Transcript Highlights:

• not residents would pay this higher fee. not residents would pay this higher fee.
• It is not a taxes and it is a user fee.
• They are paying our turnpike fees.
• 35:36.000> which<01:35:36.239> means allocations are going down which means allocations
• You can get back to me. going to cost the state a fee to do going to cost the state a fee to do this?

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The state fiscal year 2024-25 disproportionate share hospital model allotment is allocated...
• The 2024-25 disproportionate share hospital model allotment is allocated between regular disproportionate
• 2023-24 Children's Medical Services program and $3,156,005 included to cover 2023-24 administrative fees
• 2023-24 Children's Medical Services program and $3,156,005 included to cover 2023-24 administrative fees

Summary: The Legislative Budget Commission met with a quorum present and considered 12 budget amendments, most of which were adopted without opposition. The first amendment transferred $8.2 million in Department of Corrections general revenue authority from salary incentives to contracted services to support the phased demobilization of Florida National Guard troops assisting with correctional staffing. Senator Pizzo questioned the length of the Guard’s deployment and urged a long-term staffing solution, while the department said the Guard presence was being reduced and that about 2,200 employees were in training. The Department of State received an additional $618,391 in federal grant authority for library grants and private cloud costs, and the Department of Transportation’s two amendments were zero-sum work program changes: one realigned funds to production-ready projects and another added three projects over $3 million each to the current-year work program. The commission then approved several Agency for Health Care Administration amendments tied to Medicaid supplemental payment programs. These included funding for the Florida Cancer Hospital Program, indirect medical education payments, disproportionate share hospital payments for the state mental hospitals, the Low-Income Pool program, physician supplemental and public hospital payments, Florida KidCare, and Medicaid services realignment. Members asked about possible federal disallowances in the LIP and physician/public hospital programs, and agency staff said some disallowances were likely but the amount was not yet known. For KidCare and Medicaid, staff explained the changes were based on the December estimating conference, enrollment shifts, and updated actuarial assumptions, including changes to managed care regions and program design. The final amendment restored budget authority for a hospital direct payment program after a prior payment, including a $24.3 million CMS-related amount and $3.2 million in administrative fees, was not processed before fiscal year-end and reverted. Senator Pizzo pressed the agency on how the payment was missed and whether any penalty applied; staff said the invoice was not received and processed in time and that communication issues contributed. After brief debate on each item, the commission adopted all amendments, with one recorded nay on the final item, and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• and allocating the funds collected by such fees to the dam maintenance fund, having considered the same
• fees, I know we have that courage.
• This bill sought to require a registration fee of $50 for anchored seasonal platforms on public waters
• of decision-making authority, allocation of decision-making authority, a<01:28:39.640> parenting<
• <01:29:34.040> of should be a particular allocation of should be a particular allocation of

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative, the 10% mitigation fee—why 10% versus maybe not five or six?
• It also extends the collection of these fees for 10 years.
• And then there’s one other fee, and it’s called the all-other-oil fee in the bill, or in the statute,
• result in the gas and Diesel fee result in the gas and Diesel fee dropping<00:52:56.760> it
• increase of total import fee increase of total import fee Revenue<01:04:44.359> all<01:04

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first held a public hearing on HB 660, which would require historic horse racing facilities to pay 10% of HHR winnings to host communities as mitigation. Representative Om said the amendment was intended to leave charities and the state whole while funding local costs tied to large gaming facilities. Supporters argued the measure would address future municipal expenses, while opponents said host towns have not reported current problems and that the bill would single out one industry. Members questioned the 10% rate, whether the proposal was retroactive, and whether it would apply to existing facilities; the sponsor said it would apply to facilities already in place or later added. The hearing was then closed without any vote recorded in the transcript. The committee then opened a hearing on HB 658-FN, which raises reimbursement caps and adjusts fees for the Oil Discharge and Disposal Cleanup Fund and the Oil Pollution Control Fund. Representative Malloy introduced the bill, and Representative Aly explained the funds as a state-backed insurance mechanism for oil spill cleanup and prevention, including replacement of leaking home heating oil tanks for low-income homeowners. Bob Scully of the Energy Marketers Association supported the bill, saying the fee structure helps fund remediation and tank replacement, though costs are ultimately passed on to consumers. Department of Environmental Services officials Robert Bishop and Jennifer Marts described the bill as extending the fee collection for 10 years, changing reporting dates, increasing the cap for low-income tank replacement, and rebalancing fees based on an actuarial review. DES testified that the actuarial study found the fund needed to remain solvent and that home heating oil releases are the largest category of new releases, with the fuel oil fee otherwise needing to rise by more than 200% to cover projected costs. The board instead proposed a smaller increase and adjusted other fees accordingly, while maintaining a reserve to cover the first days of a major coastal spill before federal funds become available. Members asked about the basis for the fee changes, the role of the actuarial review, and the statutory language governing who pays the fees. The transcript ends during this hearing, with no final committee action or vote shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• , to establish procedures to dispute fees and charges.
• It also provides for an increase in some of the fees charged relative to licensing fees and renewal fees
• , maximum fee amount.
• So this bill will increase that fee. I'm not going to pass the bill.
• , maximum fees, notification, penalties, liability, unlawful payments, and fair trade practices.

Bills: HR188, HR189, HR190, HR191, HR179, HR180, HR181, HR182, HR183, HR185, HR186, HR187, HCR75, HCR76, HCR77, HCR78, HCR79, SCR24, SCR36, SCR39, SB64, SB107, SB152, SB185, SB217, SB232, SB278, SB290, SB294, SB320, SB321, SB419, SB424, SB436, SB440, SB468, SB470, SB476, SB482, SB489, HCR32, SCR11, HB12, HB42, HB205, HB222, HB267, HB324, HB325, HB350, HB478, HB610, HB617, HB679, HB745, HB749, HB797, HB807, HB821, HB896, HB979, HB992, HB1000, HB1024, HB1050, HB1166, HB1172, HB1173, HB1193, HB1207, HB1218, HB1223, SB256, SB180, HR1, HR17, HCR5, HCR4, HCR47, HB59, HB74, HB159, HB330, HB364, HB414, HB458, HB525, HB568, HB786, HB1008, HB1033, HB1034, HB1041, HB1062, HB1070, HB1079, HB1112, HB1118, HB1139, HB1151, HB1176, HB1182, HB1196, HB1214, HB1241, HB87, HB115, HB162, HB368, HB433, HB441, HB447, HB466, HB481, HB741, HB1242, HB362, HB893, HB990, HB1007, HB1153, HB1243, SB162, SB349, SB350, SB382, SB383, SB127, SB244, HB615, HB864, HB1103, HB1175, HB31, HB225, HB608, HB664, HB897, HB977, HB1003, HB1160, HB1180, HB911, HB306, HB366, HB1161, HB1230, HB181, HB901, HR20, HR74, HB284, HB393, HB459, HB577, HB582, HB605, HB614, HB682, HB733, HB772, HB773, HB996, HB1035, HB1058, HB1082, HB1113, HB1189, HB1234, HB1240

Keywords: hunting dogs, field trials, working dogs, dog training, greyhound protection, Farm Bill, federal overreach, sportsmen, sportswomen, wildlife management, conservation, rural communities, Louisiana hunting, hunting tradition, animal welfare, dog breeders, dog owners, outdoor recreation, Kathy Taylor, musical achievements

Transcript Highlights:

• So as far as the flat fees, they have been modified over the years.
• So as far as the flat fees, they have been modified over the years.
• Flat fees were increased a few years ago.
• These are attorney's fees, $75 an hour.
• Yes, so they're flat fees. It depends on the case type. The flat fee for capital cases is $25,000.

Summary: The committee met for an interim appropriations presentation hearing focused on justice administration agencies. Members heard budget requests from the State Attorney’s Office, Public Defenders, the Justice Administrative Commission, Regional Conflict Counsel, Capital Collateral Regional Counsel, and the Guardian ad Litem Office, followed by a presentation from the Department of Juvenile Justice and a brief public comment from a nonprofit advocate. The chair noted that presentations from the Department of Law Enforcement and the Commission on Offender Review would be moved to a later meeting. The state attorney requested funding to true up underfunded circuits under the existing formula, staff 14 new criminal judgeships, replace declining VOCA victim-services funding with general revenue, and cover a projected due process shortfall. The public defender asked for a higher starting salary for assistant public defenders, funding to restore balance in circuits where public defenders lag behind state attorneys, and staffing for new criminal judgeships. Regional conflict counsel and capital collateral regional counsel also sought salary adjustments, additional attorneys and case costs, and competitive area differential funding to address recruitment and retention issues. The Justice Administrative Commission requested funding for Florida PALM readiness and implementation and for IT hardware and software replacement; it also relayed a clerks’ request for reimbursement related to injunctions for protection, Baker Act, Marchman Act, and sexually violent predator cases. The Guardian ad Litem Office said it now has a guardian ad litem for every child in Florida and requested salary increases for senior and managing attorneys to reduce turnover. The Department of Juvenile Justice presented a much larger budget request to expand residential and detention capacity, increase per diem rates, renovate and replace aging facilities, fund the Broward detention center rebuild, improve cybersecurity and the juvenile information system, and cover rising lease costs. Members asked questions about staffing, compensation, detention and residential treatment needs, mental health and substance-use services, and the Broward project timeline. A nonprofit advocate then asked for better data collection on protection orders and related court actions to support funding for domestic violence and recovery services. The committee adjourned without taking any formal votes on the budget requests.

Transcript Highlights:

• We paid the fee. We got the services.
• And I don't remember how much we allocated, but I think it was about a million.
• So that funding has been appropriated and we have allocated that out to districts.
• I mean, we are fully allocated at this time for what we have.
• Is there a license fee or a blanket fear something like that? How much does it cost?

Transcript Highlights:

• Pre-CCA, when we set these things up and we added the fees to fund this average here of $122 million,
• The largest spike that's noted on here in 2023 was the first allocation of the move ahead Washington
• With our paving, we do a region allocation, so we allocate money across the state to each region a certain
• When you do collect, how do you allocate the money into a bucket?
• And if it does, how do you allocate your administrative overhead costs? Yeah, good question.

Summary: The committee received a detailed staff presentation on Washington State Ferries’ capital needs, current fleet status, and long-range funding outlook. Staff described the current service pattern, ridership recovery since the pandemic, the aging fleet, and the state’s plan to add three new hybrid-electric Olympic-class vessels under the 2025 budget, with delivery expected around 2030-2032. Members also heard that the fleet is operating with no reserve vessel, that preservation time is below the desired level, and that terminal electrification and vessel conversion plans face timing, cost, and procurement risks. Questions focused on ridership trends, biofuel supply, design-risk allocation in vessel contracts, sequencing of terminal electrification with new vessel delivery, and the cost and feasibility of restoring international Sidney service, which would require a SOLAS-certified vessel. Staff then outlined ferry capital funding, saying recent spending and programmed needs are far above regular ferry-specific revenues and that the system relies on a mix of dedicated accounts, transportation package money, federal grants, and transfers. They said the near-term budget is balanced through 2027-29, but the longer-term capital outlook shows a shortfall of roughly $250 million to $300 million per biennium, with broader unmet needs much higher. The presentation estimated costs for future vessels, life extensions, terminal electrification, and additional Jumbo Mark II conversions, and noted that the current enacted plan does not fully fund fleet replacement, full electrification, or life extension of older vessels. Members asked for follow-up information on terminal seismic/environmental issues, contract options for additional vessels, and the timing and cost of alternative vessel designs. The committee then shifted to WSDOT maintenance and preservation. Pascoe Focktich described maintenance operations, including winter response, guardrail repair, facilities, equipment, and the effects of underfunding and inflation. He said most of the maintenance budget is fixed cost and labor, that material prices have risen sharply, and that many facilities are in poor condition with asbestos issues and deferred upkeep. He also noted growing guardrail damage, increasing pavement claims, and the burden of maintaining aging bridges and facilities. Members asked about prior planning for these needs, the role of asbestos, and whether more proactive sequencing could help budget decisions. Troy Suing then presented the highway preservation program, saying WSDOT is in the early stages of critical failure and has stretched preservation dollars as far as possible. He explained the distinction between pavement, bridge, and other highway asset preservation, said the department is largely reactive, and estimated that delaying work can make it three to five times more expensive later. He said about 40% of roadways are currently due or overdue for preservation, bridge conditions are nearing the federal poor-bridge threshold, and the department’s 10-year preservation need is about $8 billion. Members asked about the cost of deferring work, whether the department could do more if funded, how priorities are set, and whether other states face similar problems. Finally, Evan Grimm and Mike Fay briefed the committee on bridge strikes by overheight vehicles. They described recent incidents on I-90 near Cle Elum and SR 410 near White River, the damage and closures caused, and possible countermeasures such as public outreach, improved trip-planning tools, and a pilot warning system with sensors and flashing beacons. Fay explained the state’s financial recovery process for third-party damage, saying WSDOT recovers roughly $20 million per biennium and about 78% to 80% of billed damages, with money going to the motor vehicle fund. Members asked about prevention, insurance recovery, and whether the state uses claim data to inform future design or safety changes.

Transcript Highlights:

• that<00:08:32.959> would<00:08:33.080> be<00:08:33.240> dedicated kind of a fee
• uh that would be dedicated kind of a fee uh that would be dedicated for<00:08:34.080> this<00
• These fees help offset costs for services such as risk assessments, case management, and intervention
• intention made when supervision fees intention made when supervision fees were were were removed
• Supervision programs by allocating Supervision programs by allocating resources<01:52:03.960>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It was just the permit fees. Yes? I see.
• Did we request that audit in this same manner for the permit fees?
• I’m just wondering why wasn’t a complete audit done as opposed to the permitting fees?
• It was just the permit fees. Yes? I see.
• Did we request that audit in this same manner for the permit fees?

Summary: The Joint Legislative Auditing Committee met to consider several audit requests and enforcement items involving local governments and special districts. The committee approved operational audits of the City of Miami Beach, the Delray Beach Downtown Development Authority, and the City of Daytona Beach. In each case, the requesting member described concerns about transparency, financial management, or internal controls, while local officials or representatives generally said they were willing to cooperate and, in Delray Beach’s case, noted that an internal audit had already been completed and that some issues were being corrected. The committee also received a presentation on the statewide review of neighborhood improvement districts. The reviewers reported that 15 of 21 districts were active and six inactive, with common findings including outdated or missing performance plans, weak web presence, inadequate meeting notices, and limited management mechanisms. They said staffing levels often correlated with the ability to meet statutory requirements, and they recommended updates to district governance and transparency practices. On enforcement, staff reviewed local governments and special districts that had failed to file required financial reports or had submitted audit reports missing required information. The committee approved staff recommendations to proceed under the statutory enforcement process for the noncompliant entities, with flexibility for the chair and vice chair to delay action if additional information is provided in good faith. The committee also voted to send a letter to the Union County Legislative Delegation encouraging a local bill to dissolve the Town of Rayford, based on staff’s view that the town lacked employees, services, debt, and a clear reason to continue existing as an incorporated municipality.

Transcript Highlights:

• How are those expenses allocated and how is the consumer protected?
• So there is... ...no longer a fee, monthly fee charged to customers in North Dakota for excess use of
• So May was the last time any North Dakota person paid extra for legal fees to MDU.
• How did we then stop collecting the fees for the legal if it's still... Sorry, Madam Chair.
• How did we then stop collecting the fees for the legal if it's still in the court system?

Summary: The committee met at the Coteau Freedom Mine in Mercer County, approved the June 2 minutes, and heard an overview of the mine from Coteau Properties president Andrew Hawbaker. He described the Freedom Mine as the largest lignite mine in the United States, supplying coal to Dakota Gasification, Antelope Valley Station, and Leland Olds Station. He emphasized the mine’s scale, safety record, reclamation work, workforce needs, community involvement, and economic impact, including payroll, taxes, royalties, scholarships, and local hiring. Members asked about how long land stays in production, how quickly it returns to agriculture after reclamation, labor shortages, and how mining affects groundwater and water wells. Hawbaker said most tracts are mined for about three to five years, reclamation is coordinated with landowners, and the company continues to struggle to find electricians, welders, mechanics, operators, and engineers. The committee then heard from Public Service Commission Chairman Randy Christman on coal mining reclamation and permitting. He reviewed North Dakota’s coal mining history, the state’s reclamation laws, federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act primacy, bonding, permit renewals and revisions, prohibited mining areas, inspection and enforcement, and contemporaneous reclamation requirements. Christman stressed that North Dakota’s program is professional and thorough, with frequent inspections, financial assurance, and a 10-year revegetation monitoring period before bond release. He also discussed federal coal ownership issues that can delay mine plans, the treatment of prime farmland, and how reclamation differs for wind and pipelines. In response to questions, he said one challenge is sometimes releasing land too soon before long-term compaction issues are fully understood, and he noted that data centers do not currently have a comparable reclamation model because they typically own the land. In the afternoon, the committee received an update from Lignite Energy Council president Jonathan Fortner on the lignite industry. He said North Dakota’s lignite sector supports five commercial power plants, four mines, about 12,000 direct and indirect jobs, and more than $5.5 billion in economic activity, while helping keep the state’s electricity rates among the lowest in the nation. Fortner reviewed coal severance and conversion tax revenues, the lignite research fund, federal regulatory rollbacks, carbon capture policy, and the industry’s legal costs fighting federal rules. He also highlighted a study on large-load development, saying new data centers and critical mineral processing facilities could create major local tax revenue and help justify new baseload generation. Members asked whether new gas pipelines would crowd out coal plant development and whether the economic study included jobs and broader local impacts; Fortner said the industry sees room for both and that the study did include construction, operations, jobs, and tax effects.

Transcript Highlights:

• California caps attorney fees, New York caps attorney fees, Massachusetts caps attorney fees, Illinois
• caps attorney fees.
• It goes to fees.
• Your report, your number one suggestion is we cap fees on legal fees.
• You say Delaware caps attorney's fees.

Transcript Highlights:

• subsidies and all the taxes all the fees subsidies and all the taxes all the fees people<00:10:57.160
• Some of it had already been allocated but not dispersed. It currently has about $10 million in it.
• Another point that hasn't been mentioned is administration fees for vaccines.
• He said that is how it works and why the allocation is being handled that way.
• so it actually takes out a allocation so it actually takes out a allocation that<03:38:16.199>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 224, which would redirect most money from New Hampshire’s renewable energy fund back to electric ratepayers. The bill sponsor argued the measure would lower energy costs, noting recent utility rate increases and estimating annual savings of roughly $2.5 million to $7.3 million for ratepayers. Supporters said the fund has accumulated money that should be returned to customers rather than used for subsidies, and they emphasized that the state has already rebated similar funds from RGGI for years. Opponents, including Rep. Kat McGee, argued the renewable energy fund is a successful, nonlapsing dedicated fund that supports local clean-energy projects, energy resilience, emissions reductions, and private investment. McGee said the fiscal note overstated the benefit of rebates and understated the loss of investment, claiming the average annual rebate would amount to less than $10 per customer while the program has helped leverage significant private dollars and nearly 10,000 projects. She urged the committee to reject the bill as a poor deal for the state and ratepayers. Committee members questioned the fiscal note, the size of the rebate, whether the bill would set a precedent for other dedicated funds, and whether the program’s incentives amount to picking winners and losers. The Department of Energy testified neutrally, explaining how the renewable energy fund works, including renewable energy credits, alternative compliance payments, and the fund’s use for renewable energy initiatives. No vote was taken in the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• to the panel to fund funding allocated to the panel to fund the<00:05:19.759> development<00:
• When we met with panel staff, they expressed concern that the funds allocated for the purchase of the
• , included room, board, tuition and fees, included room, board, tuition and fees, we<00:47:59.200
• to uh supplement um athletics fees to uh supplement um athletics revenue. revenue. revenue.
• don't contribute um that uh student fees don't contribute um to<01:10:27.920> athletics.

Keywords: Call to Order and Roll Call- 00:00:01 Approve Minutes from June 11, 2026- 00:00:40 Staff Report on 2026 Child Fatality Panel Update- 00:01:17 Panel Staff Response to Report-00:21:12 University of Kentucky Name, Image, and Likeness-00:44:34 Kentucky State Police Update on SERVS-01:17:55 Adjornment-01:33:05, 958, all

Summary: The committee first established a quorum and approved the minutes from the previous meeting. Members then received a staff report on the Kentucky Child Fatality and Near Fatality External Review Panel, including an annual LOIC evaluation of the panel’s operations, statutory compliance, case management system development, member experience, and written procedures. The report noted recent House Bill 778 expanded the panel’s access to records and to TWIST/I-TWIST, and recommended that staff request access and training promptly to avoid implementation problems. Analysts reported the panel has met statutory membership and meeting requirements, and that agency responses to the panel’s 2025 recommendations improved, with all responses meeting statutory content requirements though some were late. They also said the panel still lacks formal written procedures, so a prior recommendation was reissued. The report discussed the panel’s new case management system, now in testing with the Commonwealth Office of Technology, and a survey of panel members showing generally positive views of meetings and case discussions but recurring concerns about SharePoint access, time demands, virtual meetings, and the panel’s lack of enforcement authority. The report included a matter for legislative consideration suggesting the General Assembly may wish to seek additional testimony from agencies when responses are unclear or more information is needed. Panel staff responded that the work is difficult but important, said they are optimistic about gaining TWIST access, and acknowledged that written procedures have not yet been completed because they wanted to align them with the new system. They said both the system and procedures are hoped to be finished by the end of the year, with the new case management system expected to be implemented by September 1 after further testing and migration. Members also discussed trends in child fatality and near-fatality cases, including increases in reported cases since 2013, substance abuse, safe storage of firearms, and concerns about THC/CBD gummies reaching children. No formal votes were taken beyond approval of the minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• In her transfer fee home loan petition that she filed in early 2022, she included a provision that would
• amount of the exemption would be determined locally by each community, and importantly, the cost is allocated
• The cost is allocated among other residential taxpayers in the same manner, similar to the residential
• Coupled with our state's high cost of living, any changes to fees, property tax policies, or health care
• care contracts... ...continuing care retirement communities, including care contracts and entrance fees

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Revenue held a hearing on bills related to senior and disability property tax relief, with a focus on helping older adults and people with disabilities remain in their homes. Testimony supported H. 3968, which would make certain senior and disability property tax exemptions permanent so eligible residents would not have to refile annually, and H. 3198, which would expand the senior circuit breaker tax credit by indexing income and credit limits to cost of living and raising the home valuation cap from $1.1 million to $1.5 million. Representative Scanlan also testified in favor of several additional bills, including a local option motor vehicle excise tax exemption for low-income seniors and veterans, a local property tax cap for low-income seniors, an expanded senior property tax exemption, and a senior property tax deferral program designed to be revenue neutral over time. Witnesses from the City of Boston, the Massachusetts Municipal Association, and the Massachusetts Association of Assessing Officers generally supported local-option property tax relief measures and said they would help seniors age in place while giving municipalities flexibility. Committee members raised concerns about possible abuse or fraud if exemptions became permanent, and about how assessors would verify continued eligibility without annual reapplication. Supporters responded that eligibility could still be tied to real estate transactions and other documentation, and that the current annual filing requirement causes many eligible seniors to miss out on benefits. Mass Senior Action Council members testified that many seniors are struggling with rising property taxes, insurance, and other costs, and urged broader reforms such as freezing assessed values, improving outreach, strengthening the work-off program, and allowing more flexible payment or deferral options. No votes were taken; the hearing concluded after testimony and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• allocated to... ...statutory probate courts.
• Committee substitutes Senate Bill 1015, relating to excess contributions and fees.
• Allocated to statutory probate courts. Senator Zafirini, you are recognized for a motion.
• The ABA accreditation process, there is a fee associated with it.
• Yes, they're large fees with accreditation.

Bills: SB66, SB317, SB393, SB397, SB456, SB614, SB628, SB629, SB636, SB715, SB731, SB801, SB872, SB905, SB986, SB1012, SB1013, SB1015, SB1032, SB1113, SB1181, SB1212, SB1241, SB1250, SB1278, SB1285, SB1376, SB1444, SB1449, SB1524, SB1525, SB1528, SB1556, SB1588, SB1660, SB1704, SB1708, SB1802, SB1833, SB1844, SB1854, SB1863, SB1957, SB1959, SB1965, SB1999, SB2035, SB2056, SB2082, SB2119, SB2138, SB2165, SB2199, SB2201, SB2203, SB2245, SB2284, SB2419, SB2422, SB2452, SB2487, SB2523, SB2529, SB2533, SB2541, SB2586, SB2595, SB2605, SB2615, SB2675, SB2690, SB2717, SB2753, SB2778, SB2835, SB2841, SB2891, SB2929, SB2933, SB3016, SB3039, SB3044, HB912, HB2525, SJR3, SB5, SB29, SB326, SB494, SB530, SB769, SB783, SB963, SB1238, SB1271, SB1786, SB1967, SB2312, SB72, SB616, SB1143, SB1172, SB1267, SB1273, SB1506, SB1759, SB2361, SB1, SB260, SB1637, SJR36, SJR50, SJR63, SJR59, SCR12, SCR39, SCR48, SCR19, SB2023, SB1524, SB2422, SB2119, SB2753, SB1863, SB62, SB666, SB847, SB284, SB854, SB1073, SB810, SB1505, SB583, SB507, SB1434, SB1376, SB1772, SB2016, SB1163, SB1122, SB731, SB397, SB508, SB1436, SB287, SB261, SB1882, SB393, SB1791, SB209, SB2429, SB1999, SB511, SB2309, SB510, SB1085, SB1975, SB2717, SB1262, SB636, SB2056, SB884, SB517, SB1200, SB1845, SB2681, SB2199, SB2458, SB801, SB2533, SB3014, SB3013, SB758, SB1013, SB2797, SB2076, SB2876, SB2284, SB2929, SB2595, SB715, SB1640, SB1241, SB2538, SB1449, SB2529, SB986, SB1181, SB1359, SB2245, SB410, SB1234, SB456, SB1012, SB2926, SB2138, SB2615, SB2972, SB2841, SB3016, SB1856, SB2035, SB1528, SB1373, SB672, SB2891, SB1854, SB317, SB2539, SB2532, SB1250, SB2082, SB2203, SB1285, SB1959, SB1454, SB2520, SB2541, SB1708, SB1237, SB1844, SB1586, SB3039, SB2819, SB66, SB629, SB1015, SB2342, SB2903, SB2933, SB1965, SB2477, SB3029, SB2605, SB2419, SB1957, SB375, SB250, SB777, SB628, SB2523, SB2367, SB2703, SB2608, SB2778, SB3044, SB2965, SB2521, SB865, SB1032, SB2165, SB2501, SB2675, SB2452, SB2835, SB872, SB1212, SB1278, SB1588, SB1602, SB1704, SB1723, SB1833, SB1858, SB1946, SB2009, SB2177, SB2460, SB2785, SB2373, SB1660, SB614, SB867, SB1608, SB1525, SB905, SB640, SB2487, SB1698, SB383, SB705, SB748, SB1113, SB1117, SB1802, SB2340, SB2586, SB2680, SB2690, SB2994, SB2747, SB1950, SB913, SB1071, SB1086, SB1087, SB1483, SB1444, SB1553, SB1556, SB1703, SB2133, SB2297, SB2298, SB2622, SB2955, SB3059, SB2782, SB2781, SB2637, SB2633, SB2337, SB2334, SB1861, SB2043, SB1367, SB946, SB945, SB2857, SB128, SB571, SB1263, SB3058, SB612, SB2221, SB2587, SB2044, SB2363, SB2713, HB1109, HB1392, HB22, HB2525, HB3093, HB517, HB912, HB1130, HB142, HB1689, HB2018, SB2311, SB1986, SB2565, SB2943, SB1888, SB2417, SB3048, SB3052, SB3053, SB3036, SB3057, SB3056, SB3043, SB3037, SB3050, SB3063, SB3047, SB3035, HJR98, HJR99, HB136, HB2884, HB1393, HB2730, HB1399, HB1244, HB467, HB331, HB2559

Keywords: disability, supported decision-making, legal assistance, confidentiality, access to justice, autonomy, civil rights, advocacy, monuments, memorials, public property, historical significance, civil penalties, local governance, SB 393, Sparks, Middleton, local government, political subdivision, public securities

Transcript Highlights:

• In fact, there's no money allocated for repairs in the current budget, last year's budget, or in the
• As noted in your excellent committee analysis, the UC has not received a state geo-bond fund allocation
• The Dream for All program's $250 million allocation was fully claimed in just 11 days.
• The funding that has been allocated has done a lot of good.
• AB 913 further authorizes HCD to waive certain loan and monitoring fees, fee payments for affordable

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Housing and Community Development heard a long agenda focused mainly on housing production, higher education facilities, homelessness, and permitting reform. Early items included AB 6, which would direct HCD to convene a working group on allowing three- to ten-unit “missing middle” housing to be built under the Residential Code rather than the Building Code; AB 48, a higher education bond proposal that would fund campus repairs, modernization, disaster recovery, and student/employee housing; and AB 76, which would clarify a Chula Vista university innovation district exemption so the project can include academic buildings and housing without conflicting with surplus land rules. Supporters emphasized affordability, cost savings, student housing needs, and access to education, while members raised questions about implementation, affordability requirements, and project scope. The committee later took votes on these items, with AB 6, AB 48, and AB 76 all moving forward on unanimous or near-unanimous votes to Appropriations. Members also heard AB 595, which would create a state homeownership tax credit pilot to support affordable for-sale housing. The author and supporters argued that California’s homeownership rate is at historic lows and that the bill would help close racial wealth gaps by financing homes working families can buy. The committee approved AB 595 and sent it to Appropriations. The consent calendar, including several other housing-related bills, was also approved unanimously. A major portion of the hearing was devoted to AB 1165, the California Housing Justice Act of 2025, which would require ongoing state investment and a financing plan to address homelessness and housing affordability. The author and witnesses described the scale of homelessness, the limits of one-time funding, and the need for sustained, accountable funding streams. After testimony from housing advocates and people with lived experience, the committee passed AB 1165 on a 10-0 vote to Appropriations. Finally, the committee heard AB 609, a CEQA reform bill that would create a simplified exemption for qualifying infill housing projects in already developed areas. Supporters framed it as a targeted way to reduce delays and costs for housing near jobs and transit, while opponents from environmental justice, labor, and tribal groups warned it could reduce public participation, weaken protections for disadvantaged communities, and create consultation concerns for tribal cultural resources. The author said the bill would not change zoning or affordability tools and would continue to work with opponents on amendments. The bill was moved forward after extensive discussion, with members noting ongoing negotiations on tribal consultation and labor concerns.

Transcript Highlights:

• must be paid, including towing fees and any fees owed to a body shop or other storage facilities.
• must be paid including touring fees and any fees owed to a body shop or other storage facilities with
• It also prohibits a provider from charging a late fee or compelling or...
• Aguilar shared with us, an average of 333% to 1,456% APR if you add up those fees and things.
• Madam Chair, members, HB 2265, courts fees assessments, prohibits the court from imposing certain fees

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The committee worked through a very long minority caucus calendar covering a wide range of bills, with many items being described and then either left on consent, pulled from consent, or noted for votes. Topics included bullion and state depository proposals, a produce incentive appropriation, a biennial budget change, veterans services funding, driver licensing and traffic enforcement measures, procurement and public records changes, school board and school facilities rules, SNAP work requirements and verification, child welfare and juvenile justice provisions, housing and homelessness measures, energy and fuel policy, election administration, and several tax, commerce, and licensing bills. Members repeatedly raised concerns about constitutionality, federal preemption, duplication of existing law, and whether some measures were policy priorities that had been vetoed in prior sessions and were returning unchanged. Several bills drew extended debate. Members objected to English-proficiency requirements for commercial drivers and motor carriers, arguing federal law and the supremacy clause would bar them. Earned wage access regulation prompted strong opposition over consumer harm, overdraft cycles, and high effective APRs. School-related bills were criticized for overregulating public schools while not imposing similar requirements on ESA/private-school programs, especially on fingerprint clearance and reporting. SNAP-related bills were also opposed as setting unrealistic mandates and repeating vetoed proposals. Other contested measures included a drag-show criminalization bill, a bill restricting photo enforcement, a bill limiting local regulation of unmanned aircraft, and a bill conforming Arizona tax law to federal changes, which members said would benefit wealthy taxpayers and corporations without a clear funding source. The committee also heard a number of supportive or less controversial measures, including bills on veterans awareness, dementia care telemonitoring, Braille transcription funding, CPA licensure pathways, cash acceptance by retailers, and some child safety and court administration changes. Several bills were pulled from consent for further discussion, while others were noted as having unanimous or near-unanimous votes. The meeting ended with caucus announcements, including an affordability award presentation, an upcoming Latino Caucus discussion on community land trusts, and an invitation to African American Legislative Day activities, followed by adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• funds misused or stolen those allocated funds misused or stolen is<00:04:58.560> an<00:04:58.720
• So, yeah, it is indeed infuriating to think that when we allocate the dollars that we have here to go
• The first thing is our admissions application requires an application fee be paid or an application fee
• <01:13:05.679> be application fee be an application fee be application fee be an application
• > fee<01:13:07.840> waiver<01:13:08.159> be paid or an application fee waiver be

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• We do know that an extra fee can be charged. We looked at other states.
• We do know that an extra fee can be charged, and we talked about that last year when we brought it forward
• Section 2 allocates 111 to the research and development and deployment fund.
• Section 2 allocates 111 to the research and development and deployment fund.
• would be a bad Southern New Mexican if I didn't, first and foremost, thank you for the $16 million allocation

Bills: SB20, SB21, SB166, SB177, SB181, SB189, SM6

Keywords: prior authorization, pharmacy benefits manager, PBM, health insurer, prescription drugs, step therapy, formulary, auto-adjudication, electronic portal, appeals, medical necessity, serious mental illness, mental health, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, major depression, substance use disorder, addiction treatment, cancer, autoimmune disorder