Transcript Highlights:

• those fee targets? The legislature asked those fee targets?
• Is it a flat fee?
• <00:52:27.920> if those fee payers. Is it a flat fee? if those fee payers.
• Is it a flat fee?
• You all call it a fee. I'm going down. You all call it a fee.

Bills: HF3220

Keywords: school safety, school security, emergency access, law enforcement access, master key box, secure key box, entry device, school grants, education finance, Department of Education, charter schools, school districts, cooperative units, appropriation cancellation, one-time appropriation, school safety plan, emergency preparedness, public safety, school building security, 1183

Transcript Highlights:

• That helps taxpayers file on time. It reduces confusion.
• It's a moratorium on increases in taxes and fees.
• And so what we're trying to accomplish with this moratorium on tax and fee increases...
• They largely subsidize those user fee functions with general fund money, so please know that fees will
• community as we needed to institute a wastewater capacity fee this past year.

Bills: HB2780, HB4029, HB4030, HCR2052

Keywords: judicial foreclosure, tax lien, redemption rights, excess proceeds, property auction, income tax, federal tax conformity, revenue analysis, legislative session, tax reporting, municipal fees, county fees, utility rates, moratorium, tax classification, local government, inflation, economic stability, tax increases, cost-of-living protection

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 2780, a technical cleanup measure related to Arizona’s judicial tax lien foreclosure and excess proceeds process. The sponsor and a witness said the bill clarifies when a court should order a public sale, standardizes distribution of sale proceeds, and corrects inconsistencies left from prior reforms. No opposition was raised, and the committee approved HB 2780 unanimously on a 9-0 do pass vote. The committee then took up House Bill 4029, which would require the Governor’s Office of Strategic Planning and Budgeting and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee to evaluate the revenue impact of federal tax conformity changes earlier in the process, and would require the Department of Revenue to issue tax forms consistent with statute. An amendment was adopted to have OSPB and JLBC each make the evaluation and to require a governor’s report if the impact is $100 million or more, along with new reporting deadlines for DOR. Supporters argued the bill would force earlier action on conformity and prevent tax forms from diverging from statute; opponents said it added bureaucracy and could delay filing. The committee approved HB 4029 as amended by a 5-4 vote. The committee also heard House Bill 4030 and the related HCR 2052, both aimed at limiting local tax and fee increases. HB 4030 would bar municipalities and counties from adopting, imposing, or collecting increased fees, transaction privilege taxes, and utility rates from July 1, 2026, through June 30, 2030. The sponsor said the measure was intended to protect taxpayers from inflation and rising local costs. Cities, counties, and utility representatives opposed the bills, warning they would hinder infrastructure financing, water and wastewater projects, road improvements, and public safety services, and could force general fund subsidies or delayed maintenance. Supporters argued local governments have seen substantial revenue growth and should be restrained from further increases. The committee did not reach a final vote on HB 4030 or HCR 2052 in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• card fees. card fees.
• when these industries take out that fee, add additional fees to it because that may be the fee that
• And so does this fee is this fee capped like the other credit card fee at 25%?
• And so does this fee is this fee capped like the other credit card fee at 25%?
• And so does this fee is this fee capped like the other credit card fee at 25%?

Keywords: MS House Floor - 10 February, 2026; 10:00 AM, 925, all

Summary: The House convened with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, then established a quorum and dispensed with the reading of the journal. Members also introduced a number of guests and visitors, including University of Southern Mississippi programs, 4-H participants from across the state, and several local constituents. A Mississippi 4-H president, Morgan White, addressed the chamber and spoke about the value of 4-H in building leadership, confidence, and agricultural skills, and noted the state’s first-in-the-nation 4-H slingshot curriculum and competition. The chamber then moved to the calendar and took up several bills. House Bill 943 was called up and passed after a committee substitute was adopted; the bill was explained as removing a repealer related to joint reports of examination by the Commissioner of Banking and Finance and the Federal Reserve Bank. House Bill 1265 also passed after being explained as extending a repealer for the debt service management act. House Bill 1477 was taken up next and generated extended discussion; it would create a process for abandoned safety deposit box contents, requiring notice to owners, allowing a period to cure delinquency, and then transferring contents to the Treasury Department for eventual disposition. Members asked several questions about House Bill 1477, especially about how long property would be held, how heirs would be notified, how cash and tangible items would be treated, and whether documents such as wills should be scanned or preserved before destruction. The bill’s sponsor said cash would remain unclaimed property, tangible items would generally be sold at public auction, and the Treasury Department would hold property for a minimum period before sale, with heirs still able to claim it for a time. The sponsor also said the bill had support from banking and credit union groups. No final vote on House Bill 1477 is shown in the transcript excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator Putnham, Senate file 1452. Senator Putnham, Senate file 1452.
• <00:13:24.000> 1959 that was proposed in Senate File 1959 that was proposed in Senate File
• Thank you. for a fee is legally accredited and for a fee is legally accredited and prohibiting<00:26:
• They just wanted his of filing it.
• Senate File 1959 is adopted. Senate File 1959 is adopted.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• file 3763. file 3763.
• And these sections establish fees to access data sets and files from the all-payer claims database for
• And these sections establish fees to access data sets and files from the all-payer claims database for
• Section 10 was in House File 3763 and also in House File 4969.
• house file 4969. house file 4969.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up House File 4466, the sub health supplemental budget bill, and moved it to the Ways and Means Committee after a walkthrough of the fiscal spreadsheet and the DE1 amendment. Nonpartisan staff explained that the bill produces general fund savings of about $2.4 million in FY27 for the 2026-27 biennium and about $97.7 million in the next biennium, with most savings tied to HR1-related Medical Assistance changes affecting adults without children. The Department of Health provisions were described as largely cost-neutral, with some increases for implementation, data, and IT work. Staff then reviewed the DE1, which combines several bills into four articles. The bill includes health licensing board changes, Department of Health provisions such as all-payer claims database fees, newborn screening fee exceptions, loan forgiveness and scholarship program extensions, workforce shortage grant changes, and reciprocal licensure and mortuary science provisions. The federal conformity article makes changes related to MA work and community engagement requirements, six-month renewals, retroactive eligibility limits, contact information updates, cost sharing for MA expansion enrollees, and related provider tax and disability-notice provisions. Article 4 and Article 5 were described as forecast adjustments for DHS and the Department of Children, Youth, and Families. Public testimony focused largely on the federal conformity and eligibility provisions. Legal aid testified that the work requirements and retroactive eligibility changes would be confusing, could expand requirements beyond intended groups, and would increase uncompensated care. The Minnesota Hospital Association said shortening retroactive eligibility would increase uncompensated care and strain hospital finances, and Unidos Minnesota criticized the immigrant eligibility changes as harmful to lawfully present immigrants and Native communities. Blood Cancer United supported the all-payer claims database provisions and urged attention to fertility coverage. Representative Elkins offered an amendment to add $55,000 for the Department of Health to include denied-claims data in the all-payer claims database; Department of Health staff said the idea was useful and provided a one-time setup cost, but the amendment was not acted on in the portion of the transcript provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Today we have five bills on File, two of the bills are proposed for consent.
• File item four, AB 1322, which is an ad committee bill.
• And file item five, AB 1506. also an ag committee bill.
• We will hear bill presentations in file order if the author of the next bill on the file is not in the
• , where those fees are in fact.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:11:41.440> in rulle so that complaints are filed in rulle so that complaints are filed
• in the AOT or wetlands fees.
• spill to get it right um on the fee spill to get it right um on the fee structure<01:22:51.239><
• we we are our fees allow us to stop fees we we are our fees allow us to stop up<01:23:05.920> to<
• just says you don't that there's no fee just says you don't that there's no fee I<01:42:11.840><

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um House File File File um<00:21:47.360> I<00:21:47.600> think<00:21:47.679> I<00
• We are now moving on to House File 2909. House File 2909. Okay.
• The offset to that would be the dispensing fees would increase to the fee-for-service dispensing fee.
• So, that's<01:27:23.040> House<01:27:23.280> File that's House File that's House File 1883
• House file file file 2435.<01:36:05.520> Um,<01:36:06.000> Chair<01:36:06.639> Beerman

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• And I said what I had to say about it after reading their entire 36-page FDA filing. filing.
• You've got the one-way attorney's fees.
• I knew that in committee you can file an amendment.
• I think, you know, some work on the attorney's fees.
• If you sue a local government, you get one way attorney's fees.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:09:38.000> is And I want to clarify that the fee is And I want to clarify that the fee
• <00:47:00.720> Uh fees for our neighboring states. Uh fees for our neighboring states.
• When we increase the fee and then reduce the resident fee, we'll add zero out to a net zero.
• When we increase the fee and then reduce the resident fee, we'll add zero out to a net zero.
• Was it one or two and late filing?

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Right, so the motion regarding striking language around the fee.
• So lines 19 and 20, and then lines 325 to 326, which are with regard to the fee.
• Any discussion to that motion to move this bill forward as a committee bill file?
• As a committee bill file, please speak to that.
• Okay, I'm just going to give a brief overview of this next committee bill file.

Keywords: 985, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We've been paying subscription SaaS fees for a while.
• We've been paying subscription SaaS fees for a while.
• We've been paying subscription SaaS fees for a while.
• So those are the three components of that add up to fees typically go up 5% every year in fees typically
• <00:34:03.120> I because we've had mandated e filing I because we've had mandated e filing

Keywords: 00:10 Call to order and Roll Call 01:06 Information Items and Introduction of Kentucky Court of Justice 03:02 Discussion of Interpreter State and National Contractor Rates 06:35 Discussion of Certifications 08:44 Discussion of AI use in Interpretation 13:56 Software Service Initiatives 16:47 Data Security and AV system Upgrades 24:38 Drug Court Issues 28:43 Discussion of Jefferson County Record Storage 35:33 Boyle County Courthouse Construction 39.26 KY State Police Driver Testing 45:22 Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The subcommittee heard a budget overview from the Kentucky Court of Justice focused on mandated services and several growth items in the judicial branch budget. Court officials said the requests were driven by legal and contractual obligations, including higher contractor rates for court interpreters and IT support, annual software-as-a-service costs, and upgrades to the court’s audiovisual record system (JAVS). They also discussed local facilities needs tied to Jefferson County lease space and the Boyle County Courthouse, though the bulk of the presentation centered on the court’s technology and service-delivery costs. Members asked detailed questions about interpreter services, including whether services are provided in person, by phone, or by Zoom, and whether Kentucky could train and certify more local interpreters instead of relying on contractors from around the country. Court officials said the certification process is rigorous, that the branch is working with the National Center for State Courts on an apprenticeship program, and that they believe Kentucky may have flexibility to develop state-level certification if it meets court needs. They also said they are exploring technology and AI tools for translation, but have not found a solution that reliably handles complex courtroom context. Representative Sharp asked whether cases had been delayed for lack of interpreters; officials said they could provide aggregated data later. The court also described its major IT modernization effort, including a statewide case management system, e-filing, and maintenance of many legacy applications. Officials said contractor rates need to be raised to compete for skilled labor during the implementation phase, but that those costs should decline once the new systems are fully built and only maintained. They explained that part of the request covers three SaaS initiatives: ongoing subscription costs for existing systems, annual fees for the CaseWorks system used in pretrial and specialty courts after federal grant funding ends, and adoption of DocuSign to streamline invoicing, procurement, and contract execution. In response to questions from Representative KC Carney, they said cybersecurity is taken seriously, that they recently conducted a tabletop exercise, and that some risk shifts to cloud vendors under contract, though no separate cybersecurity line item was included. A substantial portion of the discussion focused on the JAVS audiovisual court-record system. Court officials said not all courtrooms are on the same version, and they want funding to bring all locations up to the current version and prepare for version 9, which they said would standardize the system statewide and support the official court record. When asked about costs, they said each upgrade can cost about $70,000 to $80,000 per system, that they aim to upgrade about 50 per year, and that the request reflects the need to keep pace with a four-year refresh cycle. No votes or formal actions were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair, that's my motion: that House File 2995 be re-referred to the Ways and Means. Mr.
• Is there anyone in the public who wishes to testify on House File 2995?
• The motion is approved, and House File 2995 is re-referred to the Committee on Ways and Means.
• Next, House File 2434. I will move that House File 2434 be laid over for possible inclusion.
• With that, I will renew that House File 2434 as amended be laid over. We are adjourned. You

Transcript Highlights:

• fall fees, charging people fees for falling.
• fall fees, charging people fees for falling.
• fall fees, charging people fees for falling.
• fall fees, charging people fees for falling.
• fall fees, charging people fees for falling.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:37:52.880> An<00:37:53.040> act original Senate file 121.
• An act original Senate file 121.
• So, your in-state registration fees.
• Uh, and then they'll registration fee.
• . fee. fee.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , what does net of fees mean again?
• and taken the fees out.
• public markets book our overall fee public markets book our overall fee structure<00:14:16.120><
• He identified the measure as Senate File 1341 and House File 1828.
• 1828<01:18:50.480> be Senate file 1341 house file 1828 be Senate file 1341 house file 1828

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, the bill goes into more detail, allowing the sheriff, the constable to collect compensation fees
• While other states accommodate expedited, expedited filings and charge a fee for this specialized service
• HB 5567 modernizes filing methods, updates the law to allow filings through any method approved by the
• Reforms, expedited filing fees authorize Secretary of State to set and collect a fee up to $5000 for
• expedited filings and services aligning Texas with other competitive states.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is a bill that was filed and passed out of the Senate by Senator Hughes, and I'm really proud to
• Other states have made expedited filings and charge a fee for this specialized service.
• HB 5567 modernizes filing methods and updates the law to allow filings through any method approved by
• Reforms expedited filing fees and authorizes the Secretary of State to set and collect a fee up to $5,000
• for expedited filings and services, aligning Texas with other competitive states.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:24:29.720> associated would be no attorney's fees associated would be no attorney's fees
• One is attorney's fees.
• But if an attorney is allowed, the attorney's fees are not going to be allowed.
• The actual forms that you would need to file—anything?
• The actual forms that you would need to file—anything?

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee on Consumer Protection and Commerce met on January 30, 2025, and heard testimony on several condominium-related bills, beginning with HB 70. HB 70 would require a budget summary disclosure for condominiums. Supporters, including Community Associations Institute, a real estate broker, and several condominium owners, said the bill would improve consumer protection by giving owners and buyers a clearer, more understandable snapshot of an association’s financial health and reserve compliance. One supporter noted the bill should help reduce confusion caused by lengthy reserve studies and emphasized the importance of accurate disclosure. A testifier also urged the committee to hear other condominium bills quickly, including measures related to an ombudsman, managing agents, parliamentarians, and attorney’s fees. The committee then heard HB 106, which would change the process for condominium fines and disputes. Phil Nery of CAI and other supporters said the bill would strengthen due process by requiring clearer notice, allowing an internal board appeal, and then permitting small claims court review without attorney’s fees unless the fine is upheld. They argued this would prevent fines from escalating into costly legal disputes and provide a more linear, fair process. Some supporters suggested amendments, including clarifying that the statute controls over association documents and refining refund language. During questioning, members raised concerns about small claims limits and whether associations would be represented by volunteers or attorneys. One testifier initially in support later said he would not support the bill as written after hearing HPD’s concerns. HB 224, relating to property rights, drew opposition from the Department of the Attorney General and the Honolulu Police Department. Both agencies said the bill would improperly push law enforcement into a quasi-judicial role and could short-circuit existing due process procedures for occupants of residences. A realtor who had initially been listed in support changed his position after hearing the opposition testimony. The committee also heard emotional testimony from a resident describing a long-running squatter and utility theft problem at a neighboring property, which he said took years of court action and police involvement to resolve. No votes or final committee actions were taken during the portion of the meeting reflected in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• , the measure is filed with the legislature.
• We have fees and fines. These include licensing and permit fees, fines, and penalties.
• I'm just looking at, again, the public filing.
• I'm just looking at, again, the public filing.
• I'm just looking at, again, the public filing.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on Initiative Petition 25-10, House Bill 5002, titled “An Act to Restore a Sensible Marijuana Policy,” which would repeal Massachusetts’ adult-use cannabis legalization framework. Chairs Brendan Crighton and Kate Hogan outlined the Article 48 initiative process and explained that the committee is gathering testimony for a report to the legislature. The hearing was organized into expert, proponent, opponent, and public testimony, with written testimony accepted through March 27. The first witness, Jessica Trow of MassBudget, testified in opposition to repeal and focused on cannabis-related revenue and social equity. She said legalization has generated nearly $2 billion statewide since adult-use sales began, with revenue flowing through the Marijuana Regulation Fund, the state sales tax, and local taxes and fees. She emphasized that funds support public health, the Cannabis Control Commission’s social equity work, the Cannabis Social Equity Fund, and municipal budgets, and argued that legalization has created pathways for communities harmed by prohibition. The petition’s spokesperson, Wendy Wakeman, argued in favor of repeal, saying legalization has worsened public health, safety, and quality of life, citing higher potency, addiction, youth use, impaired driving, workplace positives, and black-market concerns. Committee members questioned her about the data sources, the will of the voters, the role of paid signature gatherers, and the petition’s funding, including out-of-state and dark-money concerns. Opponents of the initiative then testified that repeal would harm a regulated industry that has created jobs, tax revenue, and social equity opportunities. Caroline Pino of STEM, Kristen Rogers of Levia, Judith Ledbetter of Project De-Stigmatized Healthcare, and Armani White of Firehouse Dispensary/EON described their businesses, community investments, and personal reliance on cannabis, and warned that repeal would push consumers back to the illicit market and undermine equity programs. In public testimony, Lucas Thayer of the Massachusetts Cannabis Reform Coalition and Jeff Rawson, a chemist and consumer protection advocate, also opposed the measure, arguing that regulated cannabis is safer than unregulated products and that repeal would damage investments and public safety. The hearing ended after the public testimony, and the committee voted to close the hearing.