Transcript Highlights:

• Health policy requiring an occupational license authorizing fees. The Chair recognizes Mr.
• It's only a fee now? If the.
• Not any structure that is over 500 feet.
• However, I am aware of an impact on migrating birds from structures. in the sky.
• This amendment gets rid of a fee. How's that sound? I move adoption. Mr.

Bills: HB1535, HB 123, HB 111, HB180, HB342, HB 1027, HB 1178, HB610, HB 1277, HB1615, HB1620, HB5342, HB4885, HB4751, HB4689, HB4530, HB4488, HB2149, HB2041, HB2071, HB1813, HB2282, HB2248, HB2243, HB2522, HB2310, HB2513, HB2300, HB1902, HB3719, HB4284, HB4327, HB3743, HB3778, HB3801, HB5153, HB5147, HB4877, HB4850, HB3158, HB3261, HB3005, HB3033, HB3138, HB3099, HB2849, HB2967, HB3488, HB3477, HB3466, HB3396, HB3469, HB2594, HB2776, HB2564, HB2298, HB5331, HB5646, HB5247, HB5323, HB2015, HB4384, HB3896, HB4014, HB3627, HB3594, HB2524, HB510, HB561, HB5111, HB5446, HB 1181, HB3963, HB2785, HB1661, HB2460, HB24, HJR138, HB3800, HB42, HB 129, HB677, HB668, HB2128, HB2038, HB2316, HB3686, HB2563, HB 1160, HB3883, HB2788, HB2663, HB3305, HB3474, HB 1105, HB3490, HB3597, HB 1295, HB3512, HB3783, HB2017, HB3010, HB3112, HB4215, HB3223, HB3464, HB3120, HB4214, HB4081, HB4783, HB4063, HB2783, HB5085, HB2510, HB3426, HB4361, HB 1169, HB2516, HB4700, HB3560, HB3860, HB3146, HB184, HB198, HB247, HB367, HB449, HB1778, HB514, HB632, HB2582, HB766, HB2715, HB2712, HB3069, HB3505, HB 1269, HB4224, HB5032, HB2240, HB5180, HB3348, HB4668, HB4665, HB3395, HB3157, HB4395, HB4325, HB4386, HB4273, HB2760, HB2820, HB1828, HB1579, SB2349, SB1268, SB610, SB1577, SB1369, SB2032, SB2034, SB1057, SB1044, SB922, SB1759, SB1143, SB1506, SB1403, SB2361, SB870, SB372, SB72, SB1583, SB2314, SB1267, SB1273, SB765, SB552, HB2145, HJR112, HB1804, HJR110, HB 1194, HB1531, HB5008, HB3421, SCR27, HB5398, HB1407, HB426, HB1535, HB 123, HB1773, HB1871, HB2035, HB2448, HB2492, HB1411, HB4753, HB4666, HB4529, HB1499, HB1610, HB2028, HB1506, HB886, HB3546, HB796, HB223, HB1475, HB3556, HB4638, HB 111, HB180, HB342, HB 1027, HB 1178, HB610, HB 1277, HB1615, HB1620, HB5342, HB4885, HB4751, HB4689, HB4530, HB4488, HB2149, HB2041, HB2071, HB1813, HB2282, HB2248, HB2243, HB2522, HB2310, HB2513, HB2300, HB1902, HB3719, HB4284, HB4327, HB3743, HB3778, HB3801, HB5153, HB5147, HB4877, HB4850, HB3158, HB3261, HB3005, HB3033, HB3138, HB3099, HB2849, HB2967, HB3488, HB3477, HB3466, HB3396, HB3469, HB2594, HB2776, HB2564, HB2298, HB5331, HB5646, HB5247, HB5323, HB2015, HB4384, HB3896, HB4014, HB3627, HB3594, HB2524, HB510, HB561, HB5111, HB5446, HB 1181, HB3963, HB2785, HB1661, HB2460, HCR98, HCR92, HCR126

Keywords: Trinity River Authority, river authority, Sunset Advisory Commission, Texas Sunset Act, board of directors, governor appointment, public water authority, regional water authority, water resources, local government, natural resources, board training, ethics, open meetings, public information, conflict of interest, complaint procedures, public comment, director removal, governance reform

Transcript Highlights:

• to monetary payments uh committee fees to monetary payments uh committee fees uh<00:43:23.440>
• It's a technical change that would enable existing structures to be improved for greater safety.
• The member also asked whether the phrase "living space" includes decks and similar structures.
• rules regarding uh the these structures rules regarding uh the these structures but<01:34:19.280
• He said if it is easier to expand a structure over public waters than to expand a structure in protected

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Yeah. >> Did what was the full cost of just the parking structure portion?
• Yeah. >> Did what was the full cost of just the parking structure portion?
• Yeah. >> Did what was the full cost of just the parking structure portion?
• Yeah. >> Did what was the full cost of just the parking structure portion?
• recommendation to describe the fees recommendation to describe the fees instead<00:46:27.200>

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint hearing covered several housing-related measures. On SB 2068, which would create an affordable housing land inventory task force within the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development to study how to maximize housing on transit-oriented development and other state and county lands, testimony was mostly supportive from agencies and housing groups, with one opposition witness. In response to questions, OPSD said it was already working on a list of potential parcels but could not yet identify unit counts or a timeline, and estimated about $250,000 would be needed for staffing and contractual support. The committees also heard SB 2227 on rental assistance, which would require HPHA to make monthly rent supplement payments, prioritize certain tenants including kupuna, allow agreements with counties and nonprofits, and create a special fund supported by a transaction fee on recordings. HPHA supported the bill, and the Department of the Attorney General said it recommended amending the measure to describe the fee as a tax. Additional testimony included support from elder and community organizations and one opposition witness. For SB 2061, relating to residential condominiums and the 99-year leasehold program, HCDA and the project developer testified in support of amendments intended to preserve owner-occupant requirements while making the project more marketable and financially feasible. Members focused heavily on parking, affordability, and financing. HCDA and the developer said the parking stalls would be unbundled from the units, that the project would be a 99-year leasehold with 60% of units reserved for buyers at or below 140% AMI and 40% market-rate, and that the state’s $15 million equity contribution would cover only part of the parking garage and commercial component. The hearing then moved on to SB 3327, relating to HCDA and complete communities, but the transcript cuts off before that measure was fully discussed.

Transcript Highlights:

• Over the next 14 years, prices generally increased by roughly 30%, but these fees, all of these fees
• So currently, impound and storage fees have increased to $22.85 per day and the notification fee is still
• the notification fee.
• Specifically, these fees have been frozen in statute for for 14 years, and when the fees were finally
• However, the fee structure poses some significant challenges.

Transcript Highlights:

• structures.
• The study found that if the current fee structures remain unchanged, the department risks insolvency.
• We commissioned an independent fee study to... in detail appropriate fee recommendations for each program
• The fee increase increases for escrow and CRMLA are based on the recommendations from the fee study conducted
• But the point is. definitely see that on the on those paying the fee the fees this might be quite nerve-wracking

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We facilitated structured field testing of this tool at 3 different correctional institutions were the
• So we have a lot of struck an structured and Simon structure data out there and it's all over the place
• So then then at the end, there's attorneys fees that vary for misdemeanor and felony amounts.
• So in order for the public defenders to be able to collect that $50 application fee, there has to be
• They say there's a $50 application fee.

Transcript Highlights:

• these veterans... ...ensures fees for helping these veterans are one-time fees and that the fees are
• I'd look for transparency, an easy-to-understand fee structure, as well as an outline of the scope of
• Only require hourly or flat fees charged on the back end? Upfront fees, right?
• than contingent fee.
• He said the most common structure is a 20% fee agreement.

Bills: SB1003, SB1060, SB1134, SB1275, SB1327, SB1429, SB1618, SB1634, SB1654, SB1803, SCR1002, SCR1005, SCR1023, SCR1027

Keywords: election, canvass, certification, ballot tabulation, write-in candidates, registration, voting procedures, voter registration, temporary absence, absentee voting, residency, military voters, overseas voters, election law, Arizona Revised Statutes, political signs, campaign materials, public safety, municipal regulation, veterans

Summary: The committee first heard a lengthy presentation and discussion focused on Arizona State University’s foreign research ties, especially collaborations and funding connected to China and Chinese military-affiliated institutions. The presenter argued that ASU and the Arizona Board of Regents had not been transparent about foreign gifts, contracts, and research partnerships, citing federal reporting forms, the Wolf Amendment, export-control concerns, and alleged links to dual-use technologies such as quantum systems, AI, robotics, microelectronics, and biosecurity. A witness from American Global Strategies testified in support, saying the bill would help protect U.S. research security and national security by imposing state-level guardrails on sensitive collaborations. After questions, the committee considered a strike-everything amendment to SB 1060 that would bar public universities from entering into or continuing certain loans, gifts, contracts, research partnerships, or sponsored projects involving the PRC, the CCP, and listed Chinese military-linked universities, require ABOR review and approval, and impose reporting and budget penalties. The amendment was withdrawn, and the committee instead took up SB 1327, which directs ABOR to require university research security policies and to report annually on those policies and on foreign contributions over $250,000; SB 1327 received a 4-2 do-pass recommendation, with Del Santos, Hernandez, and Márquez voting no and Kolodin, Powell, Keshel, and Gillette voting yes. The committee then heard SB 1803, a veterans bill regulating unrecognized persons who assist with VA disability claims. The sponsor and industry witnesses said the bill would protect veterans from bad actors by requiring disclosures, capping fees, banning certain practices, and filing service agreements with the Attorney General, while opponents argued it could restrict consumer choice, resemble a price ceiling, and still allow non-attorneys to engage in the unauthorized practice of law. After extensive debate over contingent fees, legal ethics, and whether the bill was too favorable to one company, the committee continued the hearing with additional testimony and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Willoughby shared on the record, which was about the current structure.
• But we have a concern with 2194, not the intent but the structure.
• Is there fees that's going to be associated with this?
• fees for the pilot program, the $1.5 million, or the trust fund.
• As far as the fees or administration, there are no fees or administrative fees being charged against

Bills: HB2180, HB2184, HB2188, HB2194, HB2206, HB2321, HB2322, HB2438, HB2442, HB2448, HB2727, HB2797

Keywords: appropriation, funding, University of Arizona, education, state budget, fetal death, funeral homes, informed consent, abortion, women's rights, medical assistance, emotional support, language acquisition, early intervention, hearing impairment, grant program, deaf education, health care, insurance claims, prior authorization

Summary: The Committee on Health and Human Services opened with remarks about shortening meeting times and then heard a JLBC presentation on the effects of H.R. 1 on SNAP. JLBC staff explained that H.R. 1 expands SNAP work requirements, raises the state share of SNAP administrative costs from 50% to 75% beginning in FY 2027, and could require Arizona to pay a share of benefits if its SNAP error rate exceeds 6%. JLBC estimated the administrative cost increase at about $33 million in FY 2027 and $44 million in FY 2028, and said a 2024 error rate of 8.8% could trigger about $139 million in state benefit costs under the new federal formula. The committee then considered HB 2797, which requires DES to regularly review data from other agencies to verify SNAP eligibility, post fraud and noncompliance data, and address out-of-state EBT purchases. Supporters said it would improve program integrity and help Arizona avoid federal cost-sharing penalties; the bill passed 7-5. The committee next heard HB 2180, which appropriates $2.5 million in FY 2027 to the University of Arizona for AZ REACH, a statewide hospital transfer coordination service. Supporters from rural hospitals and the health system described it as a useful, voluntary service that speeds transfers and reduces burden on physicians, while one health system representative asked for better operational coordination. The bill passed 11-1. HB 2184, as amended, would extend fetal death certificate filing requirements to fetal deaths at or before 20 weeks if requested by the mother and require notice of the option to transfer remains to a funeral home before an abortion. Supporters, including a mortuary owner and parents who had experienced miscarriages, said it would give grieving families dignity and closure; opponents raised concerns about reproductive rights and language in the bill. The committee adopted the Bliss amendment and passed the bill 7-4-1. HB 2188, as amended, created a Language Acquisition Grant Program for services to deaf or hard-of-hearing infants and toddlers. Supporters said it would streamline funding and preserve family choice among spoken language, ASL, or both, while an opponent argued the bill should more explicitly ensure equal access to ASL and Deaf Culture services; the bill passed 12-0. The committee also considered three more H.R. 1-related SNAP bills. HB 2442 would require able-bodied adults under 60 receiving SNAP to participate in an employment and training program unless exempt; supporters said it would connect recipients to work and training, and it passed 7-5. HB 2448 would bar DES from seeking work-requirement waivers or discretionary exemptions unless authorized by law; supporters said it would prevent broad waivers and improve employment outcomes, and it also passed 7-5. Finally, HB 2206 would require DES to reduce the SNAP payment error rate to 3% by 2030, submit annual progress reports, and face corrective action if targets are missed. Supporters said it would save taxpayer money and improve accountability, while opponents argued the target was too aggressive without more staff or funding and could strain DES; the bill was still under discussion at the end of the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• focusing on regulations, oversight, and enforcement, which all speak about the key existing regulatory structures
• The other element I want to point out there is there's not a direct correlation between entrance fee
• You could pay a high entrance fee and have 4,000 square feet of living space.
• And so it all depends on how that community is actually structured.
• You're probably sick of hearing me say that, and entrance fees.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Commission on Continuing Care Retirement Communities met for its third meeting, focused on regulations, oversight, and enforcement. Staff and agency presenters reviewed the current framework: the Executive Office of Aging and Independence explained that assisted living regulations generally do not apply to CCRCs unless an assisted living component markets itself separately, and that CCRCs must submit marketing materials, contracts, and disclosure statements for public posting. The Attorney General’s office described Chapter 93A consumer protection standards and noted it is working on draft assisted living-specific regulations. DPH outlined its oversight of licensed nursing facilities associated with some CCRCs, including routine surveys, complaint investigations, and enforcement tools such as admissions freezes, fines, receivership, and license actions, along with federal CMS sanctions for certified facilities. Commission members and presenters then discussed gaps and ambiguities in how CCRCs are defined and regulated, especially whether communities without on-site skilled nursing should still be treated as CCRCs, how assisted living-like services within CCRCs are classified, and whether residents have enough clarity about the services they are buying. A major theme was disclosure: members raised concerns about entrance fees, refund timing and conditions, whether skilled nursing is on-site or provided by contract, and how residents can compare communities. Several participants suggested more standardized disclosure and possibly broader consumer protection rules, while others cautioned that overly rigid requirements could affect community finances and development. The commission also explored enforcement and resident protections. Some members argued that independent living residents are already covered by landlord-tenant law and that existing complaint systems and community education may be sufficient, while others said residents in supported or assisted settings within CCRCs should have clearer access to ombudsman services and oversight. The discussion turned to closure and ownership transfer, with members citing recent national examples of sales and bankruptcies that changed resident terms. DPH explained its closure process for licensed nursing facilities, and members noted that Chapter 197 of 2024 adds oversight for facility transfers and financial disclosures. The meeting ended with logistics for the next session at Brookhaven at Lexington on June 2, a public hearing on June 16, and a request to circulate the hearing notice broadly to residents and stakeholder organizations.

Transcript Highlights:

• The first thing we did is their tax or their fee structure. We actually locked that into statute.
• <00:02:33.959> structure<00:02:34.800> we<00:02:35.040> actually<00:02:35.400>
• > locked<00:02:35.720> that fee structure we actually locked that fee structure we actually
• the structure that was getting<00:10:06.680> put<00:10:06.880> in<00:10:07.079> place
• Again, as you know, I had issues with the structure last year, and I'll continue watching this.

Keywords: Call to Order 00:00 Roll Call 00:05 HB 566 Discussion 01:34 HB 566 Vote 16:42 HB 39 Discussion 19:15 HB 39 Vote 23:10 HB 70 Discussion 24:48 HB 70 Vote 27:36 HB 72 Discussion 28:58 HB 72 Vote 39:45 HB 79 Discussion 41:45 HB 79 Vote 42:58 HB 223 Discussion 45:34 HB 223 Vote 46:24 Adjournment 47:38, 958, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 566, which would implement the Kentucky Horse Racing and Gaming Corporation created last year. Chairman Cook described major provisions affecting charitable gaming, horse racing, sports wagering, and quarter horse racing, including locking charitable gaming fees in statute at a slightly lower rate, expanding charitable gaming board representation, preserving existing gaming technology, allowing school districts to hold charitable gaming licenses, and setting up self-funding for the new corporation through administrative set-asides from gaming-related funds. The bill also addresses uncashed vouchers, cross-training of investigators, ethics and employment provisions, and a three-year quarter horse breeding incentive intended to grow the industry. A committee substitute made two technical changes: clarifying voucher money stays with the track facility and making the school district itself the license holder. The substitute and then the bill both passed favorably, with several members noting concerns from last year but supporting the revised structure. The committee then heard House Bill 70, an interstate compact for dietitians. Sponsor Representative Vanessa Grossl and witnesses said the measure would allow reciprocity with other compact states, improve workforce mobility, help military families, expand patient access and telehealth, and reduce administrative burden on the licensing board. The committee substitute created a third license category for educational interpreters, but that language actually belonged to the next bill; for HB 70, the committee voted the bill favorably without reported amendments. The bill passed unanimously or near-unanimously and was sent to the House floor. Next, House Bill 72 was presented by Representative DJ Johnson to amend the law governing limited x-ray machine operators. The sponsor explained that current law effectively prevents limited x-ray operators from working in the same facility as other imaging equipment, which he said creates compliance problems, disrupts training, and can force practices to move equipment or lose employees. The bill would allow limited x-ray technicians to operate in the same facility as other imaging equipment. During discussion, some members noted opposition from students and others in the field, and the sponsor invited industry witnesses to explain their concerns. The transcript cuts off before final action on HB 72 is completed.

Transcript Highlights:

• So why the fee increase? As stated, it's been more than 10 years.
• of the database, the fees of government overreach and regulation.
• consumer if we're going to be assessing this fee to the EWAs?
• That's what we heard as far as a fee.
• Updated our court fees. And we did pass this out earlier.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Senate convened with prayer, pledge, roll call, and a quorum present, then approved a motion to lay over House Bill 1525 for one legislative day. It also voted not to concur with House amendments on Senate Bills 2294, 2297, 2070, 4017, and 2262, appointing conference committees for each. The chamber then took up a series of House bill amendments and final-passage votes. On amendments, the Senate adopted changes to House Bill 1229 on fleeing law enforcement and driving-record transparency after debate over insurance impacts and public safety; House Bill 1510 on teacher retention, on-site child care, and licensure study language; House Bill 1160 to restrict student personal electronic devices during instructional time; House Bill 1429 to address drone harassment and stalking of animals; House Bill 1203 to harmonize medical marijuana provisions; House Bill 1600 to create a UND immigration clinic with reporting requirements; House Bill 1130 to broaden K-12 funding formula changes and reduce state fiscal impact; House Bill 1279 to modify the coal conversion tax exemption; House Bill 1442 to adjust membership and scope of a state task force; and House Bill 1464 to convert a maternal care services proposal into a study and remove the appropriation. The Senate rejected an amendment to House Bill 1022 concerning the Retirement and Investment Office bonus program, then passed the bill. It also passed House Bill 1234 on a $90 million transfer to reduce PERS liability, while rejecting a floor amendment to it. On final passage, the Senate passed House Bills 1008 (Public Service Commission budget), 1218 (temporary moratorium and study on economic analysis for drain projects), 1234 (PERS funding transfer), 1146 (PERS defined contribution cleanup and emergency clause), 1355 (expanded notice for administrative rulemaking), 1470 (Game and Fish fee changes and guide/outfitter updates), 1029 (Capital Grounds Planning Commission duties), 1017 (Game and Fish budget), 1374 (township supervisor open-meeting exemption for on-site inspections), and 1064 (NC-SARA membership and distance education regulation). It defeated House Bill 1583 on false political advertisements with civil-action language and House Bill 1393 on earned wage access provider regulation. The transcript ends as the Senate begins consideration of House Bill 1326 on self-defense and unlawful firearm possession by felons.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's the structure.
• It's the structure.
• That raises a structural concern for us because it creates a dynamic where the enforcement system is
• California must keep pace with the changes in the American family structure.
• Yet this bill would impose a permanent mandate on all future and structure can...

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The Assembly Labor and Employment Committee heard several bills focused on worker protections, enforcement, and technology in the workplace. SB 909 would strengthen enforcement of public works prevailing wage laws by raising contractor registration fees and penalties and directing part of penalty revenue back to enforcement; labor groups supported it as a way to deter wage theft, while contractor groups opposed the fee and penalty increases as burdensome and potentially costly for public projects. The committee members generally expressed support for stronger enforcement but also concern about the state’s backlog and capacity to enforce the law. SB 909 passed on a due pass vote and was re-referred to Appropriations. The committee also considered multiple bills addressing AI and workplace rights. SB 951 would require 60-day notice when technology displaces 25 or more workers and would require reporting on AI-related job impacts; labor and education groups supported it, while business, public sector, and industry groups argued it was premature and overbroad. SB 947 would require human review of automated discipline, termination, or deactivation decisions and prohibit predictive behavior analysis; supporters said it would prevent algorithmic abuse, while opponents raised concerns about independent contractors, private rights of action, and forum shopping. Both bills advanced on party-line style votes to the Committee on Privacy and Consumer Protection. The committee also approved SB 1149, which would expand bereavement leave to cover a “designated person” equivalent to family, with emotional testimony from a witness describing the loss of a long-term partner. Supporters said the bill reflects modern family structures, especially for LGBTQ and older Californians; there was no opposition. SB 1185, applying skilled-and-trained workforce standards to pharmaceutical facility construction, also passed despite opposition from contractors and business groups who said there was no demonstrated safety problem and warned of higher costs and fewer bidders. In addition, the committee approved consent-calendar bills SB 1316, SB 1046, and SB 1059, and left rolls open for absent members before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• The other is from the community solar facility to collect your subscription fee to the facility.
• Under SB 321, the subscriber fee will be shown Under SB 321, the subscriber fee will be shown on the
• They'll forward the subscriber fee, then they will pay it to the community solar facility.
• They've got, if I remember right, some kind of structure on it.
• So it's very, very deliberately structured so that, again, the farmers, the realtors, the developers,

Bills: SB9

Keywords: wetlands protection, nontidal wetlands, Delaware, environmental sustainability, climate change, carbon sink, permitting process

Summary: The House Natural Resources and Energy Committee met and first considered SB 321 with Senate Amendment 1, the community solar utility billing bill. The sponsor explained that it would consolidate the two-bill system for community solar subscribers into one utility bill, with the utility forwarding the subscriber fee to the solar facility through an escrow mechanism so costs are not shifted to other ratepayers. Testimony from the solar industry, the Public Advocate, and environmental advocates supported the measure, emphasizing easier enrollment, fewer barriers for low-income customers, and guaranteed savings. The committee initially lacked enough members present to release the bill, but after a roll call vote it was released from committee. The committee then heard SB 9 with Senate Amendment 1, a wetlands protection bill creating a state non-tidal freshwater wetlands permitting program. The sponsor and DNREC described a framework of exemptions, general permits, and individual permits based on wetland type and value, with an advisory committee to develop regulations. Witnesses explained that “exceptional value” wetlands would include unique wetland communities and high-functioning wetlands, and that the bill was intended to preserve important habitat while allowing farming, drainage, and other exempt activities to continue. Some members raised concerns about flooding, land classification, and the balance of the advisory committee, while supporters said the bill was the product of broad stakeholder consensus and would protect wetlands without unduly harming agriculture or development. Public comment on SB 9 was strongly supportive from environmental groups, the Delaware Native Species Commission, the Home Builders Association, the Farm Bureau, The Nature Conservancy, and affordable housing advocates, who said the bill balanced conservation with practical land use concerns. After remote testimony, the committee took a roll call vote and SB 9 was released from committee. The meeting concluded with remarks thanking the chair for her service and instructions for members to sign the backers before adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• And the other is from the community solar facility to collect your subscription fee to the facility.
• Under SB 321, the subscriber fee will be shown.
• Under SB 321, the subscriber fee will be shown on the bill from the utility, so you'll just get one bill
• They'll forward the subscriber fee, then they will pay it to the community solar facility.
• They've got, if I remember right, some kind of structure on it.

Bills: SB9

Keywords: wetlands protection, nontidal wetlands, Delaware, environmental sustainability, climate change, carbon sink, permitting process

Summary: The House Natural Resources and Energy Committee met to consider two Senate bills. SB 321, with Senate Amendment 1, would change community solar billing so subscribers receive one consolidated utility bill instead of separate bills from the utility and the solar provider. Supporters said the bill would simplify enrollment and payment, improve customer retention—especially for low-income customers—and include safeguards such as guaranteed savings and an escrow mechanism to prevent cost shifts to other ratepayers. After public testimony from solar developers, the Public Advocate, the Sierra Club, and others, the committee initially lacked enough members present to release the bill, so the vote was circulated to absent members and the bill was later reported out for floor action. The committee then heard SB 9, with Senate Amendment 1, a long-negotiated wetlands protection bill. The sponsor and DNREC explained that it would create a state non-tidal wetlands program with exemptions for certain agricultural, conservation, and routine activities, general permits for some lower-impact projects, and individual permits for higher-value wetlands. Witnesses described the bill as a compromise among environmental, agricultural, development, and local government stakeholders, while some members raised questions about flooding, landowner impacts, wetland delineation, and the role of the regulatory advisory committee. Public testimony was broadly supportive from environmental groups, the Farm Bureau, builders, engineers, and affordable housing advocates. The committee then voted to release SB 9 from committee. At the end of the meeting, members offered thanks and remarks recognizing the chair’s service and leadership on environmental and energy issues. Both bills were ultimately released from committee and reported out.

Transcript Highlights:

• Independents, and I've heard stories of the fee structure being a bit egregious at times, and it can
• And I've heard stories of the fee structure being a bit egregious at times, and it can be.
• I'm not sure what else you'd like to like fee structure about 100% virtually 100% of them use one of
• I'm not sure what else you'd like to like fee structure about 100% virtually 100% of them use one of
• I'm not sure what else you'd like to like fee structure about 100% virtually 100% of them use one of

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So, this project structural strength.
• Divers and structural strength.
• The hybrid EV fee is $126 per vehicle.
• I thought all chargers who were metered were collecting the fee.
• > was the ownership ownership fee was the ownership ownership fee was established<00:49:53.440

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

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

Transcript Highlights:

• A licensing fee or a registration fee when you want to build a chicken coop, or a developer has to pay
• Increasing fees. I know, everybody, buckle up. 1002, Senator Michaela Cavanaugh, increasing fees.
• We waste fees on everybody else. Why not on ourselves?
• and inspection fees and all of those headaches.
• And the very last thing in terms of fees would be your permit fees and any other fees that you may have

Bills: LB815A, LB838A, LB912A, LB972A, LB1126A, LB962A, LB1114, LB921, LB937, LB803, LB803A, LB1032, LB1032A, LB1075, LB1075A, LB889, LB878, LB933, LB304, LB304A, LB1096, LB1096A, LB1165, LB1165A, LB958, LB958A, LB762, LB1187, LB966, LB929, LB962, LB753, LB788, LB913, LB1055, LB1195, LB429, LB721, LB722, LB727, LB743, LB745, LB749, LB778, LB787

Keywords: LB815A, LB815, appropriation, appropriations bill, Nebraska Department of Revenue, Motor Fuel Tax Enforcement and Collection Cash Fund, motor fuel tax, gas tax, fuel tax, tax enforcement, tax collection, cash fund, budget, state spending, per diem, salaries, fiscal year, enrollment and review, final reading, Nebraska

Transcript Highlights:

• Supported payments to administer outside of the contract structure.
• Next we have the CSPP family fee deductions trailer bill language.
• and to collect these family fees.
• And finally, there's the CSPP excuse absences and family fee waivers trailer bill language.
• is established under the single rate structure are important to have.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Human Services held a hearing on the Governor’s May Revision, with no votes taken. The first major discussion focused on child care and early education, including proposed reductions tied to federal Child Care and Development Fund and Proposition 64 revenue changes, the shift of reductions from general child care to the California Alternative Payment Program, the end of funding for prospective pay implementation, a 2.01% cost-of-living adjustment, child care infrastructure grants, and a proposal to increase administrative funding for alternative payment agencies. The Legislative Analyst’s Office generally supported removing prospective pay funding and urged caution on the administrative-rate shift, while also recommending more justification for the slot reduction approach and more detail on infrastructure grant alignment. Committee members strongly objected to eliminating about 6,000 child care slots, arguing the Legislature should preserve and expand child care access. The Department of Education supported the preschool QRIS block grant increase and the COLA but raised concerns about rate alignment for three- and four-year-olds and the lack of funding to maintain enrollment growth. The committee then reviewed trailer bill language affecting child care, including codifying age-based reimbursement categories, expanding documentation for enhanced inclusion rates, clarifying CalWORKs child care eligibility, aligning health and safety standards with federal requirements, coordinating disaster-related infrastructure funding, and updating oversight language. Administration officials said the proposals were intended to support the single reimbursement rate structure, improve safety compliance, and coordinate disaster recovery funding. LAO said it had no major initial concerns with the trailer bill language but would continue reviewing it. The hearing then turned to CalFresh and nutrition programs. CDSS described projected caseload declines, a one-time augmentation for county administration to implement federal H.R. 1 changes, a proposed reassessment schedule for county administrative funding, and updated estimates that H.R. 1 could cut CalFresh funding by $2.3 billion to $3.7 billion annually and affect about 500,000 people. Members pressed the administration on the impact of H.R. 1, the “chilling effect” on immigrant households, county workload, and whether the state should backfill federal cuts, especially for families with children subject to new work requirements. The committee also discussed a one-time CalFood augmentation, state administrative expense funding, staffing for H.R. 1 implementation, and a small increase to the CACFP meal reimbursement rate. Finally, the committee began IHSS items, including the impact of reinstating the Medi-Cal asset limit, automatic IHSS termination tied to Medi-Cal loss, and related savings and caseload estimates, with the administration explaining that these proposals would reduce eligibility and that there is no broad substitute for IHSS for many recipients.

Transcript Highlights:

• academic years or semesters for which an academy scholarship provides for the cost of tuition and fees
• academic years or semesters for which an academy scholarship provides for the cost of tuition and fees
• Madam Wippen, members, as amended by the Commerce Committee, House Bill 2834 sets the petition filing fee
• We don't want to incentivize individuals to tear down historic structures if they can be rehabbed, so
• We don't want to incentivize individuals to tear down historic structures if they can be rehabbed, so

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The meeting was a caucus-style run-through of many bills and resolutions across Appropriations, Commerce, Education, Federalism/Military Affairs/Elections, Government, Health and Human Services, Judiciary, ENRU, Public Safety, and Rural Economic Development. Measures discussed included housing and HOA rules, school policy and funding, health care licensing and records timelines, public safety and corrections funding, election and campaign rules, water and environmental policy, and several criminal justice and juvenile justice changes. Many items were described as being on third-read consent or consent calendars, with staff often noting that no questions were raised and no sponsor was present. Several bills drew sponsor explanation or member discussion. In education, members reviewed bills on teacher strikes, school safety, math placement, student outcomes, free school meals, parent permission for clubs, and school bond ballot disclosures. In health, bills covered prior authorization data reporting, nursing board rules and complaint procedures, pharmacist testing/treatment authority, opioid antagonist expiration dates, board continuations, and a constitutional amendment on refusing medical mandates. In government and public safety, members discussed DCS legal representation, inmate medical records, public safety parity funding, sheriff authority, border support funding, and a resolution supporting county sheriffs. In commerce and housing, bills addressed condominium and HOA authority, shade structures, pet restrictions, insurance certificates, apprenticeship definitions, automatic renewal contracts, and a state housing affordability district. There was notable discussion on House Bill 4044, which would create a Public Safety Parity Fund for DPS and DOC salaries using interest from the state rainy day fund and other revenue sources. The sponsor argued it would provide a reliable way to fund public safety pay, while others objected that it would consume interest needed to preserve the fund’s value and that a general fund appropriation would be more appropriate. The bill prompted extended back-and-forth, with some members supporting the concept and others saying it was fiscally irresponsible. Another point of discussion came on House Bill 2775, where staff noted a possible misprint in the bill history, and on House Bill 467, where staff clarified that the inactive voter list changes related to e-poll book status categories. No formal votes were recorded in the transcript, and the meeting appears to have been a review of measures before floor action.

Transcript Highlights:

• some adjustments to the fee structure.
• of the fees had been adjusted since it was established.
• of the fees had been adjusted since it was established.
• I can't speak to somebody else's motives, but that's the structural issue that I see.
• And don't think the legislative body can make decisions on the structure itself.

Keywords: 908, all