summary:
The committee heard a series of May Revision budget items, beginning with the State Controller’s Office. SCO described requests for Fiscal Book of Record stabilization, payroll system implementation, ACFR reporting support, and unclaimed property outreach funding. Members focused on the Fiscal system’s July go-live, the improved timeliness of the ACFR, and the unclaimed property program’s roughly $15 billion balance and outreach efforts. The Department of Finance and LAO raised no major concerns, and the item was closed after discussion of how the new outreach funding would be used.
The committee then considered several revenue proposals. Finance presented a proposal to tax pre-written digital software and SaaS, with estimated General Fund gains of $450 million in 2026-27 and $900 million ongoing; LAO suggested broader digital tax changes and a business-use exemption, while industry groups opposed the measure as a tax on essential digital tools. CDTFA also presented an administrative request tied to the software tax, and later a $10 million budget reduction reflecting lower operational needs. The committee then heard a federal conformity proposal for new children’s tax-deferred accounts, which LAO supported, and a proposal to cut the first-year LLC/LP minimum tax from $800 to $400, which Finance said would aid small business formation but LAO argued was poorly targeted and would reduce revenue.
Another major item was a permanent business tax credit limitation beginning in 2027, capping credits at the greater of $5 million per corporation or 50% of pre-credit liability. Finance said it would raise about $850 million in 2026-27 and more in later years, while LAO noted it would mainly affect large firms using the R&D credit and could also touch California Competes and other programs. Public testimony split sharply between business groups opposing the cap and advocates supporting it as a progressive revenue measure. The committee also heard FTB’s CalFile realignment proposal, which would retain a smaller staff to continue improving the free filing system and return most of the prior funding to the General Fund.
The hearing concluded with the California Arts Council’s request to reauthorize the Keep Arts in Schools voluntary contribution fund, which brings in about $221,000 to $266,000 annually for arts grants and teacher stipends. Members and advocates supported the item but also urged larger arts funding, including the Performing Arts Equitable Payroll Fund. The Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development then presented proposals for the California Civic Media Program, CA RISE reappropriation, and a reversion of unused Chips for America facility funds; LAO supported the latter two but was cautious about new civic media spending. Members raised concerns about the civic media program’s scope, including the exclusion of broadcast and the lack of a specific ethnic media set-aside, while GoBiz said funds would begin going out in the fall if approved.
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee Apr 9th, 2025
Transcript Highlights:
- an over $7 million surplus this year for this program. maybe the $10 per fee lot fee should be suspended
- There is a modest fee increase, developed in consultation with mobile home resident input, that will
- And even when developers win their cases, they do not collect attorneys' fees.
- And even when developers win their cases, they do not collect attorney's fees, which means that most
- developers to pay for their legal fees incurred by the public agencies to defend these laws they have
Summary:
The Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee heard a long agenda of housing-related bills, beginning with AB 518 on low-impact camping areas. The author and supporters said the bill would streamline permitting for small rural camping operations on private land, expand outdoor access, and support rural economies, while opponents from campground associations and counties warned it could undermine existing regulation, create enforcement problems, and allow advertising of unpermitted sites. Members raised concerns about fire safety and local control, but the bill was ultimately passed as amended on an 8-0 vote.
The committee then approved AB 635, which would require HCD to refer up to 25 of the most serious mobile home residency law complaints to the Attorney General. Supporters said mobile home residents need stronger enforcement against egregious park-owner violations, while opponents argued the existing program is underused, costly, and should remain subject to a sunset. After discussion of the program’s surplus and enforcement role, the bill passed 9-1. AB 893, which expands ministerial approval for mixed-income housing near college campuses and broadens eligibility for affordable units to students, faculty, and staff, also drew strong support from student advocates and housing groups and respectful opposition from the League of California Cities over local control and height limits; it passed 10-0.
AB 925, the Mobile Home Emergency Safety Act, would require stronger emergency preparedness measures in mobile home parks, including accessible exits, working fire hydrants, and gas shutoff access, with a fee increase to fund enforcement. Supporters framed it as a life-safety measure in disaster-prone areas, while opponents argued the bill duplicates existing requirements and imposes an unnecessary fee increase. The committee voted 6-1 to send it to Appropriations, with the bill left on call. The consent calendar, including several other housing and local government bills, was approved 8-0. The committee also heard AB 712, which would increase penalties and attorney-fee protections for applicants enforcing state housing laws against public agencies; supporters said it would improve compliance, while special districts opposed the bill as overly broad and unclear. Members discussed indemnification and timing issues, and the bill was advanced with amendments to Judiciary.
FL
Florida 2026 5th Special Session
Regulated Industries Feb 3rd, 2026
Transcript Highlights:
- The bill does include provisions that could allow a utility to require connection fees, impact fees,
- Could allow a utility to require connection fees, impact fees, and other rates and charges, including
- The second issue addressed in the strike-all concerns an emerging fee structure imposed by developers
- more than doubled your fees in just the last few years.
- You've raised your fees more than doubled your fees in just the last few years.
Summary:
The Senate Committee on Regulated Industries met with a quorum and considered four bills. First, the committee took up SB 1724 on municipal utility services. A late-filed strike-all amendment by Senator Martin was adopted after he explained it would require annual customer meetings for certain extraterritorial utility customers, cap the use of utility revenues for general government purposes, eliminate a 25% surcharge and reduce the rate differential cap, remove municipal natural gas utilities from the bill, and preserve certain surcharges only as needed to satisfy existing bond covenants. The Florida League of Cities raised implementation concerns about the July 1, 2026 effective date and the time needed for rate studies and budget adjustments, but the bill as amended was reported favorably.
The committee then heard SB 936 on temporary door locking devices by Senator McLean. The bill would define temporary door locking devices, authorize their installation at any height, require the Florida Building Commission to add standards to the Florida Building Code, and require their use to be incorporated into safety plans, drills, and training. With no opposition or debate, SB 936 was reported favorably.
Next, the committee considered SB 1014 by Senator Mayfield, which would prohibit municipalities from refusing water and wastewater service solely because a property owner declines annexation, if the property is near a municipal main line, not served by another utility, and the utility has capacity. An amendment narrowed the bill by defining “main line” and reducing the distance threshold from 2,000 meters to one-half mile. The Florida League of Cities opposed the bill as amended, citing concerns about large users, possible conflict with annexation law, potential enclave creation, and revenue impacts, but Senator Mayfield said he would continue working on the issues. The committee reported the bill favorably.
Finally, Chair Bradley presented SB 1498 on community associations. A strike-all amendment was adopted that made technical changes to video conference recording, turnover inspection reports, and electronic voting, and added provisions requiring associations to provide records to law enforcement and prosecutors, creating a second-degree misdemeanor for willful refusal. It also targeted mandatory club or amenity fee structures controlled by developers or third parties, declaring such provisions against public policy, limiting assessments to proportional expenses, and allowing suits and conveyance of common areas after turnover. Testimony from homeowners described alleged governance abuses and opaque, profit-driven mandatory fees in their communities, while the Community Associations Institute supported the amendment. The committee reported CS for SB 1498 favorably. Members then recorded additional votes for the record, and the meeting adjourned.
HI
Transcript Highlights:
- Committees on Housing to develop a Committees on Housing to develop a comprehensive<00:01:55.200>
- c> a Development Corporation to develop a Development Corporation to develop a plan<00:02:48.160>
- fee.
- The leaseold fee for their leaseold fee.
- c> a Development Corporation to develop a Development Corporation to develop a plan<00:11:19.279>
Summary:
The Committee on Housing heard two resolutions. STR 48 SD 1 called for a comprehensive strategy to adopt updated building codes, with testimony listed from several groups but no one appeared to testify. The committee later deferred the measure, noting it was very similar to House Concurrent Resolution 67 House Draft 1.
The committee then took up STR 6D1, which urges the Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation to develop a plan to produce enough housing to meet state demand. HHFDC testified that the resolution misstated the scope of low-income housing tax credit units and emphasized that the state’s housing need is much larger than previously cited, with a recent study showing about 33,000 units needed for households at or below 60% AMI statewide. HHFDC supported planning but said any plan must be realistic and account for private land constraints. A member raised concerns about rising leasehold costs and affordability for homeowners, and HHFDC responded that rental affordability can be maintained more readily than for-sale housing.
The committee adopted HHFDC’s proposed amendments to STR 6D1, including deleting a clause about overbuilding, revising the shortage figures, and adding language referencing Senate Bill 26 and the affordable housing land inventory task force. The committee also amended the resolution to focus on density and timing of development for projects identified by that task force. The measure passed with amendments, and the meeting adjourned.
ND
North Dakota 2025-2026 Regular Session
Government Finance Committee Jun 25th, 2026
Transcript Highlights:
- The fee varies based upon that. We do have fees.
- fees.
- The fee process in the community development and building department, the permit fee, I’m not completely
- The fee process in the community development and build What Chief Lorenz said, the fee process in the
- community development and building department, the permit fee, I'm not completely familiar with that
Summary:
The committee began with roll call, introductions of a new fiscal analyst and a new member, and approval of the March 19 minutes. The first major presentation was from the Office of Management and Budget on the state’s general fund and special fund status through May. OMB reported general fund revenues were running below the legislative forecast by about $76 million, driven largely by weaker individual income tax and sales tax collections, though the projected ending balance remained positive and above the budgeted level. The budget stabilization fund was above its cap and would transfer excess earnings to the general fund, and the legacy fund balance continued to grow. Members also asked about federal funding uncertainty and mineral leasing revenue variability.
The committee then reviewed compliance reports and trust fund analyses, followed by discussion of a bill draft for the fixed-route city transportation network study. The draft would create a $15 million general fund grant program with a formula-based distribution to eligible fixed-route transit cities, intended to support operating and capital needs and help match federal transit funds. Transit officials from Minot and Fargo testified in support, explaining local fare and match structures and the difficulty of replacing aging buses and securing federal matching dollars. Several members questioned whether the program should be limited to the current four cities or broadened to future eligible urban areas, and whether local funding sources should be explored further. The committee did not finalize the bill draft at that point and planned to continue discussion at a later meeting.
The committee also approved a bill draft repealing obsolete language related to approval of a bi-state authority with South Dakota, after staff explained that no agreements had ever been implemented and the provision appeared outdated. A roll call vote was taken and the motion carried. Later, the Department of Commerce and the Northern Plains UAS Test Site presented updates on uncrewed aircraft systems initiatives, including the Vantis radar data enclave, the drone replacement program, and efforts to build a revenue model for Vantis. Test site officials said FAA approval had been secured for the radar data program, replacement of noncompliant drones was underway, and future revenue could come from state and external users once pricing and intellectual property arrangements are finalized. Members asked about Chinese-made drones, supply chain issues, automation, and how the system would manage beyond-visual-line-of-sight operations.
The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation then presented on the design of a new minimum-security prison and a reentry housing study. Officials said the proposed facility would relocate the minimum-security prison to the penitentiary campus, reduce costs from an earlier estimate, and provide more beds and programming space, with construction potentially beginning in 2027 and opening around 2031. They also described staffing needs, the planned move of women to the New England facility, and possible expansion of men’s housing there. The parole and probation chief described a reentry housing task force studying housing needs for people leaving incarceration, with a goal of developing data-driven recommendations for subsidies and support services; a representative from Protection and Advocacy closed by expressing general support for fixed-route and paratransit funding.
CO
Colorado 2026 Regular Session
Colorado House 2026 Legislative Day 086 Part 2 Apr 10th, 2026
Colorado House Floor Meeting
Transcript Highlights:
- This amount shall be from general education development program fees.
- <04:06:33.680>
program <04:06:34.080>14 <04:06:34.319>fees education development - program 14 fees education development program 14 fees and<04:06:34.960>
$93 <04:06:35.600> - This amount shall be from fees, small business development centers, activities, grants, and donations
- Program Fee for Service Contracts. Program Fee for Service Contracts.
Summary:
The committee and floor took up House Bill 1411, which concerned the Cover All Colorado program. Debate centered on whether removing the program’s cap would create an open-ended entitlement and add pressure to the state budget. Supporters and opponents argued over fiscal impacts, with several members saying the program had grown far beyond its original cost estimate and that the state needed to protect the budget and maintain a balanced plan. The bill was ultimately passed as amended.
House Bill 1412 was then considered, authorizing the Department of Health Care Policy and Financing to use statistical sampling and extrapolation to recover Medicaid overpayments in certain provider audits, including ABA therapy and non-emergency medical transportation. Sponsors said the measure would help recapture millions in overpayments tied to fraud, waste, and abuse, and noted safeguards such as strict benchmarks, internal audit review, and a third-party audit firm. An amendment striking the word “alleged” from the bill was adopted, and the bill passed as amended.
House Bill 1413, which changes leave provisions for certain public servants, was also approved. The bill removes a statutory cap on how much sick leave state employees may earn, while leaving actual leave policies to departments and bargaining agreements, and increases annual military leave to align with federal law. Members described it as a modest employee-benefit measure in a year without across-the-board pay raises. The House also laid over House Bill 1410 until later in the day and received the committee of the whole report on a large slate of other bills. Later, Representative Richardson sought to reverse the committee’s action on an amendment to House Bill 1389, which involved the comprehensive human sexuality education grant fund, arguing the grant program should be repealed if it is no longer funded.
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 1 on Health Mar 17th, 2025
Transcript Highlights:
- payers fee schedule.
- That's a small mailer fee program. And this proposal has no impact on those existing fees.
- That's a small mail or fee program. And this proposal has no impact on those existing fees.
- Again, it's the application and site readiness review fees, which are one-time fees, and then a fee associated
- fees.
Summary:
The committee heard a budget oversight hearing on the Department of Health Care Services, focusing first on the overall Medi-Cal budget and a March General Fund loan to cover a current-year shortfall. DHCS said the 2025-26 budget proposal totals $193.4 billion, with Medi-Cal projected at $188.1 billion total funds and $42.1 billion General Fund, driven by higher enrollment, pharmacy costs, managed care growth, and costs tied to eligibility expansions and the COVID-era redetermination unwinding. The department said the $3.44 billion loan was needed to manage cash flow and ensure timely payments to providers and plans, while the LAO noted Medi-Cal’s cash-basis budgeting creates volatility and that more detailed estimates would come with the May Revision. Members discussed federal Medicaid threats, the need for transparency on cost drivers, and the impact of pharmacy spending, long-term care, and immigration-related coverage expansions.
The second major topic was family health programs, including California Children’s Services, the continuous coverage unwinding, and opioid settlement fund spending. DHCS described CCS funding methodology changes, ongoing county stakeholder work, and a delayed rollout of CCS monitoring and oversight until July 1, 2025, while county representatives and advocates argued the program is underfunded and asked for more technical assistance and a delay in implementation. On the unwinding, the department explained that federal redetermination flexibilities helped maintain coverage after the pandemic, but the Governor’s budget proposes ending them at the end of June 2025; advocates urged making the flexibilities permanent to avoid coverage losses. For opioid settlement funds, DHCS and Finance said the budget increases funding for naloxone distribution while reducing other harm-reduction spending based on updated settlement revenues, prompting criticism from members and public commenters who argued the change would weaken effective harm-reduction programs.
The hearing also included an update on Proposition 35 implementation. DHCS said the voter-approved measure continuously appropriates MCO tax revenues beginning in 2025, with up to $4.6 billion annually available for specified Medi-Cal and provider investments in 2025 and 2026, but implementation depends on consultation with the required stakeholder advisory committee. The department and LAO noted uncertainty about future federal rules affecting the MCO tax after 2026. Public testimony largely supported maintaining Medi-Cal expansions, protecting immigrant coverage, preserving harm-reduction funding, and increasing support for community health workers, pediatric dental care, and CCS county administration. No votes were taken during the portion of the hearing provided.
KY
Kentucky 2025 Regular Session
Kentucky Housing Task Force 2025 (9-22-25)
Transcript Highlights:
- for the development. for the development.
- It can't be the developer.
- There is no recurring fee each.
- we're going to on the other fee? we're going to on the other fee?
- asking me for 7500 for the closing fees. asking me for 7500 for the closing fees.
Keywords:
Meeting Start 00:00:03
Roll Call 00:00:08
Discussion of Indiana Residential Infrastructure Fund 00:01:27
Discussion of Affordable Housing Trust Fund 00:33:30
Discussion of Urban Infill 01:12:37
Approval of Minutes from July Meeting 01:39:00
Adjournment 01:39:42, 958, all
Summary:
The Housing Task Force heard a presentation from Anita Sanford of the Homebuilders Association of Kentucky and Sheri Cybert of Indiana’s Residential Infrastructure Fund about Indiana’s low-interest loan program for local housing infrastructure. They described the program as a voluntary, locally driven model that helps communities finance roads, sewers, sidewalks, traffic lights, turning lanes, and other infrastructure needed for new housing development. Sanford emphasized that infrastructure and regulation are major drivers of housing costs, citing estimates that infrastructure can account for up to 30% of a home’s cost and regulations another 25%, and said the association is studying Kentucky-specific regulatory costs. She also noted that every $1,000 added to new home construction can price out about 2,000 Kentucky households.
Cybert explained that Indiana’s program, administered through the Indiana Finance Authority, began in 2023 with $75 million appropriated over two years and has since closed 17 loans totaling $60.7 million, with more than 2,700 projected housing units. The program reserves 70% of funds for rural communities and 30% for urban communities, requires applications from local governments rather than developers, and asks communities to show need through a market study, describe the infrastructure and housing to be built, and provide preliminary engineering plans and a repayment source. She said the loans currently carry an interest rate around 3.5%, reset quarterly, and that the program has generated about $25 million in savings to communities compared with private borrowing. She also described recent Indiana legislative changes that encourage higher density and other zoning reforms, and said a majority of those local ordinance changes must be adopted for an application to be fundable.
Members asked about the ordinance requirements, the funding split between rural and urban areas, repayment mechanisms, and whether there were caps on project size. Cybert said repayment is worked out case by case, often through existing or project-specific TIFs, temporary tax agreements, or letters of credit, and that the program has no cap on request size or income/affordability restrictions. She said the largest request funded was $19 million for a 700-unit project. Co-chair Mills and others discussed whether Kentucky could adopt a similar model and what it would cost, while Sanford and Cybert said they were still refining budget estimates. Later, Scott Welch, president of the Homebuilders Association of Kentucky, testified that upfront infrastructure costs are a major barrier in his projects, citing a $1 million pump station and road-widening and utility relocation costs as examples, and said an infrastructure fund would help get projects off the ground.
ND
North Dakota 2026 1st Special Session
Government Finance Committee Jun 25th, 2026
Government Finance Committee
Transcript Highlights:
- The fee varies based upon that. We do have fees.
- fees.
- The fee process in the community development and build So does the, did the states start to refuse to
- The fee process in the community development and build What Chief Lorenz said, the fee process in the
- community development and building department, the permit fee, I'm not completely familiar with that
Summary:
The committee first received a general fund and revenue update from the Office of Management and Budget. Staff reported that the state started the biennium about $176 million above prior estimates, but year-to-date revenues were now running below legislative forecast, mainly due to lower individual income tax and sales tax collections. The budget stabilization fund was above its cap, the legacy fund continued to grow, and oil revenues were slightly above forecast overall. Members also asked about federal funding uncertainty and mineral leasing variability, and OMB said agencies would be asked to address potential federal reductions case by case during budget preparation.
The committee then reviewed compliance reports and trust fund analysis materials, followed by a bill draft for a fixed-route city transportation grant program. Testimony from transit officials in Fargo and Minot supported the proposal, saying state aid would help match federal transit funds and support operations, but members raised questions about the funding source, fare structures, and whether the program should be limited to the current four fixed-route cities or allow future eligible cities. Several members asked for more time to study the formula and possible funding options before moving the bill forward.
Next, the committee approved a bill draft repealing obsolete language related to a proposed North Dakota-South Dakota bi-state authority. Staff explained the provision had been unused for about 30 years and that existing law likely already allowed joint powers agreements without the specific language. The committee voted to adopt the repeal bill draft.
The Department of Commerce and the Northern Plains UAS Test Site then provided an update on uncrewed aircraft system initiatives, including the Vantis radar data enclave, the drone replacement program, and future revenue models. Officials said North Dakota had received FAA approval to operate the radar data pathfinder, had begun replacing non-compliant drones from restricted foreign sources, and was working on phased procurement and cost-recovery plans. Members asked about deadlines, funding, supply-chain issues, and how the system would be used; staff said the federal restrictions were already in effect and that Vantis was being positioned as infrastructure for future beyond-visual-line-of-sight operations.
Finally, the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation presented on the design of a new minimum-security prison and on a reentry housing task force. The new facility is planned for the penitentiary grounds, with a reduced estimated cost of about $263 million, 600 beds initially, possible expansion to 732 beds, and completion projected around 2031 if funded in 2027. The reentry housing task force described a data-driven effort to identify housing needs for people leaving incarceration, with the goal of reducing homelessness and recidivism through targeted housing support and possible subsidies. Members asked about staffing, site selection, housing duration, and whether employment and transportation needs would be included in the assessment.
HI
Hawaii 2025 Regular Session
JHA Public Hearing - Fri Jan 31, 2025 @ 2:00 PM HST
Judiciary & Hawaiian Affairs
Transcript Highlights:
- yeah is storm water fees and sewage fees yeah is storm water fees and sewage fees yeah uh<01:37:11.800
- could go in and ask for a waiver on the sewer connection fees, which is significant if you're a developer
- with, but also as we move forward on developing projects, if we can get those fees eliminated, the sewer
- with, but also as we move forward on developing projects, if we can get those fees eliminated, the sewer
- <01:43:17.400>
goes fees well that the user fees goes fees well that the user fees goes through
Summary:
The committee heard testimony on House Bill 410, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs’ biennium operating budget. OHA asked for a modest increase over its base budget, including $1.2 million to fund 13 new full-time positions for a strategy and implementation team tied to its long-term plan, with emphasis on housing, education, health, and economic resilience. OHA also described a broader effort to work directly with executive branch departments to improve outcomes for Native Hawaiians. Testimony was largely supportive, with several individuals speaking in favor and one testifier expressing strong frustration about Native Hawaiian rights and access to resources. The chair noted there were 38 additional written/supporting testimonies and three in opposition. Members asked about OHA’s funding sources and public land trust revenues; OHA said it is not receiving the full 20 percent share, described a public land trust working group and system issues, and said a related bill would seek funding to begin an inventory. No vote was taken in the portion provided.
The committee then considered House Bill 304, which would make the Hawaiian version of a law binding when the law was originally drafted in Hawaiian and later translated into English. The Judiciary supported the bill, saying it reinforces Hawaiian as an official language and looks to the original language for legislative intent. The Attorney General supported the intent but recommended narrowing the bill with a proviso to avoid ambiguities, limiting it to laws originally drafted in Hawaiian that were not later amended, codified, recodified, or reenacted in English. Public testimony was generally supportive, though one speaker raised broader sovereignty concerns. Members questioned how many laws would be affected and whether the proposed amendment would undercut the bill; the Attorney General said the amendment was meant to address uncertainty in interpretation. No final action was reported.
Finally, the committee heard House Bill 603, which would direct OHA to administer a Native Hawaiian business marketing program to promote Native Hawaiian-owned businesses through marketing and technical assistance. OHA supported the concept, saying a label or branding program could help consumers identify and support Native Hawaiian-owned businesses, but requested that funding be redirected to a working group to study program design, implementation, enforcement, and long-term viability. The chair noted four supportive testimonies had been received, and a member asked OHA to confirm that its programs serve all Hawaiians, not only those eligible for homelands; OHA said it serves all Hawaiians in the state. The transcript ends before any vote or further action on HB 603.
HI
Hawaii 2025 Regular Session
EDT-WTL, EDT-AEN, EDT Public Hearings 03-18-2025
Economic Development and Tourism
Transcript Highlights:
- <00:18:39.720>
a rather than dlnr needing to develop a rather than dlnr needing to develop - port um and under Section 266 the fees port um and under Section 266 the fees are<00:23:49.120><
- They don't want to pay the fee.
- Department of Agriculture. bus Development bus Development Corporation<01:07:34.839>
afternoon - white technology uh Development white technology uh Development Corporation<01:14:37.000>
first
Summary:
The Senate Committee on Economic Development and Tourism and on Water and Land heard testimony on HB 504, a measure relating to environmental stewardship and funding for natural resource protection and restoration. Supporters included multiple state agencies and advocacy groups, such as DLNR, HTA, Hawaiʻi Ocean Legislative Task Force, Resources Legacy Fund, the Hawaiʻi Climate Action Coalition, and others, who said the bill would create dedicated funding for environmental, climate, and cultural resource needs and help address wildfire, flood, coastal storm, and tourism-related impacts. Several witnesses emphasized that Hawaiʻi’s environmental funding gap is large and that visitor contributions should be directed to stewardship and restoration. Some supporters also urged that the measure be applied equitably across all visitor accommodations and related uses, including cruise ship cabins and state rooms, while a few suggested amendments to broaden coverage or create a working group for implementation.
Opposition and concerns focused largely on the bill’s tax structure and legal/administrative issues. The Department of Budget and Finance and the Tax Foundation questioned the reimbursable general obligation bond special fund in part two, suggesting it be converted to a regular special fund or deleted. The Attorney General’s office said part two may violate the single-subject rule in the state constitution and recommended deleting it. The Department of Taxation said the proposed points-and-miles language would be difficult to audit and enforce, and Expedia and others said the proposed tax treatment of loyalty points and certain payment forms would be operationally difficult. Industry witnesses also warned the bill could raise costs in a high-tax destination and asked for more marketing support if the tax is increased. The committee also heard concerns that a new tax on cruise ship cabins could raise federal preemption issues.
The chair noted the testimony count as 23 in support, 179 in opposition, and one with comments. No vote was taken in the portion provided, and the hearing ended with questions from senators and agency responses about possible amendments, enforcement, and constitutional concerns.
TX
Texas 89th 2nd C.S.
Senate Committee on Water, Agriculture, and Rural Affairs May 11th, 2026
Water, Agriculture and Rural Affairs
Transcript Highlights:
- We want to know that the water and sewer tap fees, the sewer fees, the stormwater runoff fees, those
- Impact fees. Wow.
- And so they are charged—it’s called a GRP fee, a groundwater reduction program fee.
- One's a base fee and one's a volumetric fee.
- We've developed plans.