Transcript Highlights:

• And CCRCs also have entrance fees in addition to monthly fees.
• And again, we’ll talk about entrance fees a little bit here.
• So your lower fee, the entrance fee may be a little lower than a life care contract, with the potential
• And so theirs are much lower, their entrance fees.
• , that entrance fee, before we admit them.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Aging and Independence commission meeting focused on continuing care retirement communities (CCRCs), with members and presenters discussing how the model works, consumer protections, and areas for future review. After member introductions, Jennifer Fuller summarized survey results showing the top priorities as financial viability and affordability, consumer protections and rights, and regulation/monitoring standards. The commission said those issues would guide its work plan, while also keeping staffing, definitions, and federal support on the radar. Alyssa Sherman of LeadingAge Massachusetts and Jim Freiling of Brookhaven at Lexington gave a detailed overview of CCRCs, explaining that they combine housing with health-related services under long-term contracts and typically require entrance fees plus monthly fees. They described the three common contract types: Type A/life care, where costs stay relatively stable if residents need more care; Type B, which offers some included or discounted care with higher costs later; and Type C, fee-for-service, with lower entrance fees but higher costs if care needs increase. They also discussed nonprofit governance, resident involvement, and the role of state and Attorney General disclosure requirements. Several members raised concerns about affordability, refund timing, and the need to distinguish true CCRCs from other senior housing marketed similarly; presenters said refunds are often tied to reoccupancy and that their organizations are collecting data on refund timelines and contract terms. The discussion also covered resident rights and governance, including whether residents should have seats on nonprofit boards. Christine Griffin said her community lacks resident board representation and urged the commission to consider a state requirement, while others said resident associations and direct engagement with boards can be more effective than mandatory board seats. Members also discussed transparency around monthly fee increases, financial screening before admission, and the importance of clear marketing so consumers understand what they are buying. No votes were taken. The meeting ended with logistical updates, including a tentative public hearing date of June 3, 2025, a note that the next meeting would focus on regulation and monitoring standards, and a reminder that the commission would continue refining its work plan based on survey feedback.

Transcript Highlights:

• to the addressing fee.
• SB 1080 does not streamline development. SB 1080 does not streamline development.
• or a development order permit.
• so we capped impact fees at 12.5% per year over a four-year period. ...impact fees at 12.5% per year
• It is surrounded by development.

Summary: The committee first heard SB 1134, which would extend the use of qualified private providers in the building permit process to residential solar energy systems and certain single-trade inspections, and would allow computer-based plan review tools. The sponsor said the bill is intended to reduce long solar permitting delays and lower costs. A late amendment clarifying the word “application” was adopted, and after some discussion about local permitting problems and the need to work with municipalities, CS/SB 1134 was reported favorably, with Senator Pizzo voting no. The committee then took up SB 784, dealing with issuance of addresses and parcel identification numbers for plats. The bill sets a 14-day timeframe, and an amendment was adopted that would allow use of a private provider if the deadline is missed and would limit fee collection if verification is not completed. Members discussed whether the bill should include more flexibility and whether private providers are appropriate for this function, but the committee ultimately reported CS/SB 784 favorably. SB 1738, allowing counties that previously opted out of transportation concurrency to opt back in while maintaining current levels of service, was also reported favorably without significant opposition. Next, SB 1080 on local government land regulation was presented as a measure to speed up development permit and order approvals, limit repeated information requests, prevent hearing delays, and impose penalties for noncompliance. Local government testimony argued it would rush planning and weaken public input, while supporters called it common-sense streamlining. After debate, the bill was reported favorably, with several no votes. SB 1260, which clarifies county constitutional officer budget procedures and creates an appeal process for clerks and supervisors of elections similar to that used by sheriffs, was also reported favorably after members raised concerns about county budget timelines. Finally, the committee considered SB 420, as amended by a strike-all, which would prohibit counties and municipalities from adopting or funding DEI-related ordinances, programs, or policies, while carving out compliance with state and federal law and defining DEI-related terms. The amendment removed retroactivity and delayed the effective date, but members from both parties raised concerns about vague definitions, impacts on women- and minority-owned business programs, local commemorations, and the loss of attorney’s fees for prevailing counties. Public testimony was sharply divided, with many speakers opposing the bill as an attack on local control and inclusion, and a few supporting it as a merit-based standard. The amendment was adopted, but the bill drew extensive opposition in debate and was not yet reported in the portion of the transcript provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• With this in mind, the development.
• we've had conversations about developing we've had conversations about developing a<00:56:36.240
• what that fee is? what that fee is? >> How<01:12:25.040> much? >> How much?
• But it could be much access fee.
• access fee. Thank you. access fee. Thank you.

Bills: HF3830, HF3688

Keywords: utilities, rate cases, cost recovery, reporting requirements, gas infrastructure, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• I allowed for a $5 fee for those swabs.
• <00:31:32.240> a develop a develop a uh<00:31:34.320> uniform<00:31:34.960> form
• before anything else happens and develop before anything else happens and develop a<00:40:35.440
• to include um not a cap on the fee to include um not a cap on the fee associated<00:42:44.640>
• <00:42:59.280> for us being able to recoup that fee for us being able to recoup that fee for

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:02 Roll Call 00:00:23 HB 414 Discussion 00:01:58 HB 414 Vote 00:22:34 HB 43 Discussion 00:24:56 HB 43 Vote 00:26:37 HB 518 Discussion 00:27:37 HB 518 Vote 00:45:20 Adjournment 00:46:35, 958, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and took up three bills. House Bill 414, sponsored by the chair, would require collection of DNA at booking for felony arrests. Supporters, including Sen. Julie Rocky Adams, Michelle Kyper, and Ashley Spence, argued that felony-arrest DNA collection is already used in many states and in the federal system, helps solve cold cases, and can exonerate innocent people. Kyper and Spence gave detailed personal testimony about sexual assaults and how delayed DNA collection allowed serial offenders to remain unidentified for years. Members asked about the removal of a $5 fee in the committee substitute and about what happens to DNA if a case is dismissed; the sponsor said the fee was removed to treat DNA collection like other booking procedures, and that dismissed-case language was taken out because of concerns about duplicate samples. The committee adopted the substitute and passed the bill favorably on a roll call vote. House Bill 43, sponsored by Rep. Diana Gordon, would create a grace period for deputy coroners to complete required annual training when extenuating circumstances prevent timely completion. Gordon said the bill was a repeat of last session’s HB 403 and was intended to let deputies remain employed rather than lose their license and reapply. After a brief question about how often extensions would be used, she said the grace period would be discretionary and limited to unusual circumstances. The committee then passed the bill favorably by roll call. House Bill 518, also with a committee substitute, addressed local tax collection and payment procedures. The sponsor described it as a compromise between business groups and local governments, aimed at simplifying payment of local occupational license fees and net profits taxes by requiring cities and counties to offer electronic payment options. Testimony from the Kentucky League of Cities, the National Federation of Independent Business, and the County Judge/Executive Association focused on reducing paperwork for businesses while preserving local control and avoiding forced centralization. The committee adopted the substitute and passed the bill favorably on a roll call vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so let's develop the provider network, or do you develop the provider networks so they're there at
• on those fee transfers.
• Is that 3% administrative fee... Is that 3% administrative fee represented anywhere in this ASR?
• The speaker added that many plans do not pay on a fee-for-service basis or fee schedule.
• We asked for what was paid by fee-for-service.

Summary: The Health Care Budget Subcommittee took up two bills and then continued oversight discussions with APD and AHCA. CS/HB 27, the Social Work Licensure Interstate Compact, was presented as a way to let Florida social workers practice in other compact states and vice versa; AARP, the Florida Chamber, and NASW Florida supported it, and the bill passed favorably. HB 1127, a child welfare bill, would create a treatment foster care pilot for children with high behavioral needs, improve DCF data collection on commercially sexually exploited children, and expand recruitment for protective investigators and case managers; the bill also passed favorably after brief supportive testimony. The committee then questioned APD at length about the iBudget waiver waitlist, enrollment pace, spending projections, and provider capacity. APD said it had sent more than 1,100 interest letters in categories 3, 4, and 5, enrolled 1,124 people so far this year, and expects to spend about 96.4% of its waiver appropriation, leaving roughly $82 million unspent. Members pressed APD on why prior discussions suggested more reserve was needed, how long the SANS process takes, whether category 6 could be expanded, and whether the agency has enough waiver support coordinators and direct support providers. APD said it has about 1,061 waiver support coordinators statewide, adequate capacity for current enrollees, but would need further analysis if the legislature directed a much larger enrollment increase. Members also asked about outreach, annual maintenance of the waitlist, portability for military families, and whether communication efforts should be privatized. Finally, AHCA walked the committee through the 2023 Achieved Savings Rebate (ASR) report for Aetna and explained how the report is used for financial monitoring, rebate calculations, and transparency. AHCA said the ASR is separate from the medical loss ratio (MLR) calculation, though both are reviewed, and that Florida uses the ASR mechanism rather than an MLR remittance requirement to recover funds from plans. Members asked about related-party disclosures, CVS/Caremark relationships, expanded benefits, encounter data, network adequacy penalties, denials and appeals reporting, interest earned on capitation payments, and whether rate increases were reaching providers. AHCA and the outside auditors said they review the plans’ reported data, reconcile it to underlying records, and can assess liquidated damages for network adequacy violations; several members requested follow-up data on rebates, interest, provider capacity, and related-party reporting.

Transcript Highlights:

• We also create an environmental protection trust fund so that any of the bag fees or violation fees go
• Small businesses typically tend to resist a fee.
• So please keep the fee in there.
• As a town, however, we cannot charge a fee.
• We need a fee.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Environment and Natural Resources held a heavily attended hybrid hearing focused primarily on plastics reduction bills, along with a few local and related waste-management measures. Chair Rauch and Chair Barber outlined strict testimony rules because of the large number of speakers. Before the plastics docket, the committee heard support for a local Sharon sewer-extension bill for a Sunrise Senior Living project, and the bill’s proponents said the project would help address senior housing needs and would still require MWRA and local approvals. The chairs also noted a separate local matter involving Sharon and the MWRA. A major portion of the hearing centered on the Plastics Reduction Act and related bills addressing single-use plastics, including plastic bags, polystyrene, black plastic, plastic beverage bottles, non-flushable wipes, skip-the-stuff provisions, and truth-in-labeling. Sponsors and supporters said the bills would reduce litter, microplastics, greenhouse gas emissions, and municipal waste costs, while creating statewide consistency and supporting environmental justice communities. Several speakers cited local bans already adopted by many Massachusetts cities and towns, and many urged the committee to advance comprehensive statewide action. The committee also heard testimony on a boat wrap recycling bill, a mattress recycling bill, and a bill to prohibit hotels from providing small plastic toiletries. Municipal officials and waste professionals supported extended producer responsibility for paint and labeling for non-flushable wipes, saying these measures would shift costs away from cities and towns and reduce strain on wastewater systems. The Massachusetts Municipal Association, Mayor Ruth Ann Fuller of Newton, and a Franklin County waste official all backed paint EPR and wipes labeling. Fire Chief Brian Nardelli testified for the Fire Chiefs Association in support of lithium-ion battery legislation, citing fire safety and disposal concerns. Other speakers, including environmental groups, local activists, and business representatives, supported bag and polystyrene bans, though the Retailers Association of Massachusetts urged any bag policy to be truly statewide and said any bag fee should be retained by retailers. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• that you're developing.
• schools, and now will be developed, so the landowner pays the fees and it helps all other property..
• schools, and now will be developed, so the landowner pays the fees and it helps all other property..
• so the land owner pays will be developed so the land owner pays the<00:50:48.559> fees<00:50:
• perhaps for a fee perhaps not for a fee perhaps for a fee perhaps not for a fee but<01:33:24.400

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• These fees are long overdue. These fees are long overdue.
• You haven't updated your fees.'
• What that fee goes where?
• What we're trying to say is that that fee, unlike many consumer fees that you use for food, gas, has
• We have to incur legal fees, tens of thousands of dollars of legal fees, to defend against these.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on the Judiciary held a hearing on bills in the Civil Actions 2 and Court Administration areas, with testimony spanning judicial security, judicial compensation, civil process fees, bar advocate compensation, interstate discovery, defamation protections for sexual assault survivors, and related criminal procedure changes. Chairs Edwards and Day opened with housekeeping rules on testimony limits and written submissions, then called witnesses on each bill in turn. On H. 1766, judicial officers and the Massachusetts Bar Association strongly supported a judicial security bill that would protect judges’ personal information, citing threats, online harassment, swatting, and violence against judges and their families. On H. 1819, judges and the Massachusetts Judges Conference asked for higher compensation, saying Massachusetts judges rank low nationally after cost-of-living adjustment and that pay affects recruitment and retention. The committee also heard support for H. 1582/S. 1183 to raise civil process service fees, with sheriffs saying the fees have been unchanged since 2003 and are needed to cover rising costs, safety equipment, and operations funded by those fees. The committee heard from prosecutors on H. 1604 and H. 1846, which would give district courts concurrent jurisdiction over certain school-threat and leaving-the-scene offenses, allowing prosecutors to handle less serious or panic-driven cases more efficiently while preserving mandatory penalties. CPCS and bar advocates supported H. 1876 on bar advocate compensation, describing a continuing shortage and crisis in indigent defense despite recent pay increases and staffing investments. The Boston Bar Association supported H. 1857, a Massachusetts version of the Interstate Depositions and Discovery Act, saying it would simplify out-of-state discovery and reduce cost and delay. A large portion of the hearing focused on H. 1974/S. 1143, which would protect survivors of sexual assault and harassment from retaliatory defamation suits unless the plaintiff proves actual malice, and would allow fee shifting and damages against abusive suits. Survivors, advocates, and attorneys described threats, legal costs, and chilling effects that silence reporting, while supporters said the bill would protect truthful speech and improve access to counsel. The committee also heard insurance-industry testimony on S. 1101, which would change personal injury protection payment rules to require insurers to tender disputed amounts within 30 days to avoid attorney’s fees; insurers said the bill would curb a growing volume of provider lawsuits and reduce abuse of the no-fault system. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the chair closed after all scheduled testimony was complete.

Transcript Highlights:

• Madam Chair, members, HB 2946, Municipalities Counties Development Fees, modifies development fees charged
• fees can be utilized to fund things like libraries and parks at a municipal level.
• Madam Chair, members, HB 2946, Municipalities Counties Development Fees, modifies development fees charged
• fees can be utilized to fund things like libraries and parks at a municipal level.
• Madam Chair, members, House Bill 2834, claims against HOA's filing fee.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The caucus reviewed a long list of bills and resolutions, with staff giving brief descriptions and members flagging which items were on consent, had unanimous committee votes, or should be pulled for further discussion. Topics included education, health care, public safety, labor, water, taxation, housing, and elections. Several measures were noted as party-line or mixed votes, while many others were reported as unanimous and placed on third-read or consent calendars. Among the more discussed items were bills on school and labor policy, including a proposal to prohibit teacher strikes, a measure restricting school district bond actions, a bill requiring school safety protocols and assigning felony penalties for noncompliance, and a resolution limiting public money for labor organization activities. Members also raised concerns or requested further review on bills involving pharmacist testing authority, expired opioid antagonists, a county sheriff-related measure, a housing affordability district proposal, and a tobacco/vape regulation bill. Some measures were explicitly pulled from consent, including a Medicaid audit resolution, a budget-related pay-withholding resolution, and several education and public safety bills. The caucus also heard multiple health and human services measures, such as genetic counselor licensing, nursing board and pharmacy board continuations, foster care rights, psychiatry access funding, and free school meals. In addition, there were water and energy bills on Colorado River management, groundwater, transmission-line review, and renewable energy valuation, plus election and campaign-related proposals. The meeting ended with announcements, including an upcoming Colorado River breakfast briefing and an internal award recognizing Representative Brian Garcia, followed by adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 4211 would protect investors and residents in those non-traditional developments.
• We've had success developing processes to disrupt these places.
• We've had a success of developing processes to disrupt these places.
• I serve as an advisory board member for StoneArx, Inc., a blockchain developer.
• I serve as an advisory board member for StoneArx, Inc., a blockchain developer.

Bills: HB111

Summary: The committee heard a long series of House bills, with most measures laid out by Senate sponsors and then left pending after brief public testimony. Early bills focused on construction and licensing issues, including HB 305 on prompt payment for public construction audits, HB 5093 on restoring public access to notary contact information, HB 2037 on updating landlord-tenant repair and security deposit rules, HB 4214 on a centralized public information request contact database, and HB 5435 exempting higher education institutions from a 90-day notice requirement for certain public-private partnership projects. Testimony was generally supportive on these bills, and no votes were taken; each was left pending. The committee also considered several transparency and regulatory bills. HB 111 would expand the Public Information Act to certain nonprofit state associations and narrow some attorney-client and working-paper exceptions, with supporters arguing it would improve oversight of public funds and critics questioning the scope and thresholds. HB 5129 would protect occupational license holders’ personal identifying information from disclosure without consent, HB 4350 would allow peace officers to redact personal information from online real property records, HB 4748 would authorize multiple-award state purchasing contracts, and HB 4765 would clean up code enforcement officer licensing rules. HB 4134 would allow motor vehicle creditors to charge limited fees for electronic payment options while requiring a free alternative, and HB 1043 would direct a study of blockchain-based property title records; both drew testimony, with some concern about the practical effects and vendor implications of the blockchain study. Several bills addressed insurance, workforce, and digital-asset regulation. HB 3520 would reduce the insurance coverage required for transportation network companies during the period when a driver is en route to pick up a passenger, drawing support from Texans for Lawsuit Reform and opposition from trial lawyers who argued the higher coverage better protects the public. HB 3320 would create a self-insurance pool for religious institutions, with TDI explaining it would still be regulated but operate under a special statutory framework. HB 4233 would modernize rules for digital asset service providers by removing certain auditor-access requirements and updating reporting and licensing provisions. HB 3923 would reduce bachelor’s-degree requirements for some state jobs, though Every Texan argued low pay, not degree requirements, is the main driver of turnover. HB 4518 would create a legal structure for decentralized unincorporated nonprofit associations tied to blockchain governance; business law experts opposed it as unnecessary and potentially risky, while crypto advocates supported it. Finally, HB 1803 would join an interstate compact for dentists and dental hygienists, with supporters citing workforce shortages and opponents saying Texas already licenses quickly and that the compact could weaken state oversight. Throughout the hearing, the committee repeatedly closed testimony and left bills pending, and a quorum was eventually established before later items were heard.

Transcript Highlights:

• Madam Chair, Israel, what do these fees typically fund?
• However, an exaction does not include development fees, fees for municipal or county services, or regular
• permit application fees.
• However, an exaction does not include development fees, fees for municipal or county services, or regular
• permit application fees.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The caucus reviewed a long list of Senate bills covering elections, transportation, health care, land use, water, criminal justice, and local government. Several election-related measures were described, including SB 1037 on voting equipment custody and internet/port restrictions, SB 1568 on election system software timekeeping, and SB 1687 moving the primary date to May starting in 2028. Members also discussed bills on photo enforcement fines, roadable aircraft registration, motor vehicle booting, assisted living occupancy limits, and municipal permit and exaction rules. A number of measures were noted as third-read consent items, while others were flagged for further discussion or amendments. Health and public safety bills drew substantial discussion. The committee heard bills on insurance coverage for breast cancer screening, safe-haven hospital surrender of newborns, dialysis documentation, behavioral health licensing compliance, naturopathic IV drug administration, traumatic event counseling for public safety employees, sex offender registration limitations, and probation rules for dangerous crimes against children. Members raised concerns or requested removal from consent on several items, including SB 1095 and SB 1094 related to gender-affirming care for minors, SB 1346 on AHCCCS claims processing, and SB 1178 on naturopathic drug administration. There was also debate over SB 1520 on immigration data sharing and SB 1635 on warning someone about an imminent arrest, with objections citing civil liberties and First Amendment concerns. The committee also considered multiple property, water, and development bills. These included measures on effluent water use for landscaping, groundwater fee diversion in Pinal County, increasing the Water Supply Development Revolving Fund loan cap, creating a foreign entity review commission for real property transfers, and restricting transport of Mexican gray wolf pups into Arizona. Members discussed SB 1419 on solar roof inspections and financing disclosures, and SB 1787 on municipal exactions and appeals, with an amendment proposed to limit it to commercial property. Several members explained their votes or asked to pull bills from consent, and some items were noted as having split votes or anticipated floor amendments. The caucus ended with Rhonda’s election-related bills and a note that the group would move immediately into a closed caucus afterward.

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:

• We're going to update the phlebotomist certification fee from a biannual to an annual fee and make technical
• That's the laboratory field sciences fees.
• We wouldn't have to do it every time we needed to increase fees.
• , laboratory field science fee, ADAP cleanup, the very long-named one.
• From the fee-setting authority it currently has right now? Sure.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And then on workforce development, I represent one of the state hospitals and also an area.
• So in looking at the BHCIP awards to date, we developed a methodology where we looked at and...
• At our last hearing, we heard about one critical component, which was the school fee schedule.
• As you heard in the previous hearing, the CYBHI Fee Schedule ...across the state of California.
• The Workforce Initiative includes five distinct behavioral health workforce development programs.

Summary: The hearing opened with remarks from the chair and members about recent federal cuts to public health, mental health, family planning, and Title X funding, with strong concern about the impact on California programs and providers. The committee then turned to the Department of State Hospitals, which presented its 2025-26 budget proposal of $3.4 billion, including new positions, capital improvements, and funding tied to increased patient costs and incompetent-to-stand-trial services. DSH reported major progress in reducing the IST waitlist and wait times, said it had met the court’s 28-day treatment benchmark for those without extenuating circumstances, and described workforce recruitment and retention efforts such as residency programs, fellowships, outreach, and hiring streamlining. Members asked about future IST referral trends, SB 1323’s effect on diversion and community treatment, and workforce lessons in high-cost regions; public comment urged reconsideration of county IST growth cap methodology in light of new criminal justice initiatives. The committee next received an informational overview of Proposition 1 and its changes to behavioral health funding and governance. The Legislative Analyst’s Office explained that Prop. 1 restructured county MHSA funding buckets, expanded the Commission for Behavioral Health, shifted prevention and early intervention responsibilities, and authorized a $6.4 billion bond, including $4.4 billion for behavioral health facilities through BHCIP. DHCS said it had released guidance for county integrated plans and was receiving extensive public comment. Members focused on BHCIP application requirements, especially letters of support and tribal projects, and raised concerns about whether DHCS’s implementation matched statutory intent. DHCS said it had authority to set application requirements and that tribal entities were treated differently because of sovereignty and funding structure. DHCS then updated the committee on BHCIP, the Behavioral Health Bridge Housing Program, and related bond implementation. The department said BHCIP had awarded about $1.7 billion across five rounds, with more than 130 projects and 223 distinct facilities funded, and that it was preparing to award the new bond funds after receiving nearly $8 billion in applications. The LAO’s assessment found that more than half of awards served at least 80% Medi-Cal enrollees, but also raised concerns that the regional allocation model could reinforce inequities, that the program had not sufficiently addressed the highest-need regions such as the southern San Joaquin Valley, and that smaller counties and less launch-ready applicants faced barriers. For bridge housing, DHCS said more than $1.1 billion had been awarded, serving over 5,000 people and supporting more than 2,000 operational beds, but the Governor’s budget proposes to eliminate Round 4 funding as the administration weighs other statewide investments and Proposition 1 implementation workload. Public commenters and members urged more accountability, better regional equity, stronger labor and community involvement, and caution about funding for for-profit psychiatric facilities. Finally, the committee heard on the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative. CalHHS and DHCS described CYBHI as a broad prevention- and equity-focused effort with more than 1,300 organizations funded, over $2.1 billion awarded, and multiple work streams spanning schools, community programs, workforce, and digital supports. DHCS highlighted school-based services, the fee schedule rollout, and digital platforms BrightLife Kids and Soluna, which it said are reaching users statewide and providing low-barrier access to coaching and support. Members and public commenters raised concerns about delays in school fee schedule implementation, the large share of funding going to digital tools, the need for more in-person services, and whether the initiative is sufficiently tracking outcomes and equity impacts. No formal votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• And do they have to renew their fee, the license, every year, or is that biennial?
• 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.
• Workforce development type of perspective.

Keywords: Appropriations - Room 216, 5 February, 2026; 8:30 AM, 925, all

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.

Transcript Highlights:

• Next, we have our grain license fees.
• Thus, we are requesting increased fees.
• So the answer is that the $500 fee would be per location.
• Time to develop a good program that works for farmers. So, we developed a pilot program.
• From there, we moved on with the development of our program.

Transcript Highlights:

• How long will it take to develop it?
• But the fee appears twice as a wholesale fee in section two and again as a retail fee in section three
• versus regulatory license fee tax. versus regulatory license fee tax.
• So if to be 5% local regulatory fee.
• Hopefully that will reduce that fee. Hopefully that will reduce that fee.

Keywords: An issue was found with the live stream of this meeting. This version was uploaded as a complete version and should contain the entirety of the meeting. Meeting Start 00:00:00 Roll Call 00:00:15 HB 647 Discussion 00:02:00 HB 647 Vote 00:05:47 HB 501 Discussion 00:07:40 HB 501 Vote 00:09:53 HB 502 Discussion 00:11:20 HB 502 Vote 00:14:48 HJR 75 Discussion 00:16:53 HJR 75 Vote 00:17:35 HJR 76 Discussion 00:19:00 HJR 76 Vote 00:19:43 HB 869 Discussion 00:21:22 HB 869 Vote 00:30:00 HB 619 Discussion 00:31:39 HB 619 Vote 00:34:33 HB 356 Discussion 00:36:22 HB 356 Vote 00:40:19 HB 900 Discussion 00:43:17 HB 900 Vote 00:46:21 HB 816 Discussion 00:48:02 HB 816 Vote 00:53:47 HB 9 Discussion 00:55:05 HB 9 Vote 01:18:25 HB 757 Discussion 01:21:04 HB 757 Vote 01:35:55, 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• a month fee. a month fee.
• <02:37:46.720> I'm low fee that goes back to them. I'm low fee that goes back to them.
• letting them hover in development limbo. letting them hover in development limbo.
• <04:18:11.520> Or developers, you know what I mean? Or developers, you know what I mean?
• helps to close the gap for developers. helps to close the gap for developers.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:16:41.040> lacked transformation fund development lacked transformation fund development
• Um they they do not develop uh Medicaid Um they they do not develop uh Medicaid rate<00:24:22.960>
• transparencies and how do we develop transparencies and how do we develop those<00:27:57.560>
• "Well, Myers and Stauffer develops, again, they develop rates based on cost proposals and cost reports
• > managed We have fee-for-service versus managed We have fee-for-service versus managed care<00

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Medicaid Oversight and Advisory Board met on January 12, 2026, to approve the December 10, 2025 minutes and continue finalizing its findings and recommendations. Members reviewed findings on administrative inefficiencies, Medicaid and workforce participation under HR 1, Medicaid budget growth, rural health transformation fund development, and provider tax/state-directed payment changes. The board approved a motion to change “pilot” to “partnership” in the workforce-related recommendation, and also adopted a technical amendment clarifying overlapping HCBS services by removing reference to adult daycare waiver services and revising the language to focus on reducing duplication, simplifying provider contracting, and standardizing processes across programs. A separate technical correction was noted to change “DMS” to “DPH” in the rural health transformation finding, to be handled in the final edits. Several findings drew discussion but no final substantive vote during the meeting. On the rural health transformation fund, Dr. Berg said Kentucky had done well in federal funding and noted limits on what could be shared publicly, while Commissioner Lee said a public website had been created and recommended the department reference be changed to the Department for Public Health. Finding five prompted extended discussion about provider taxes, state-directed payment reductions under HR 1, and whether the board should address the relationship between actuarial studies, MCO payments, and actual provider reimbursement more directly. Senator Meredith and others argued for a broader, more transparent baseline review of rates across provider groups, while Commissioner Lee said CMS will require certain fee schedule comparisons to Medicare beginning July 1, 2026, and that quarterly expenditure reports already go to LRC. The board did not finish resolving finding five during the meeting and agreed to return to it after staff prepared more explicit language. Members also discussed the possibility of an all-payers claims database as a better way to understand what is being paid across payers and services. No final vote on the full findings package was taken in the portion of the meeting provided, but the board did adopt the noted amendments and continued working through the remaining language.

Transcript Highlights:

• , and legally defensible fee when development does not meet the local inclusionary housing requirement
• > not defensible fee when development does not defensible fee when development does not meet<01
• Thank you. putting a $100,000 fee on development in putting a $100,000 fee on development in order<01
• on any development to impose a new fee on any development that<01:42:20.480> does<01:42:20.639
• Adding new fees to market-rate development pushes more projects beyond the margin of feasibility.

Keywords: 1189, house, all