Video & Transcript Research : 'fee increase'
Page 61 of 500
KY
Kentucky 2025 Regular Session
Public Pension Oversight Board (10-21-25)
Transcript Highlights:
- into lower cost or a reduced increase into lower cost or a reduced increase cost<00:13:40.880>
<00:21:04.799>- We have tried to include both management fees, but also fees that are incentives or carried interest,
- I know that all KPPPA and TRS are always working to try to reduce those fees, but fee dollar amounts
- amounts
will those fees, but fee dollar amounts will those fees, but fee dollar - increasing uh with each budget cycle. increasing uh with each budget cycle.
Keywords:
Meeting Start: 00:00
Attendance Roll Call: 01:02
Approval of Minutes: 02:03
Annual Investment Review: 04:10
Adjournment: 37:34, 958, all
Summary:
The committee met with a quorum, approved the prior meeting minutes, welcomed new staff member Sean Parks, and announced that it would not meet in November. The next meeting was scheduled for December 8 at 10:00 a.m., with the chair noting that pension bills would be heard then and emphasizing that all pension bills must go through the full process and include actuarial analysis.
Brad Gross of the Public Pension Oversight Board presented a detailed review of Kentucky retirement systems’ investments and funding. He said fiscal year 2025 ended with about $50.5 billion in pension assets and $12.52 billion in retiree health assets, both up from the prior year. He reported strong investment performance across the systems, with all Kentucky public pension funds exceeding their policy benchmarks and the median peer return of 10.4%. He also discussed long-term return trends, asset allocation differences among the systems, fee levels, and cash flow, noting that cash flow remains a key monitoring issue and that supplemental appropriations have improved the cash position of some funds, especially the Kentucky State Police and TRS systems.
Gross also explained that assumed rates of return have generally fallen over time, which increases unfunded liabilities and required contributions, and said the systems’ current assumptions range from 5.25% to 7.1%. He noted that the committee’s materials included peer comparisons and historical charts, and that all asset classes were within target ranges. In response to a question from Senator Funky From, Gross was asked about pension spiking and whether supplemental general fund contributions could create a false sense of security in cash flow analysis; the question was raised but not resolved in the portion of the transcript provided.
MN
Transcript Highlights:
- 25% that probably have a tax increase 25% that probably have a tax increase and<00:30:39.279>
- <00:37:58.319>
for <00:37:58.640>specific fees so some fees are for specific fees so some - The revenue increases, or is projected to increase, in fiscal 28 and 29.
- There could be a fee in processing, or if I have to replace my card, there could be a fee for that.
- There could be a fee in processing, or if I have to replace my card, there could be a fee for that.
WA
Washington 2025-2026 Regular Session
Senate Local Government Dec 4th, 2025
Transcript Highlights:
- So with the increase in the number of licensed child care providers, that also increases the overall
- We had increases in the eligibility limits for families. We’ve had increases in the provider rates.
- Impact fees, I think we've heard some of these on this list already today, but impact fees.
- Impact fees, especially those around traffic impact fees specifically, can make costs rise dramatically
- Impact fee waivers: I mentioned already waiving impact fees in Mountlake Terrace for child care facilities
Summary:
The committee held a work session on form-based codes, child care facility siting, and street standards/frontage improvements. On form-based codes, Commerce’s Dave Anderson explained that these codes emphasize building form, orientation, and the public realm more than traditional use and density tables, and that they are typically applied in specific districts rather than citywide or statewide. Lacey’s Vanessa Dolby described the city’s Woodland District code, developed through community charrettes, fiscal and market analysis, and subdistrict-specific standards to create a walkable downtown. She said the approach has helped produce a more desirable built environment and more flexibility in permitted uses, but also noted it can be less user-friendly for applicants and still requires some use restrictions; both presenters said a hybrid approach is often best.
The committee then heard from DCYF and multiple providers about barriers to opening child care facilities. DCYF officials said Washington has more than 6,500 licensed providers and that a new pre-licensing support team is helping applicants navigate licensing, but local zoning, building, fire, parking, utility, and occupancy requirements still create delays and confusion. Testifiers described long permitting timelines, inconsistent local interpretations, costly upgrades, and utility hookup delays; one Yakima provider said county requirements, a floodplain-related elevation certificate, and a private well issue stopped her in-home child care proposal, while others described traffic impact fees, parking mandates, and zoning barriers that made projects infeasible. Enterprise Community Partners highlighted examples of successful local reforms, including fee waivers, expedited permitting, and zoning changes in several cities, and DCYF said it is working toward a 2026 action plan and a resource guide for providers.
In the final section, planners and developers discussed how street standards and frontage improvement requirements can undermine infill and middle housing. Poulsbo’s planning manager said current standards were designed for greenfield subdivisions and often force costly curb, gutter, sidewalk, stormwater, and utility upgrades on small infill sites, sometimes adding tens of thousands of dollars and causing projects to be abandoned. A Seattle-based developer made similar points about small middle-housing projects being burdened by frontage work, curb ramps, buried standards, and EV-ready parking requirements that can trigger expensive undergrounding. Committee members asked about possible state-level changes, including whether child care should be treated as an essential public facility and whether parking requirements had already been reduced; one senator noted that minimum parking requirements for child care facilities were eliminated in prior legislation, with implementation phased in over the next few years.
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 5 on Corrections, Public Safety, Judiciary, Labor and Transportation May 20th, 2026
Transcript Highlights:
- I would also like to note that we use performance-based fee structures, so the increased cost means we
- The external investment management fees are the largest driver of the increase in the budget.
- It's going to result in a net increase in fees.
- It's going to result in a net increase in fees.
- Okay, so why should we increase CalPERS and CalSTRS budgets to pay higher investment fees to private
Summary:
The committee held an informational hearing on the Governor’s May Revision proposals for labor, public safety/judiciary, and transportation, and no votes were taken. In Part A on labor, the Employment Development Department reviewed proposals for EDD Next document management system funding, updated UI loan interest costs, disability insurance and paid family leave benefit and administration adjustments, WIOA funding changes, UI administrative and benefit changes, school employee benefit adjustments, an EMT training reappropriation, and a technical correction tied to EDD Next. PERB discussed funding tied to AB 28 and AB 1, including litigation-related workload and new jurisdiction over legislative employees. DIR presented proposals for legal unit reclassifications, two major IT modernization projects, a new Cal/OSHA emerging technologies unit, a COIA reappropriation, and trailer bill language on electronic assessment payments and the DWC director salary cap. CalHR proposed additional funding for a consolidated employee assistance program contract, and CalPERS and CalSTRS presented budget adjustments tied to investment costs and state contribution changes.
Members focused heavily on UI debt and interest payments, asking the administration for a plan to reduce the outstanding loan and relieve employers. Finance said no specific repayment plan was included in the May Revision, while LAO said the state’s UI tax structure is structurally insufficient and that any debt payoff should be paired with tax-system reform. Senators also questioned EDD Next costs and timelines, PERB’s caseload and staffing needs, and DIR’s emerging technologies unit, with LAO noting that the unit would appear focused on physical workplace safety rather than broader AI labor issues. CalHR said the new EAP contract would consolidate services, improve access to clinicians, and lower costs relative to the current model. CalPERS defended higher external management fees as part of a strategy to pursue higher net returns, while some members pressed for more transparency about private investments; CalSTRS said it was not prepared to address investment-strategy questions at this hearing.
Public comment in Part A was dominated by advocates urging support for an immigration enforcement emergency relief fund, along with comments supporting the Jails to Jobs proposal, the Apprenticeship Innovation Fund, and additional PERB funding. The chair noted that many of the immigration-related requests might fall under other committees and said staff would follow up. In Part B, Finance and LAO outlined judicial branch and DOJ May Revision items, including funding for court interpreter services, appellate court security, lactation room implementation delays, courthouse construction reappropriations, and DOJ budget increases. LAO recommended approving the language-access proposal with a report on reducing interpreter cost growth and reducing the General Fund backfill for state court facilities by $10 million on an ongoing basis.
VT
Transcript Highlights:
- would not cover the discounted fee would not cover the necessary<02:22:46.960>
increase <02:22 - fees, potentially increasing<02:24:10.720>
state <02:24:11.040>revenue. - . increased those uh smuggler's notch. increased those uh fees<03:47:11.920>
significantly <03: - aforementioned fees, but does estimate the increase as reported earlier in DMV expenses of $32,000 per
- aforementioned fees, but does estimate the increase as reported earlier in DMV expenses of $32,000 per
Summary:
The House returned from recess and took up S. 208, a bill on standards for law enforcement identification. The House Judiciary Committee explained that it had rewritten the bill into a model-policy approach focused on Vermont state and local agencies, rather than imposing direct requirements on all law enforcement, because of constitutional and preemption concerns raised by a recent Ninth Circuit decision. The amended bill would direct the Law Enforcement Advisory Board to develop a statewide policy on officer identification and facial coverings by July 2027, require agencies to adopt a consistent policy by October 1, 2027, and deem agencies to have adopted the model policy if they do not act. The committee reported the bill favorably on a 6-5 vote.
Members then debated an amendment offered by Representatives Berbeco and McGill to restore federal officers to the bill. Supporters argued that public authority should not be anonymous, that visible identification is necessary for transparency, accountability, and public trust, and that the bill should apply to federal agents as well as state and local officers. They said the amendment included exemptions for undercover work, tactical teams, protective equipment, and safety concerns, and argued Vermont should not wait for courts to resolve every constitutional question before acting. Opponents on the Judiciary Committee said the language remained likely unconstitutional and could jeopardize the bill’s passage; the committee had found the amendment unfavorable on an 8-1 vote.
The floor debate continued with several members speaking in favor of the amendment, including arguments that other states have adopted similar requirements and that Vermont should lead on the issue. One member raised a point of order that was not sustained, and the Speaker ruled federal authority relevant to the question. The transcript ends while debate on the amendment was still underway, after a request for a roll-call vote was granted, with no final floor vote on the amendment shown in the excerpt.
MS
Mississippi 2026 Regular Session
Appropriations - Room 216, 5 February, 2026; 8:30 AM
Appropriations
Transcript Highlights:
- And some of it's just the increase in cost, but looking to increase what we can do with it.
- <00:03:01.599>
in And um some of it's just the increase in And um some of it's just the increase - Our renewal fee is $100, and late fees are $200. I saw your fees went up a couple years ago.
- is $100 and um late Um our renewal fee is $100 and um late fees<00:05:43.759>
$200. - <00:05:44.400>
And <00:05:44.479>then fees $200. And then fees $200.
Summary:
The committee first heard from the Board of Registration for Foresters, which said it is self-funded through applications and renewals and receives no general fund support. The board requested a budget increase from $62,755 to $77,035, mainly for technology upgrades to its database and website, a social media presence, and about $3,000 more for board travel. Members asked about contractual expenses, staffing, renewals, reserves, and office location; the witness said most renewals are now online, the board has a reserve but he did not know the exact amount, and the board is leased space in the Robert E. Lee Building. No vote was taken, and the chair moved on to the next agency.
The Mississippi Board of Examiners for Social Workers and Marriage and Family Therapists then presented its budget and operational needs. The board described its 10-member structure, three employees, and oversight of about 4,450 social workers and 210 marriage and family therapists. It explained that a prior $50,000 deficit appropriation was approved too late to spend, and asked to include that amount in the current budget for technology upgrades and equipment. The board also requested salary increases, additional travel funds, money for out-of-state compact participation, more contractual funds for database enhancements and digitizing records, and one additional computer. Members questioned the board about its large cash balance, staffing, office location, and the social work compact; the board said it has about $1 million in cash, is in leased space at Old River Place, and needs database changes to support the compact. No action or vote was taken.
Finally, the Cosmetology and Barbering Board discussed major licensing and regulatory changes and its budget request. The board said it had already adopted a passing score for the licensure exam, ended the practical exam, extended testing approval periods, removed barriers to temporary work permits, and opened a path for apprenticeships, mobile establishments, and online licensing software. It also described recommendations in SB 2566, including a low-income first-license fee waiver, sanitation warnings, reduced education and instructor-hour requirements, and removal of some display requirements. The board said these changes had already led to new applications and test signups. On the budget side, it said it was withdrawing a prior request for $6,340 for practical-exam contractors because that exam was eliminated, but still sought $120,000 for certified mail, $49,000 for recruitment and retention salaries, and continued flexibility for possible live-streaming requirements under pending legislation. Senators asked whether the practical exam had been eliminated and whether the board could still ensure competency and inspections; the board said skills are still assessed through program completion and theory testing, and it asked to retain inspector positions because it oversees roughly 6,000 to 6,500 licensed shops and salons with only two inspectors.
KY
Kentucky 2025 Regular Session
Capital Projects and Bond Oversight Committee (8-26-25)
Transcript Highlights:
- 10.720>
to <00:10:10.880>fund This increase is necessary to fund This increase is necessary - And the Mega Cavern, a temporary rate increase was accepted a temporary rate increase was accepted until
- footage but increasing the amount per. footage but increasing the amount per.
- <00:57:35.440>
was instructional and no tax increase was instructional and no tax increase - Uh, and that will provide both the fees of bond counsel, the fees of hosting a TERA hearing.
Keywords:
0:00:08 Call to Order and Roll Call
0:00:38 Approval of Minutes
0:01:02 Information Items
0:02:17 Lease Rpt from Postsecondary Institutions
0:06:42 Project Rpt from Finance and Administration Cabinet
0:15:03 Lease Rpt from Finance and Administration Cabinet
0:24:00 Rpt from OFM – KY Infrastructure Authority
0:42:55 Economic Development Fund Grants
0:53:38 Rpt from OFM – New Debt Issues
1:16:33 Remaining 2025 Meeting Dates
1:16:45 Adjournment, 958, all
Summary:
The committee first handled routine business, including roll call, approval of the July minutes, and several informational reports. Those reports included a University of Kentucky restricted-fund medical equipment purchase for Chandler Hospital, debt issues for five school districts, Eastern Kentucky University’s planned model laboratory school using construction management risk delivery, a Division of Real Properties lease advertisement, Kentucky Communications Network Authority quarterly project reports, and EKU asset preservation revisions.
Members then heard and approved a new UK St. Clair Urgent Care Clinic lease in Morehead and an amendment expanding space for the UK Family and Community Medicine Clinic at Turflin Clinic. Testimony explained that both properties are privately owned, the Morehead lease predated the UK/St. Clair arrangement, and the Turflin Clinic is tight on space. The committee also approved three new projects and an appropriation increase: two Department of Military Affairs projects, a Window Ford Training Center underground electric project and a Williamsburg Readiness Center interior repair project, a Fish and Wildlife property acquisition adjoining Veterans Memorial Wildlife Management Area, and an $8.113 million increase for the Department of Revenue integrated tax system (DORIS). The DORIS increase was described as needed for change orders tied to legislation and to complete the unified tax system.
The committee next reviewed no-action items, including a $3 million emergency flood-damage repair project for the Bush Building and Vest-Lindsay House in Frankfort, and three pool projects over $1 million: a Kentucky Correctional Institute for Women window replacement phase 2 project, a Department of Criminal Justice Training interior refurbishment at Thompson Hall, and the Muddy Gut Branch stream mitigation project in Johnson County. The flood project was confirmed to be fully reimbursed by insurance proceeds.
Finally, the Kentucky Infrastructure Authority presented six loans and nine grants. Action items included water and sewer financing for Cumberland County, Lebanon, Northern Kentucky Water District, Lewisport, and Providence, plus a major Taylor Mill treatment plant project and several cleaner water grants and reallocations. Members asked about loan rates, local rate increases needed to repay debt, and the Providence emergency water interconnect; staff explained that Lewisport had begun a rate increase process, and that the Providence project would connect Webster County Water District and the city of Providence to stabilize pressure after a systemwide failure. All action items were approved.
KY
Kentucky 2025 Regular Session
Administrative Regulation Review Subcommittee (2-10-25)
Transcript Highlights:
- fee.
- Representative West asked whether anything that includes new or increased fees is usually questioned,
- to be increased.
- anything that includes new or increased fees<00:13:19.639>
we <00:13:19.800>ask <00:13:20.360 be <00:13:31.079>increased <00:13:32.079>thank to be increased thank to be increased
Summary:
The Administrative Regulation Review Subcommittee met on February 10 with a quorum present, approved the minutes, and then reviewed a long agenda of agency regulations, most of which were accompanied by staff-suggested amendments for drafting conformity under KRS Chapter 13A. The Department of Financial Institutions’ 808 KAR 9:10, the Secretary of State’s 030 KAR 2:11, the Office of the Attorney General’s 04 KAR 5:10, the Board of Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology’s emergency 201 KAR 17:120, the Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources’ 301 KAR 2:41, the Department for Environmental Protection’s 401 KAR 47:110 and 48:320, the State Police regulations 502 KAR 1:012 and 1:121, the Department for Public Health’s 902 KAR 4:15, the Department for Medicaid Services’ 907 KAR 1:15, and the Department for Community Based Services’ 921 KAR 1:400 were all discussed and, where applicable, staff amendments were approved without objection. The Workplace Standards emergency regulation 803 KAR 2:320E was also presented without amendment, and the Department of Insurance’s 806 KAR 9:360 was taken up but ultimately deferred at the agency’s request.
Several regulations drew brief substantive discussion. The Fish and Wildlife rule on foxhound training enclosures was explained as expanding both commercial and non-commercial provisions for training with dogs involving red fox and coyotes, with enclosure standards intended to protect wildlife inside and outside the facilities. The environmental protection rules were tied to House Bill 478 and addressed permit-by-rule timelines, reporting, and operating standards for certain construction and demolition debris landfills, including sites up to two acres; members asked whether these facilities were private or municipal, and staff said they were a mix, often tied to private demolition contractors or single projects. The State Police fee increase for hazardous materials endorsements was described as reflecting a federal TSA fee change, and the witness estimated the new fee at about $23.
The most extended debate concerned the Board of Education’s 704 KAR 3:535 on full-time virtual and remote learning programs. The agency amendment would cap enrollment in such programs at 10% above a district’s prior-year in-person enrollment, while also clarifying accountability, staffing, and monitoring requirements. Education officials said the cap was intended to address concerns about district capacity and student performance, and they cited Cloverport as an example of a district with high virtual participation and participation-rate issues. Members expressed concern that the amendment was too open-ended for regulation and suggested the issue might be better addressed in statute; no motion was made to adopt the agency amendment, so the regulation was left to proceed to the committee of jurisdiction. The Department of Insurance also discussed implementation of Senate Bill 188, saying it had received more than 3,000 complaints since the law took effect and was still working through enforcement and complaint processing before asking to defer its PBM licensing regulation.
TX
Texas 89th Regular
Licensing & Administrative Procedures Apr 8th, 2025
Licensing & Administrative Procedures
Transcript Highlights:
- And I was actually quite surprised that still. gorge fees and notification fees were in fact regulated
- fees stayed the same.
- So currently impounded storage fees have increased to $22.85 per day in the notification fee is still
- for the notification fee.
- Typically, these fees have been frozen in statute for 14 years, and when the fees were finally adjusted
Bills:
HB679, HB1764, HB1788, HB2186, HB2204, HB2418, HB2885, HB2983, HB2996, HB3250, HB3352, HB3756, HB3816, HB3913, HB3928, HB4077
Keywords:
environment, regulation, land use, public health, community development, alcohol, Sunday sales, local option election, Texas, business hours, alcohol sales, liquor, off-premise consumption, alcoholic beverages, CPA, Certified Public Accountant, licensing, accountancy, state regulation, continuing education
WA
Washington 2025-2026 Regular Session
Senate Housing Sep 16th, 2025
Transcript Highlights:
- That way, as the property increases in value over time, that tax abatement increases as well.
- or a connection fee.
- So you have to start the conversation about impact fees and what's a fair fee with the question of what
- impact fees for things like infill projects.
- So what are the advantages of an impact fee system?
Summary:
The Senate Housing Committee heard presentations on a range of housing finance, permitting, and affordability tools. Chattanooga described its affordable housing PILOT program, which uses a per-unit property tax abatement tied to the rent loss from providing affordable units, with a 15-year term and annual compliance monitoring. Committee members asked about the program’s structure, whether it had been used elsewhere, and who was participating; the presenter said the first mixed-income project would bring 278 units with 42 affordable units and that the model was attracting private market-rate developers. Shoreline then described its MFTE and inclusionary zoning approach, emphasizing that longer tax exemption periods and station-area zoning changes had helped spur development, with most current pipeline projects concentrated near light rail stations.
The committee also heard from the Municipal Research Services Center and the Department of Commerce on tax increment financing, proportional impact fees, and permit timelines. Commerce explained that TIF can fund public improvements such as roads, utilities, broadband, and some affordable housing or child care facilities, while proportional impact fee guidance is intended to help jurisdictions charge fees more closely aligned with actual project impacts. On permit timelines, Commerce presented its first annual report under recent law changes, using 2024 as a baseline year and noting that reported timelines were generally longer than statutory goals; members asked about outliers, paper versus electronic processing, and whether back-and-forth between applicants and staff was driving delays. Commerce said it would follow up with more data, including on CHIP funding and permit reform practices.
Several local governments then shared permitting process improvements. Auburn reported relatively short review cycles and described its move to fully electronic permitting, internal performance standards, and a stock plan program that speeds review for repeated home designs. Bellevue described an AI permitting pilot with a local startup to help with pre-application questions, document triage, and plan review, aiming to reduce incomplete applications and revision cycles. Seattle presented a pilot for accessory dwelling unit co-development in which a mission-driven partner would help homeowners split lots, finance, build, and manage ADUs, with the homeowner eventually buying out the partner and retaining ownership; committee members asked about rent setting, management fees, and default risk, and staff said they would follow up. The committee also heard brief overviews of community land trusts and limited equity cooperatives as permanent affordability models, with presenters urging continued state and local funding support and policy recognition for these approaches.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- impact fees to two-thirds, and prohibiting fee increases more more than once every three years.
- This bill also requires an independent audit before adopting or increasing impact fees.
- Impact fees can increase housing costs and provide unpredictability in our market.
- So this just says that if there is a compelling interest that the fees are increased, then you should
- an example, you decide that you want to increase those fees by 5%.
Bills:
HB3902, HB4420, HB3269, HB469, HB336, HB316, HB5396, HB993, HB1342, HB5216, HB2046, HB2188, HB2450, HB2813, HB2857, HB4075, HB2911, HB4682, HB3117, HB3253, HB3442, HB4820, HB4336, HB5356, HB3669, HB3428, HB5465, HB3662, HB2590, HB2288, HB1886, HB3458, HB5603, HB5620, HB1489, HB4101, HB4990, HB5685, HB4950, HB4980, HB5684, HB3507, HB3566, HB4487, HB4462, HB4876, HB4915, HB4663, HB5570, HB2929, HB5261, HB2920, HB4642, HB4746, HB1609, HB5403, HB5453, HB3844, HB2336, HB1572, HB 1226, HB2806, HB2617, HB2827, HB3948, HB3945, HB4266, HB4542, HB3319, HB1772, HB2496, HB1970, HB3434, HB5545, HB5577, HCR59, HCR135, HB4, HB46, HB3221, HB1403, HB3892, HB4234, HB722, HB4105, HB4413, HB170, HB551, HB3053, HB3142, HB3180, HB3722, HB1794, HB1784, HB1581, HB2530, HB4308, HB1896, HB2974, HB3359, HB4580, HB2458, HB2215, HB3332, HB2278, HB3015, HB3151, HB1368, HB40, HB 101, HB 112, HB146, HB214, HB413, HB1523, HB493, HB521, HB594, HB557, HB305, HB549, HB854, HB 1057, HB 1052, HB842, HB3174, HB3196, HB824, HB 1039, HB2529, HB2713, HB4936, HB4995, HB4830, HB4864, HB5219, HB5263, HB5154, HB2674, HB5525, SB529, SB541, SB2004, SB1012, SB2269, SB1886, SB1236, SB693, SB2308, HB2486, HB4862, HB4689, HB4520, HB2225, HB168, HJR218, HB4921, HB5623, HB2494, HB2545, HB2587, HB2625, HB5520, HB5436, HB4926, HB1573, HB5165, HB4811, HB5081, HB4755, HB3179, HB4310, HB4611, HB2159, HB4626, HB3637, HB3153, HB3066, HB2786, HB2966, HB638, HB640, HB876, HB497, HB5539, HB4809, HB5308, HB4687, HB4070, HB4421, HB4412, HB3284, HB3369, HB3420, HB3449, HB4098, HB4281, HB4120, HB4504, HB4370, HB 1106, HB2370, HB2404, HB3863, HB2407, HB2253, HB2273, HB2040, HB1586, HB3788, HB3993, HB4690, HB4309, HB4696, HB2308, HB 1142, HB1533, HB1621, HB2242, HB2012, HB2193, HB2442, HB2464, HB2348, HB2313, HB2289, HB1942, HB2011, HB1629, HB2993, HB3592, HB3824, HB4076, HB4535, HB4623, HB4773, HB 1091, HB5115, HB5515, HB3372, HB5659, HB 127, HB386, HB 115, HB2868, HB 1249, HB4766, HB3720, HB4656, HB4879, HB 105, HB5383, HB4621, HB5431, HB5678, HB5534, HB4174, HB4212, HB3954, HB3966, HB3636, HB3918, HB1422, HB4765, HB4732, HB4742, HB5122, HB4518, HB5084, HB3986, HB4045, HB4144, HB3911, HB3976, HB4473, HB3425, HB3641, HB3642, HB3475, HB3509, HB3424, HB3383, HB4744, HB4531, HB4539, HB3159, HB5228, HB5370, HB4359, HB4398, HB4443, HB4466, HB3861, HB3849, HB4240, HB4706, HB4685, HB5354, HB5141, HB5686, HB3629, HB3554, HB3567, HB2015, HB3575, HB5381, HB1431, HB3514, HB4614, HB4546, HB4683, HB5681, HB5673, HB5663, HB4271, HB4350, HB4035, HB3807, HB3812, HB3552, HB3540, HB3715, HB3710, HB3664, HB4196, HB4233, HB4173, HB1998, HB3333, HB3510, HB4222, HB2070, HB2854, HB2347, HB 113, HB983, HB4847, HB1449, HB3833, HB5151, HB265, HB1845, HB782, HB 108, HB1960, HB158, HB1954, HB1955, HB2512, HB605, HB2581, HB2803, HB627, HB2667, HB1738, HB636, HB3679, HB2638, HB2655, HB871, HB2438, HB 1107, HB1765, HB1822, HB2153, HB4099, HB3732, HB3171, HB3178, HB3182, HB3749, HB2814, HB3977, HB4204, HB4207, HB4449, HB1820, HB1876, HB1939, HB1347, HB2593, HB2136, HB2132, HB2658, HB2413, HB2757, HB2080, HB3154, HB3063, HB3009, HB3448, HB3006, HB2844, HB3241, HB3680, HB3169, HB2078, HB2507, HB4559, HB3946, HB3460, HB3405, HB475, HB3463, HB3441, HB3520, HB2060, HB4731, HB4991, HB1991, HB5596, HB2014, HB2142, HB2673, HB2731, HB2417, HB2399, HB2301, HB3335, HB3234, HB3320, HB5573, HB4848, HB4748, HB4769, HB4795, HB2086, HB2234, HB2203, HB4916, HB5624, HB4505, HB139, HB5093, HB5302, HB5402, HB5606, HB2333, HB4630, HB4701, HB2583, HB2983, HB4924, HB3339, HB3793, HB3631, HB4882, HB5509, HB5499, HB5430, HB5561, HB5611, HB5043, HB5064, HB3733, HB3781, HB3219, HB32, HB4515, HB5348, HB3902, HB4420, HB3269, HB469, HB336, HB316, HB5396, HB993, HB1342, HB5216, HB2046, HB2188, HB2450, HB2813, HB2857, HB4075, HB2911, HB4682, HB3117, HB3253, HB3442, HB4820, HB4336, HB5356, HB3669, HB3428, HB5465, HB3662, HB2590, HB2288, HB1886, HB3458, HB5603, HB5620, HB1489, HB4101, HB4990, HB5685, HB4950, HB4980, HB5684, HB3507, HB3566, HB4487, HB4462, HB4876, HB4915, HB4663, HB5570, HB2929, HB5261, HB2920, HB4642, HB4746, HB1609, HB5403, HB5453, HB3844, HB2336, HB1572, HB 1226, HB2806, HB2617, HB2827, HB3948, HB3945, HB4266, HB4542, HB3319, HB1772, HB2496, HB1970, HB3434, HB5545, HB5577, HCR76, HCR127, HCR9, HCR40, HCR118, HR559, HCR59, HCR135
Keywords:
Medicaid, reimbursement, nursing facilities, ownership change, healthcare policy, mental health, psychiatric beds, inpatient psychiatric treatment, acute psychiatric care, bed availability, bed capacity, hospital reporting, HHSC, Health and Human Services Commission, state hospitals, private mental health facilities, civil commitment, competency restoration, not guilty by reason of insanity, jail diversion
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- In September 2024, UTEP students voted in favor of a three-year phased-in fee increase from $30 to $150
- Okay, just one question: you're okay with the fee increase? Yes. Awesome. Okay.
- So my concern is not the increase.
- So do the students from out of country, how much of an increase do they see in their tuition and fees
- They would see the same increase because it would be a mandatory fee.
Keywords:
special prosecutor, state law, criminal justice, accountability, law enforcement, stormwater management, counties, regulation, environment, water quality
Summary:
The Committee on Higher Education met to hear several bills and first corrected the minutes from its April 1, 2025 meeting to reflect that a committee substitute for HB 271 had been adopted before the bill was reported favorably. The committee then heard HB 3326, which would help Texas higher education employees, especially adjunct faculty, qualify for federal Public Service Loan Forgiveness by counting classroom hours toward full-time status, requiring institutions to verify employment within 60 days, and requiring annual notice to eligible employees. No witnesses testified against the bill, and it was left pending.
Members then heard HB 2853, authorizing UTEP to phase in a student union fee increase to fund demolition and reconstruction of its aging student union. Representative Perez and UTEP student and university witnesses said the current facility is outdated and insufficient for a campus of more than 25,000 students, while some members raised concerns about the size of the fee increase and its impact on low-income students. UTEP representatives said most students receive aid, the fee would be phased in over time, and the project was student-approved; the bill was left pending. The committee also heard HB 4066, a one-line bill to abolish the Texas Research Incentive Program after the state cleared its backlog of matching obligations, with the author saying the program was no longer needed in light of newer research funding approaches. The bill was left pending.
The committee spent substantial time on HB 125, which would create the Tarleton State University College of Osteopathic Medicine. Supporters, including Tarleton leadership, the founding dean, a rural hospital CEO, and a feasibility consultant, argued the school would address severe rural physician shortages by recruiting Texas and rural students, training them in rural settings, and developing new residency slots rather than competing for existing ones. Members asked about affordability, residency placement, and whether the school would draw students from rural Texas; Tarleton said it would seek to keep tuition and debt low, had already raised private donations, and would request $25 million in state support over the biennium. The bill was left pending.
Finally, the committee heard HB 42, which would increase the annual Higher Education Fund appropriation and adjust its allocation methodology. The chair and university witnesses described rising deferred maintenance, inflation, cybersecurity needs, and enrollment growth at HEAF-eligible institutions, with witnesses from Texas Tech, Sam Houston State, and UNT saying the additional funding would help address aging facilities and technology needs. After testimony, the committee left HB 42 pending and recessed.
HI
Transcript Highlights:
- component of the school impact fee, but retain the land impact fee requirement and the in-lieu fee requirement
- Amend HRS 302A-606 to increase the required number of units to satisfy the land component impact fee
- component of the school construction fee component of the school impact<00:02:00.119>
fee <00: - requirement and the inl fee contribution requirement and the inl fee remove<00:02:06.200>
all - construction cost component impact fee construction cost component impact fee and<00:02:09.800><
Summary:
The committee took up House Bill 422, relating to school impact fees. The Education Committee recommended passage with amendments, and Ways and Means concurred. The amendments would repeal the construction fee component of the school impact fee while retaining the land impact fee and in-lieu fee requirements, remove related statutory language, exempt certain developments from school impact fees, raise the unit threshold for satisfying the land component to 100 units, require the School Facilities Authority to adopt rules and policies, and require a report to the Legislature on the effect of repealing the construction portion of the fee. The measure was also given a sunset date of June 30, 2029, with the committee report to note that the changes are intended to test the efficiency and efficacy of the fee structure and could be made permanent if the report supports that outcome. The committees adopted the recommendation, with one senator initially voting no and then changing to yes after the amendments were explained.
The meeting also included a separate hearing on House Bill 1155, concerning procurement for Department of Transportation projects and construction manager/general contractor procurement. DOT testified that it supported the concept but wanted to narrow the bill, saying the current language was too broad and that the goal was to allow more innovative procurement while preserving selection safeguards. The State Procurement Office said it supported the bill’s language but was willing to work with DOT on alternative wording. Several construction-related organizations, including subcontractors, iron workers, elevator constructors, and building trades representatives, opposed the bill, arguing that exemptions from the procurement code would weaken protections such as retainage, equality, and prompt payment and could invite favoritism or corruption. In response to those concerns, the chair proposed amendments limiting the exemption to DOT, narrowing the qualifying contracts, adding a two-year sunset, requiring a report after the first year, and clarifying that project management could not be procured under the section. The amended recommendation passed, though several members voted with reservations.
A separate item, House Bill 476, was briefly called up at the end of the agenda, with a recommendation to pass with amendments to increase a rate from 7.25% to 8%, but discussion was not completed in the portion of the transcript provided.
HI
Hawaii 2026 Regular Session
WLA, EDT-WLA, WLA DEFER Public Hearings 03-23-2026
Transcript Highlights:
- mortgage fees for commercial vessels, requiring revenue from the fee increase be used by DLNR for improvements
- Increasing the gross receipt fee, you know, takes um a lot of money off the top here, and we are not
- an industry that um can increase our fees um quickly.
- <00:02:34.520>
So, <00:02:35.440>um increase our fees um quickly. - So, um increase our fees um quickly.
Summary:
The committee first heard HB 649, which would create a small boat harbor commercial vessel special fund and raise mortgage fees on commercial vessels to fund harbor improvements. DLNR stood on written testimony in support, while the Ocean Tourism Coalition, Activity and Attractions Association of Hawaii, Calypso Charters, and a local commercial operator all opposed the bill, arguing that the fee increase would burden thin-margin businesses without fixing procurement and staffing problems and that the bill’s fee language and fund allocations were too vague. A DLNR witness also noted a prior bill, HB 2477, had sought to broaden the fee base to more ocean operators statewide rather than increase the percentage. No vote was taken on HB 649 during the portion shown.
The committee then heard HB 2599 on aquatic protection, which would prioritize ecosystem integrity and use of best available science in managing aquatic resources and set coral reef resilience goals. DLNR supported the measure, and a testifier from the public urged stronger coral goals for Oahu and a broader framework including water quality, herbivore management, fishery management, enforcement, and coral restoration. There was no opposition or vote shown on HB 2599 before the committee recessed to a joint hearing.
In the joint Economic Development and Tourism / Water, Land, Culture, and the Arts hearing, members heard HB 2118 on transferring the State Foundation on Culture and the Arts and the King Kamehameha Celebration Commission from DAGS to DBED, HB 2474 on authorizing non-binding international cooperative agreements, HB 1863 on creating an honorary ambassador to Canada, HB 1943 on out-of-state DBED offices and export promotion, and HB 2604 on a performing arts ticket surcharge. Testimony was generally supportive for HB 2118, HB 2474, HB 1863, and HB 1943, with questions focused on agency placement, sister-state relationships, and the rationale for overseas offices. HB 2604 drew opposition from the Tax Foundation and others, who argued the surcharge functioned as a tax and would make arts participation more expensive; the chair recommended deferring it.
During decision-making, both committees passed HB 2118, HB 2474, HB 1863, and HB 1943 with amendments, including technical changes and revised effective dates. For HB 2474, the amendments were described as clarifying definitions for sister-state and international cooperative agreements, allowing relationships with national governments, and preserving legislative approval and transparency. HB 1943 was amended to require an office in Laoag City, Philippines, rather than a non-existent DBED Philippines office. HB 2604 was deferred. After the joint session, the Water, Land, Culture, and the Arts committee resumed and heard HB 2395 on permits for taking marine deposits and HB 2361 on administrative support for the Kahului Bay Regional Council, both of which drew only DLNR written testimony and no further action in the excerpt. The committee then began HB 1823 on Coastal Zone Management Act exemptions, with the Office of Hawaiian Affairs testifying first, but the transcript cuts off before further testimony or action.
KY
Kentucky 2026 Regular Session
Senate Standing Committee on Banking and Insurance. (3-24-26)
Banking & Insurance
Transcript Highlights:
- It had a 10% fee cap for catastrophic losses, 15% fee cap for non-catastrophic losses.
- It had a 10% fee years ago had fee caps.
- Uh there's a uh fees.
- workers' comp fee schedule. workers' comp fee schedule.
- <00:42:07.160>
schedule increase that workers comp fee schedule increase that workers comp
MN
Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session
Committee on Agriculture, Veterans, Broadband and Rural Development - 04/04/25
Agriculture, Veterans, Broadband, and Rural Development
Transcript Highlights:
- But that could be adjusted if that fee would like to be credited to the first year's fee.
- It also changes the fee structure from $50 over $5,000 to a flat $30 fee that everybody will pay.
- a registration without a fee.
- a registration without a fee.
- a registration without a fee.
FL
Florida 2026 5th Special Session
Appropriations Committee on Health and Human Services Jan 14th, 2026
Transcript Highlights:
- Listed on our Medicaid fee schedule.
- In fee for service, sorry, current fee-for-service rates are lower than those paid by capitated plans
- In fee for service, sorry, current fee for service rates are lower than those paid by capitated plans
- This proposal will help in redesigning the Medicaid fee-for-service fee schedule to ensure those children
- I was so happy to see that you are increasing that fee-for-service, because that is going to make access
Summary:
The Appropriations Committee on Health and Human Services heard a presentation on the governor’s proposed fiscal year 2026-27 budget for the health and human services silo, which totals $48.5 billion. Agency leaders outlined major requests for AHCA, APD, DCF, DOEA, DOH, and the Department of Veterans’ Affairs, including behavioral health redesign, Medicaid rate changes, developmental disability services, child welfare and opioid programs, senior services, cancer research, public health initiatives, and veterans’ facility and technology needs. The committee also received an overview of the overall state budget, which was described as $117.4 billion, up 1.1% from the current year.
AHCA’s presentation focused on $71.6 million for a Medicaid behavioral health redesign, including funding for residential treatment, a serious mental illness waiver, and higher inpatient psychiatric rates for youth, plus $7.1 million to raise private duty nursing reimbursement in fee-for-service Medicaid, $2.5 million for the background screening clearinghouse, and $124.4 million for the Health Care Connection System (FX). APD requested funding to continue moving people off the pre-enrollment list and to support developmental disability centers, a new forensic facility, an electronic health record system, and higher operating costs. DCF highlighted $81.9 million for eligibility and system integrity, $187.5 million for opioid prevention and treatment, $35.5 million for community-based care lead agencies, and $72.7 million to expand behavioral health bed capacity, including 474 new beds at state hospitals. DOEA sought additional funding for Alzheimer’s services, home care, and community care for the elderly. DOH emphasized $278 million for cancer research and innovation, $5 million for food and product safety testing, $5 million for the Florida FIRST blood-on-ambulance initiative, and $5.7 million for a public lab feasibility study. Veterans Affairs requested funds for facility improvements, cybersecurity, and medication management equipment.
Members asked detailed questions about several items, especially the proposed changes to the AIDS Drug Assistance Program (ADAP), which would reduce eligibility and the number of people served. Senators and public witnesses criticized the lack of transparency and urged the department to pause the changes and work with stakeholders; the Surgeon General said the issue was driven by funding constraints and federal changes, not a legal barrier, and that the agency was exploring alternatives. Questions also addressed the Office of Minority Health and Health Equity, the Kids Care/CHIP expansion implementation, the cancer research funding structure, and the timeline and cost of the FX system. Public testimony focused heavily on ADAP, with speakers warning that thousands could lose medication access and calling for community involvement and a review of the program’s finances. The committee adjourned after the presentations and questions, with no votes taken on the budget items during this meeting.
NV
Nevada 2025 Regular Session
Assembly Committee on Commerce and Labor May 31st, 2025 at 11:30 pm
Commerce and Labor
Transcript Highlights:
- plans, and this cost increase will only be passed on to our members.
- The rebate administrative fee is paid by manufacturers.
- types of junk fees and other things in here.
- There are at least, like, 20 fees...
- Other types of junk fees and other things in here, there are at least, like, 20 fees that PBMs charge
Keywords:
public employees, police officers, benefits, appropriation, law enforcement, medical debt, collection agency, healthcare, consumer protection, financial assistance, occupational safety, air quality, greenhouse gases, employee monitoring, safety program, hemp, hemp products, cannabidiol, CBD, cannabis
TX
Texas 89th 2nd C.S.
Licensing & Administrative Procedures Apr 8th, 2025
Licensing & Administrative Procedures
Transcript Highlights:
- in their fees or their rates, um.
- 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
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- And so I ask you to please consider increasing.
- That tax expense is increasing at 20 to 30 percent per year.
- We faced an 11 interest rate increase. increases in from 2022 to 2023 and guess what happened to my client
- It would be reasonable attorney's fees.
- So those tax consultants would be at risk for those attorney's fees.
Keywords:
county appraisal district, board of directors, governance, taxing units, public representation, penalty, property report, taxation, timely filing, chief appraiser, appraisal district, ad valorem tax, property appraisal, tax protests, unequal appraisal, property rights, property tax, public employees, protest leave, appraisal review board