Transcript Highlights:

• But the bill also removes an existing 4,000-ton cap on calculating emission fees.
• But the bill also removes an existing 4,000-ton cap on calculating emission fees.
• The bill also removes an existing 4,000-ton cap on calculating emission fees.
• You don't have to pay emissions fees on them.
• You don't have to pay emissions fees on them.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00 Attendance Roll Call 00:12 Introduction of Guests 01:09 HB 88 Discussion 01:46 HB 88 Roll Call Vote 03:24 HB 346 Discussion 04:20 HB 346 Roll Call Vote 21:58 Chair Comments 24:31, 958, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and first considered House Bill 88, which was described as a short bill to clarify procedures for Waste Management boards, including term limits, appointments, and making sure consolidated governments actively recruit community members and make openings easier to find. The sponsor said the bill was intended to resolve confusion about members staying on after terms expire. The bill received no opposition, passed the committee unanimously, and was reported favorably for the floor. The committee then took up House Bill 346, as amended by a committee substitute. The sponsor explained that the bill responds to a dispute over air emission fees, especially for emergency generators and backup generators used for worker safety and limited non-emergency testing. The bill would exempt emergency generators and backup generators operating 100 hours or less for maintenance/testing from fees, while also removing an existing 4,000-ton cap so the per-ton fee would drop for most permitted sources. Members discussed the possible impact on utilities and ratepayers, with concerns raised that costs could be passed through to consumers and affect coal-dependent areas. The sponsor and another member argued the change would generally reduce fees for most sources and incentivize emissions reductions; the cabinet was described as neutral, and the affected utilities were identified as TVA, LG&E, East Kentucky Power, and Big Rivers, with only TVA having raised comments. The committee substitute was adopted, and the bill passed the committee with a favorable recommendation, though one member voted no and several members explained yes votes while expressing ongoing concerns about future rate impacts. At the end of the meeting, members briefly discussed broader concerns about utility surcharges and the need to monitor the effects of legislation on ratepayers, but those comments were not part of the bill under consideration. The chair noted that future meetings may include more bills and could start earlier if needed, and the committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Article 6 is all of the fee increases from the Secretary of State's office.
• <00:38:36.440> increases Article 6 is all of the fee increases Article 6 is all of the fee
• So, they really don't need a fee increase if they're returning money.
• ><00:42:13.760> the<00:42:13.840> part<00:42:14.080> of increases fees on people
• filing fees are very modest increases to filing fees and<00:42:58.720> will<00:42:58.920> help

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:55:21.400> in 3.7% increase in 3.7% increase in patients<00:55:23.319> um<00:55
• the report date uh we've seen increases the report date uh we've seen increases in<00:59:34.119>
• We've never raised a fee in the history of the program. We've eliminated fees or lowered fees.
• We've never raised a fee in the history of the program. We've eliminated fees or lowered fees.
• /c> program we've eliminated fees or low program we've eliminated fees or low lowered<01:14:56.480>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Health and Human Services Oversight Committee met on February 2 and first approved the draft minutes from the prior meeting, with minor corrections to the meeting date and attendance notation. DHHS Associate Commissioner Patricia Tilly then gave a department update, describing the current uncertainty around federal priorities and funding, and provided two substantive reports: progress on the new Hampstead Youth Development Center and an update on the department’s review of an ALS registry proposal. She said the YDC project is underway with tree clearing, fencing, stormwater and site-prep work, and remains on track for completion by June 30, 2026 and operation by August 30, 2026. The center currently has 12 youth, and the new design is intended to provide flexibility for fluctuating census levels. On ALS, Tilly explained that HB 576 had prompted the department to examine whether a registry could be built, but the estimated cost of a HIPAA-compliant system was about $750,000. She said DHHS is reviewing whether existing data sources, such as hospital discharge data and CHIS claims data, could provide useful information, but noted both are incomplete for registry purposes. Committee members discussed whether the Rare Disease Advisory Council, Dartmouth, or existing cancer registry infrastructure could help reduce costs. DHHS said it is neutral and willing to continue exploring alternatives, while members emphasized the value of a registry and the need to consider shared infrastructure and funding. The committee also heard from Jenny Horan of the Alzheimer’s Association, who presented the subcommittee’s report on Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias. She said the subcommittee spent the past year gathering information on dementia care, abuse and exploitation issues, caregiver strain, and available services, and is now moving into a second phase focused on identifying gaps and developing a state plan. Members asked about geriatric psychiatric capacity and long-term care availability; Horan said the state has limited capacity and that the plan will help clarify where needs are greatest. She offered to return for follow-up questions at a later meeting. Finally, Olivia May of DHHS presented the quarterly report on the 12-month postpartum Medicaid coverage extension. She said New Hampshire implemented the extension after federal and state action, and the first claims data are still emerging because of reporting lags. In the initial cohort studied, 95% received some medical services during the extended period, 52.4% received mental health or substance use disorder treatment, 26.7% received preventive visits, and 3.2% received heart or hypertension services. Members asked about return on investment and whether higher federal matching rates are being used appropriately; DHHS said it claims the highest possible match based on eligibility group and will return with more data over time. The committee then heard the annual therapeutic cannabis program report from Michael Holt, who said the program had 1,475 registered patients as of June 30, 2024 and that growth has slowed, with New Hampshire having the lowest per-capita medical cannabis enrollment nationally.

Transcript Highlights:

• Additionally, a $150 counsel fee is imposed on each indigent adult.
• Additionally, a $150 counsel fee is imposed on each indigent adult.
• The automatic CPI increase would save everyone's time.
• It has now been 37 years without an increase.
• Barbara Reardon continued: “Seven years without an increase.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee held its inaugural hearing of the session, led by Chair Michael Day and co-chair Senator Lydia Edwards, and reviewed a large slate of bills and constitutional amendments. The chair laid out hearing procedures, including three-minute testimony limits, priority for in-person witnesses, and deadlines for reporting constitutional amendments and House bills. The committee heard testimony on 29 proposals, with many witnesses and advocates speaking in support of measures they said would clarify the law, improve access to justice, or address public safety and fairness concerns. Several bills drew extensive testimony. Supporters of H.1686/S.1254 urged creation of a commission to study intentional misrepresentation of service animals, citing disruptive and dangerous encounters with fake service dogs and the need to protect legitimate service-dog teams. H.1649/S.1168 on court transcriber fees received strong support from transcribers and CPCS, who said rates have been frozen at $3 per page since 1988 and should be raised to $4.50, with an automatic CPI adjustment; they also described the work as time-consuming and essential to the justice system. H.1768/S.1037 on indigency was backed by CPCS, which said the bill would update eligibility rules, reduce unnecessary six-month reassessments, and eliminate the $150 counsel fee for indigent adults. H.1723/S.1193 to remove the charitable immunity cap was supported by legislators and attorneys who argued the current $20,000/$100,000 caps leave seriously injured people undercompensated and make Massachusetts an outlier. The committee also heard testimony on S.1046 regarding adoptions, with multiple adoptive parents, attorneys, and agency representatives describing recent probate court interpretations that have disrupted out-of-state surrender and finalization practices. Witnesses said the bill would restore predictability and allow birth parents outside Massachusetts to use either their home-state law or Massachusetts law, while preserving ICPC safeguards. Senator Feingold testified on H.1748/S.1109, “Conrad’s Law,” to criminalize coercing someone into suicide, arguing Massachusetts should join most other states in creating a specific offense rather than relying on involuntary manslaughter charges. Representative Donahue supported H.66 to remove “so help me God” from the constitutional oath of office. No votes were taken during the hearing; the committee simply heard testimony and thanked witnesses, with chairs indicating they would continue reviewing the bills and written submissions.

Transcript Highlights:

• We got an increase in 22; we got another increase in 23. We're on a pathway.
• because there's a lot of hidden fees in.
• , or at least negotiate those fees.
• . increasing your Sharpe ratio at all?
• Yes, it might increase the return, but it does increase our risk.

Transcript Highlights:

• So as state collections have increased, balances have also increased, So as state collections have increased
• The corporate filing fees collections have gone up because those are the fees that people pay when they're
• So talk a little bit about corporate filing fees. Those are incorporation fees?
• um those are incorporation fees no just just you just A little bit about corporate filing fees.
• They are other taxes and fees, which are small fees that come through different trust funds.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Finance and Tax convened with a quorum present, heard an introductory presentation of committee staff, and then received a staff briefing from Azar Khan on Florida’s state tax structure and revenue outlook. The presentation covered fiscal year 2023-2024 revenues, noting more than $127 billion in total state revenue, with general revenue exceeding $48 billion and sales and use tax making up the largest share. It also compared Florida’s tax burden to other states, highlighted Florida’s low per-capita revenue ranking and strong business formation numbers, and reviewed major and minor revenue sources, tax rates, and the revenue estimating conference process. Members asked about what drives revenue growth, including population, tourism, construction, and auto sales, and about Florida’s regressivity, corporate income tax participation, and investment earnings on state balances. Khan said the state’s revenue picture remains positive and stable, but that future growth is slower than during the COVID-era spike; he also explained that some negative forecast changes were tied to legislative actions such as the insurance premium tax credit, while others reflected lower tobacco consumption and severance activity. He noted that revenue and spending forecasts are separate and that budget-side growth is driving concerns raised in other state economic projections. The committee also discussed possible tax package ideas for the upcoming session, including tax holidays and homeowner relief, but no specific proposals were acted on. The chair announced the committee would not meet the following week and that the next meeting would be in week three of February. The meeting concluded with no objections to a motion to adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• Are y'all willing to supply that data as far as your administrative fees or costs?
• fees to...
• So the increase of insurance more to take care of an administrative fee you're talking about well I'm
• increase for these mandates, then we need to make sure and have that in there.
• But if this cost is already included and the fees you're getting now.

Bills: HB138, HB335, HB388, HB138

Keywords: health impact analysis, cost analysis, coverage mandates, health insurance, legislative analysis, health care data, education, funding, classroom resources, teacher support, student outcomes, health benefits, provider dentists, payment reimbursement, insurance code, noncontracting, dental care, reimbursement, health benefit plans, noncontracting providers

Transcript Highlights:

• with that fee for service.
• We're not recalculating or adjusting the fees.
• We're not setting new fees, we're adjusting the fees based on the Consumer Price Index from 2008 to 2019
• That's a 2008 fee.
• , that I need to do something to increase the fees so that they can operate efficiently.

Transcript Highlights:

• The goal of this proposal is to increase The goal of this proposal is to increase safety<00:03:39.320
• fee-for-service program. fee-for-service program.
• fees at 6%. 6%. 6%.
• This would increase that to 50%.
• medical records without paying a fee. medical records without paying a fee.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• This also has a fee increase tied to it.
• This account tied to the fee increase.
• There is the Senate park fee increase.
• The Senate proposal does fee increase.
• Um uh to increase the AIS boat fee.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• These climate fees are particularly harmful to developers and small businesses who will face increased
• When a builder builds that construction, they pay a builder fee.
• , impact fees to establish parks.
• These fees, examples of which range from $5,000 to over $25,000 per lot across Texas, are directly increasing
• When we pay a Parkland fee, we have the choice of paying the fee to the city. or simply building a park

Bills: HB158, HB714, HB 1198, HB1630, HB1998, HB3509, HB3788, HB3875, HB3948, HB3977, HB4097, HB4313, HB4314, HB4317, HB158

Keywords: housing, veterans, surplus government property, affordable housing, funding sources, housing assistance, homeless prevention, landlord incentives, rural housing, domestic violence, community development, tenant readiness, program participants, financial assistance, homelessness, rental support, Texas Tenant Readiness Program, tenant assistance, housing stability, Texas Department of Housing

Transcript Highlights:

• and tournament fees.
• or fees and equipment costs that are divided between the state and the county. fees or fees and equipment
• Is there any evidence that by waiving the fees, there's increased participation?
• that you waive the fees?
• is a larger fee.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• That increase moved to $25,000.
• That's been in place for many years, but that was increased.
• The amount of fees will depend on what sector the manager is in.
• We are sensitive to fees. Again, our target is that net return. we know fees reduce that.
• Madam Chair, if I could go back to fees, one more comment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there any evidence that by waiving the fees, there's increased participation?
• fees, fee revenues generate by almost a million dollars.
• So to waive the fee might increase the number of participants, lower the success rate.
• is a larger fee.
• And so what these researchers were able to conclude is that having fine and fee debt build up increases

Summary: The Judiciary Interim Committee met to begin its study of charitable gaming and the ownership of alcoholic beverage establishments by licensed charitable gaming organizations, a study directed by Senate Bill 2334. Legislative Council gave an overview of the constitutional and statutory framework for charitable gaming, site authorizations, rent limits, proceeds, and recent legislative changes. The Attorney General’s Gaming Division then clarified the financial flow of gaming, explaining that in fiscal year 2025 North Dakota had about $2.5 billion in gross gaming proceeds, with roughly 88-90% paid back in prizes and about $256 million available to organizations after taxes; most of that activity came from electronic pull tabs. Members asked for more detail on winnings, replays, rent, and the breakdown of manufacturer/distributor revenues, and the AG’s office agreed to provide supplemental information. The committee also heard from the League of Cities and the Association of Counties about local site authorization. Cities said they have a limited role in approving gaming sites, can adopt policies after public hearing, may charge up to $100, and can set certain conditions, including local nexus requirements, but cannot require donations or force a specific charity or site. The League said it had worked with stakeholders on a model policy to provide more consistency, though members raised concerns that local requirements could become too restrictive for charities serving broader areas. Counties said the issue is mostly a city matter, with little county involvement beyond minimal site fees and general site approval. The North Dakota Gaming Alliance testified in support of the study and provided IRS-related material suggesting charities may use asset diversification, while emphasizing it had not taken a position on whether charities should own bars. Members questioned whether bar ownership is being used for site stability or to channel charitable gaming dollars, and whether city policies might disadvantage charities with broader missions. The committee also discussed the relationship between gaming organizations, manufacturers, and distributors, including restrictions on incentives and interference, and asked for more information on those entities and their ownership. Later in the meeting, the Racing Commission gave its regular update on live racing, pari-mutuel wagering, ADW providers, purse and promotion funds, a new TRPB contract, and concerns about cease-and-desist actions from other states. Finally, the State Hospital superintendent briefly reported on the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s support services, including the SORT team, training, and security assistance for the hospital campus.

Transcript Highlights:

• creation and operation of science park districts in certain counties that may impose assessments, fees
• relating to the establishment of the Health Impact Cost and Coverage Analysis Program, authorizing a fee
• HB 1206, by Gonzalez of Dallas, relating to the disclosure of certain fees by landlords.
• HB 1211, by Lujan, relating to tuition and fee exemptions at public institutions of higher education
• AB 1221 by Lasagna relating to the increasing of the reimbursement rates for certain expenses related

Summary: The House met to read a large slate of newly filed bills and resolutions and refer them to committees. The measures covered a wide range of topics, including health care and insurance, public education, elections, criminal justice, public safety, taxes, transportation, agriculture, environmental regulation, higher education, housing, and local government. Several proposals focused on abortion and reproductive health, firearms, voter registration and ballot access, school curriculum and accountability, property tax and homestead issues, and state contracting and agency oversight. A number of constitutional amendments were also filed, including proposals on initiative and referendum, veto override authority, vaccination refusal, parental rights in education, gun rights, Medicaid expansion, and various tax exemptions. No substantive debate, testimony, or votes occurred during this portion of the meeting; the clerk simply read the bills and resolutions and announced their committee referrals. The list included both general legislation and joint resolutions, with many items sent to standing committees and several to subcommittees. The House then adjourned without objection until 2 p.m. on Tuesday.

Transcript Highlights:

• , increasing the cost of transportation, increasing registration fees for passenger vehicles, requiring
• additional fees to the state.
• Road Fund, and adjusting certain formulaic distributions of motor vehicle fees.
• Increasing the weight distance tax for motor vehicles other than buses, increasing registration fees
• of motor vehicle fees.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Additionally, reducing the LLC filing fee will result in extreme loss of revenue.
• Further reducing the annual report fee would lead to further revenue loss.
• Additionally, reducing the filing fee is going to increase fraudulent filings.
• Nantucket voters overwhelmingly support a transfer fee.
• Please consider an optional real estate transfer fee for seasonal communities.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee held a hearing on Governor Healey’s economic development proposal, H. 5386, also referred to as the Mass Winds Act, focused on global investment, talent, innovation, housing, and business competitiveness. Governor Healey, Secretary of Economic Development Eric Paley, and Secretary of Administration and Finance Matt Gorzkowicz described the bill as a response to federal uncertainty and global competition, building on the 2024 Mass Leads Act. They highlighted proposed investments in a Global Mass initiative, including a $50 million innovation access fund and $20 million for sites to help international companies locate or expand in Massachusetts, along with support for AI, quantum, robotics, defense innovation, climate tech, downtown revitalization, and creative/cultural economy projects. They also emphasized measures to lower business costs, including reducing the LLC filing fee, expanding the small business energy tax exemption, and streamlining housing and development rules. Committee members questioned the administration about non-compete reform, AI and data-center infrastructure, housing affordability, and whether the bill would help retain workers and companies in Massachusetts. The governor and secretaries argued that the non-compete changes would restore the original compromise by requiring any alternative to garden leave to be negotiated at separation, and they said the bill’s housing and workforce provisions are intended to help young workers stay in the state. They also said Massachusetts is already investing in AI training, an AI hub, and energy-related planning, while acknowledging that data-center growth will require careful attention to water, electricity, and ratepayer impacts. Several witnesses testified on specific sections. Northeastern University supported the internship tax credit, saying experiential learning helps students gain jobs and remain in Massachusetts. The Latino Empowerment Advisory Council supported the waiver of redundant English testing for internationally trained nurses, saying it would speed entry into the workforce without lowering clinical standards. Russell Beck opposed the non-compete changes, arguing they would undermine the 2018 compromise and could reduce other forms of employee compensation. The Secretary of the Commonwealth’s office opposed the LLC fee reduction, citing revenue loss and fraud concerns. Municipal and regional groups, including the MMA and the Metro Mayors Coalition, supported site plan review codification and downtown/arts investments, while urging continued municipal input. The AFL-CIO asked for trigger language to preserve labor protections if federal law changes, and business and industry witnesses generally supported the bill’s competitiveness and global investment provisions. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational, with written testimony invited after the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• that portion or authorizing the imposition and collection of fees through the rulemaking process.
• that portion or authorizing the imposition and collection of fees through the rulemaking process.
• Moving on to our next testifier, we have the Department of Taxation with comments. collection of fees
• so we recommend collection of fees so we recommend either<00:03:37.959> deleting<00:03:38.519
• um through the ru making process of fees um through the ru making process and<00:03:45.159> I

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The joint hearing of the Committees on Economic Development and Technology and Tourism on February 12, 2025, focused on HB 77/HB 1077, a measure related to increasing the transient accommodations tax and directing revenue toward climate mitigation/resiliency and economic development/tourism resiliency. Most testifiers supported the bill, including the Hawaii Emergency Management Agency, Hawaii Green Infrastructure Authority, State Energy Office, Governor’s office, DLNR, the Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission, the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development, the Nature Conservancy, the Hawaii Climate Advisory Team, Care for Aina Now Coalition, the Hawaii Tourism Authority, and the Ocean Legislative Task Force. Supporters emphasized the need for reliable funding for disaster preparedness, environmental restoration, infrastructure resilience, and tourism-related resilience projects; some cited polling and a reported funding gap for natural resource protection and restoration. Opposition or concerns came from the Kohala Coast Resort Association, which argued the state should fully collect existing taxes from short-term vacation rentals and other accommodations before considering any tax increase. The Attorney General and Department of Taxation offered technical comments, noting the bill’s special fund language referred to fees that the chapter did not actually authorize and recommending either deleting that language or authorizing fee collection through rulemaking. The Hawaii Tourism Authority supported the measure but asked that the funding mechanism have a clear nexus to tourism resiliency. After a brief recess, the chair recommended amendments to redirect the proposed 1.75% TAT increase away from the two special funds and into the general fund, while earmarking 7.3% of total revenue for climate mitigation/resiliency and 7.3% for economic development and tourism resiliency, with technical and defect-effective-date amendments. Both committees then voted to pass the measure with amendments; the recommendations were adopted, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:04:37.840> well governor's bill here is increases well governor's bill here is increases
• 39.880> a doesn't increase this has a doesn't increase this has a refundability<00:04:41.520><
• use their credit card, and the fee that gets charged to the bank, or what fees are you talking about
• about credit card fees.
• Johnson so I think I mentioned ATM fees Johnson so I think I mentioned ATM fees but<01:26:25.320

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up House File 2437, the governor’s proposed tax bill, and first adopted the A25-Z42 amendment to put the bill in the desired shape. Commissioner Paul Marquardt of the Department of Revenue then presented the bill as part of Governor Walz and Lieutenant Governor Flanagan’s budget, describing it as a response to budget pressures that would make the tax system more fair and stable while supporting economic development and jobs. Marquardt walked through the bill’s major provisions. These included sustainable aviation fuel policy, repeal of K-12 education credit assignment, elimination of the political contribution refund, expansion of the research and development credit, short-line railroad infrastructure modernization, changes to the state airport fund levy, replacement of attachments and appearances with distribution systems, a narrow personal property tax exception for low-income housing tenants, reduced aquatic invasive species aid, and a 34% reduction in PILT payments. He then focused on the sales tax article, saying it would lower the statewide rate by 0.75% while expanding the base to selected professional services such as accounting, banking, brokerage, and legal services, with business-to-business transactions exempt. He said the proposal would be effective for sales and purchases after September 30, 2025, and estimated a first-year rate-cut impact of about $99 million versus $215 million from the service expansion, while arguing that most households would see a net tax cut. He also noted other changes such as landlord penalty adjustments, a 30% reduction in sustainable aviation fuel incentive payments, repeal of local government cannabis aid, and repeal of the tax filing modernization account. Public testimony began with Kyle Playford of the Financial Planning Association of Minnesota, who strongly opposed the proposed sales tax on professional services, especially financial planning. He argued that financial planning is an essential service for retirement, investment, and long-term financial security, and said the tax would raise costs for consumers, reduce access for middle-class families, small business owners, and retirees, and put Minnesota firms at a competitive disadvantage. The chair then indicated that additional public testimony would continue before member questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Just to clarify, are you asking if the registration fee itself the $65 dollars will be increasing.
• As of right now, there's not I have not had any discussion about increasing the registration fees for
• We've not had a fee increase since 2018.
• Significant increases in the fees collected were intended to help you have a larger facility to work
• The last time that we increased our license fees for the doctors was in 2010.

Keywords: 914, all