Transcript Highlights:

• The fees that we payment fees, right?
• So, if you look at it, a $100 bill, $4 in tax, a $4 vendor fee or a $4 fee for swipe fees, roughly.
• So, if you look at it, a $100 bill, $4 in tax, a $4 vendor fee or a $4 fee for swipe fees, roughly.
• So, if you look at it, a $100 bill, $4 in tax, a $4 vendor fee or a $4 fee for swipe fees, roughly.
• So, if you look at it, a $100 bill, $4 in tax, a $4 vendor fee or a $4 fee for swipe fees, roughly.

Keywords: 981, all

Summary: The House convened with a quorum, approved the journal, and heard several announcements and recognitions. Members marked World Ovarian Cancer Day, promoted Cinco de Mayo and a related potluck, welcomed DeMolay International guests, and recognized correctional officers and employees during Corrections Officers and Employees Week. Several committees also announced upcoming meetings and bill hearings, including Health and Human Services, Judiciary, Transportation, Housing, and Local Government, Capital Development, and Appropriations. Committee reports were read, including favorable recommendations on several bills and a postponement indefinitely of House Joint Resolution 1029. The Majority Leader then moved a slate of bills to special orders, and the House agreed without objection. The chamber then proceeded to floor consideration of Senate Bill 134, concerning payment card network fees. Senate Bill 134 drew debate over whether merchants should continue paying swipe fees on the tax portion of credit card transactions. Supporters said the bill would provide meaningful relief to small businesses and restaurants, with estimated savings of $8,000 to $10,000 per business and about $217 million statewide. Opponents argued the bill shifted costs to banks and could have unintended consequences, suggesting the state should instead directly pay or reimburse the fees. After debate, the House passed Senate Bill 134 by voice vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• But putting a fee onto a $50 floating raft, a $50 fee per year onto a $50 floating raft is just nuts
• But putting a fee onto a $50 floating raft, a $50 fee per year onto a $50 floating raft is just nuts
• I would be paying that $50 fee.
• I would be paying that $50 fee.
• <03:38:05.920> There's of you know fee collection. There's of you know fee collection.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Do we look at cutting FTEs, assessing fees? Do we look at cutting FTEs, assessing fees?
• Did we increase any of the fees that you charge? Can you refresh my memory?
• Did we increase any of the fees that you charge? Mr.
• There's over 27,000 pieces of structural steel.
• There's over 27,000 pieces of structural steel weighing over 3.1 million pounds.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee first approved the December 10 minutes and then received a DEQ base budget summary and agency overview. DEQ staff explained that the agency is largely federally and special funded, with major ongoing costs in salaries, operating expenses, grants, and continuing appropriations. Director Dave Glatt and accounting director Beth Jacobson highlighted core programs, the move to a new chemistry laboratory, the new state fuel inspection program, wastewater-related funding from HB 1577, and implementation of SB 2267 for on-site wastewater rules. They also noted the agency’s spending patterns, possible federal EPA cuts, and the likelihood of some fee adjustments or program changes if federal support declines. Members asked about DEQ’s travel, field offices, future staffing, and how the agency would respond to reduced federal regulation. DEQ said most staff are based in Bismarck, with field offices in Fargo, Sawyer, and Gwinner, and that travel is driven by inspections and spill response. Glatt said the agency would continue to rely on science and law, and that any future federal retrenchment could mean more state responsibility but likely not a wholesale increase in FTEs. The committee also discussed a feedlot enforcement case in the Minot area, with DEQ explaining its role in ensuring compliance, permitting, and animal-waste management standards. The Department of Health and Human Services then presented on FTE block grant reporting, TANF balances, child care transfers, and the Rural Health Transformation Program. Donna Ockland explained that no line-item transfers had occurred yet for the new rural health work, but about 33 positions were planned and some current staff time could be reimbursed through approved cost allocation. HHS also reviewed TANF’s frozen eligibility and block grant structure, the transfer of up to 30% of TANF funds to child care, and recent program changes that increased benefits and raised the income limit. Staff said the department is using TANF more strategically to support child care and other allowable uses, while still carrying over unused funds as many states do. Finally, Pat and HHS staff gave an update on the Rural Health Transformation Program, saying the first funding opportunity was being posted and that the state is on track to obligate the federal funds within the required timeline. They described priorities such as workforce retention, preceptor development, technical assistance for critical access hospitals, community wellness projects, and ambulance upgrades. Members asked about rural versus urban eligibility, immigrant recruitment, evaluation of year-two funding, and how the program would address varied local workforce needs. The meeting then shifted to an Office of Management and Budget update on the new State Hospital project, where Lindsay Ashley reported continued construction progress, updated cost information, and selected alternates, with photos and details showing work underway in multiple building sections.

Transcript Highlights:

• and say, hey, we're not going to pay this fee because this license is there, and the state misses out
• on literally millions of dollars in licensing fees?
• With that being said, is there any indication of what kind of revenues were generated from this fee or
• when this took place, the department stopped collecting that fee, and so it's a little unclear.
• Also, if there's legislation requiring a nominating commission, similar to the structure of the JCC's

Summary: The Joint Administrative Procedures Committee reviewed several agency rules and objections under Chapter 120. First, the committee revisited prior objections to Agency for Health Care Administration rules containing sunset provisions. AHCA’s general counsel said the agency amended 26 of the objected rules but declined to amend five others, arguing sunset provisions are lawful, are not themselves rules, and were consistent with a 2019 gubernatorial directive. Committee members questioned that position, especially for licensing and certificate-of-need rules, and urged the agency to consider legislative changes; no formal action was taken on that item during the discussion. The committee then considered an objection to Department of Management Services Rule 60G-1.001 defining the Governor’s Mansion grounds. Committee staff argued the rule is vague and improperly refers to future land acquisitions without updating the rule since 1998. DMS defended the rule as a general definition tied to publicly recorded property and a master lease, but said it would not object if the Legislature chose to codify the definition in statute. After discussion, the committee voted to file the objection. Members also received informational updates from the Department of Environmental Protection on the Solaris state lands inventory system, and from the Florida Gaming Control Commission on its response to the Tampa Bay Downs unadopted-rule litigation, in which the commission said it has stopped relying on the prior tax interpretation and will not promulgate a rule on that issue. The Department of Business and Professional Regulation said it would remove an unsupported cigar wholesale dealer permit reference, repeal an obsolete excise-tax deduction rule, and amend penalty guidelines and an affirmation in its alcohol, beverage, and tobacco rules. Finally, the Division of Administrative Hearings’ interim director discussed case-processing times, possible changes to ALJ status, and whether the Florida Rules of Evidence should apply in administrative proceedings, emphasizing the need to weigh costs, independence, and impacts on pro se litigants. The chair noted this was likely the committee’s final meeting of the year.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so we think that we have an equitable rate structure. We believe that.
• Infrastructure fees, upgrades, infrastructure fees, what would those, what would that bill look like?
• So we have a tiered structure to encourage conservation measures.
• Is predicated on time and how these contracts are structured.
• It was a tap fee. And the bigger tap you had, the more you paid.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• However, they are struggling to legally operate in our current permitting structure.
• Recording is a fee-for-service operation, meaning that they rely on fees that they charge to provide
• This is clear evidence that existing fees do not reflect actual costs.
• AB 2224 modernizes recording by requiring counties to implement a more straightforward fee structure
• While the base recording fee is increased under this bill, several other fees are eliminated compared

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• HB3012 removes a mandated $3 course fee from the education...
• Each permit also incurs an additional $3,000 fee.
• There are unidentified employees, excessive removal fees, and unscrupulous business practices.
• In 2018, Austin determined the average. ...removal fee to be one hundred and fifty dollars.
• They're just there for people to collect these fees.

Bills: HB589, HB705, HB1842, HB1874, HB2349, HB2614, HB2827, HB3012, HB3214, HB3308, HB3385, HB3529

Keywords: cosmetology, licensure, interstate compact, state regulations, public safety, workforce mobility, charitable raffles, nonprofit, wildlife conservation, ticket sales, fundraising, master electrician, electrical work, occupational licensing, work scope, Texas law, Texas Real Estate Commission, TREC, real estate broker, sales agent

Transcript Highlights:

• The proposed $493 licensing fee for speech language pathology assistants, or SLPAs, is more than double
• the supervision requirements while also seeking a cost estimate to reduce the assistant licensing fees
• The proposed $493 licensing fee for speech language pathology assistants, or SLPAs, is more than double
• the supervision requirements while also seeking a cost estimate to reduce the assistant licensing fees
• The proposed $493 licensing fee for speech language pathology assistants, or SLPAs, is more than double

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• have a PBM 938, and it's a different way of looking at how we regulate PBMs between administration fee
• , dispensing fee, reimbursements, what the department can do in reverse auction.
• There's no reason for us to keep those fees.
• Typically in our industry, that's two of which have committed to go to a fee-for-service model.
• Then we're going to have a data fee, then we're going to have a market access fee, and before you know

Bills: SB511, SB512, HB591, HB909, HB938, HB1154, HB1187

Keywords: automobile repairs, insurance transparency, repair shop liability, non-OEM parts, policyholder rights, automobile insurance, appraisal process, insurance policyholders, dispute resolution, claim valuation, family leave, insurance, paid leave, employment benefits, caregiver support, behavioral health, crisis services, mental health care, insurance coverage, healthcare access

Transcript Highlights:

• would have this disproportionate fee would have this disproportionate fee where<00:52:18.079>
• a higher fee a higher fee in<00:52:25.520> even<00:52:25.760> in<00:52:26.000>
• the revenue so that means license fees the revenue so that means license fees that<01:15:53.520>
• <01:19:59.440> would massage therapist license fees would massage therapist license fees would
• this this this one with the structured this this this one with the structured in<01:28:56.239>

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This concept for regulating early termination fees is not unheard of.
• Although the recent changes in FCC's leadership Termination fees.
• Rather than outright banning these fees, as the FCC approved, Rather than outright banning these fees
• structured, it's the cap that gives me the biggest heartburn.
• structured, it's the cap that gives me the biggest heartburn.

Summary: The committee heard several privacy and consumer protection bills, with most of the discussion focused on AI and social media. AB 1405 would create a state registry for AI auditors and set basic transparency, ethics, and qualification standards for those auditors; supporters said it would build trust and provide a foundation for future AI oversight, while some members questioned whether government should define auditor qualifications instead of industry groups. The bill was moved out on a 5-1 vote to Appropriations, with the roll left open. AB 2, by Assemblymember Lowenthal, would impose enhanced financial penalties on large social media companies when their negligence causes harm to children and teens. Supporters, including a grieving parent and Common Sense Media, argued the bill would create accountability for harmful algorithms and design choices, while opponents from TechNet, EFF, CCIA, and CalChamber warned it was vague, could chill speech, invite censorship, and raise Section 230 and First Amendment concerns. Committee members debated private right of action versus public enforcement, possible shakedown lawsuits, and whether the bill should be narrowed; the bill passed 6-0 to Judiciary with the roll left open. AB 410 would expand California’s bot disclosure law so bots must identify themselves up front and truthfully if asked, rather than only prohibiting deceptive bots in limited commercial or election contexts. Supporters said the measure would help users, especially youth and vulnerable people, know when they are interacting with AI and reduce deception online; one privacy group withdrew opposition after amendments, and other industry groups said they were no longer opposed or had no formal position. The bill passed 9-1 to Appropriations with the roll left open. The committee also approved AB 1327, which lets consumers cancel home improvement contracts by email instead of only by mail and requires phone assistance for cancellations; the Contractor State License Board withdrew opposition after amendments, and the bill passed 11-0 to Judiciary with the roll left open.

Transcript Highlights:

• Loss of contact visits, loss of family contact, loss of community support, fines, fees, etc.
• Structural racism.
• Repealing pay-to-state fees would not create a budget gap. It would close an ethical one.
• as part of the same harmful structure.
• House Bill 2659, an act to remove medical and health services fees for incarcerated folks.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing before the Joint Committee on Public Safety and Homeland Security focused on several correction-related bills, including visitation reform, elder and medical parole, incarcerated persons’ human rights, and creation of an independent correctional oversight office. Vice Chair Christopher Worrell chaired the hearing in place of Chair Dan Cahill for much of the session and explained that the committee would first hear from incarcerated individuals remotely, then move to public testimony. The committee repeatedly enforced three-minute limits and accepted written testimony as well. Much of the testimony from incarcerated people emphasized that visitation is central to rehabilitation, family stability, and reentry, and that current DOC policies—visitor caps, pre-approval requirements, scheduling rules, dress-code enforcement, and restrictions on contact—have reduced family contact and caused harm. Several speakers argued that elderly and medically frail prisoners should be released through parole because incarceration is costly, ineffective, and inhumane for people who pose little public-safety risk. Others described poor prison conditions, limited programming, inadequate healthcare, segregation-like housing, and the impact of K2 use, suicides, and self-harm. Supporters of the oversight bill said an independent office is needed to address racial disparities, grievance failures, and lack of accountability within the DOC. A number of speakers tied their support to personal experiences, including alleged racial discrimination, denial of programs, and barriers to family visits. Some testified that rehabilitative programming, education, and restorative justice reduce violence and improve outcomes, while others said the DOC spends too little on programming and too much on punishment. Committee members asked a few follow-up questions, including about K2 contraband and how to reduce drugs in facilities, and one member asked about typical visitation lengths. No votes were taken during the hearing; the committee heard testimony on the bills and several witnesses urged favorable reports.

Transcript Highlights:

• Right, and Senator, you did mention that this kind of fundamentally changes the structure.
• You know, clearly, it wasn't how we structured the bill initially.
• One is there is the potential for the associated licensor fees or the fees to be considerable and potentially
• One is there is the potential for the associated licensor fees or the fees to be considerable and potentially
• One is that in existing law, there are fees and penalties. Where do those fees and penalties go?

Summary: The Assembly Health Committee heard several bills focused on health care access, oversight, and affordability. The first major item was SB 306 by Senator Becker, a prior authorization reform bill. Becker and supporters, including the California Medical Association and California Hospital Association, argued that prior authorization delays care, adds administrative burden, and can lead to serious patient harm. The bill was substantially amended late in the process to have DMHC and CDI identify services and drugs to exempt from prior authorization based on utilization data, with safeguards for fraud, waste, abuse, and patient safety. Health plans and insurers opposed the measure as written, saying prior authorization remains an important utilization-management tool and raising concerns about the 90% threshold, drug inclusion, and how modifications are counted. The committee also heard SB 35 by Senator Umberg, which would let cities or counties inspect unlicensed sober living homes if DHCS does not act promptly on complaints. Supporters said the bill would address weak enforcement and protect residents, while one behavioral health directors group opposed it unless amended. Members generally supported the measure, citing problems with unlicensed facilities and the need for local enforcement backup. The committee then heard SB 62, which would codify California’s updated essential health benefits benchmark if approved by the federal government. Senator Wiener said the package would add hearing aids, durable medical equipment, and infertility treatment including IVF, acknowledging that premiums could rise but arguing the benefits were worth it. Health Access California and other advocates supported the bill, while the California Family Council opposed it. The committee also took up SB 596 by Senator Menjivar, which would tighten the rules for hospitals claiming an on-call list as a defense to nurse staffing ratio penalties. Supporters, including nurses and SEIU, said hospitals have used vague or ineffective on-call practices to avoid accountability and that the bill would improve enforcement and patient safety. Hospital groups opposed it, arguing that staffing is highly dynamic, that hospitals need flexibility to manage acuity and emergencies, and that the bill could increase costs and interfere with collective bargaining arrangements. Finally, the committee heard SB 40 by Senator Wiener, the Insulin Affordability Act, which would cap insulin copays at $35 for a 30-day supply and restrict step therapy unless a plan covers at least one insulin in each drug type. Supporters, including physicians, diabetes advocates, nurses, students, and patient groups, said insulin is life-saving and too often unaffordable, forcing patients to ration or choose between medication and basic needs. There was no formal opposition testimony, though one member questioned why insulin remains so expensive. The committee also began discussion of SB 363, but the transcript cuts off before that bill’s full presentation or any action on the measures. No votes are recorded in the portion provided, and several bills were noted as consent items earlier in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• for our agency and we strive to keep those fees low.
• And our current fee structure is set to about 90 to 95% of what we are statutorily authorized to charge
• When reviewing fees charged by other medical boards across the country, Texas is not the highest fee
• Um, licensing fees, big deal. Um.
• We haven't raised fees since September 2015, like I said, and the fees have remained flat.

Transcript Highlights:

• So if there's no tax liability, the law says the $25 is the fee.
• Why would we charge you late fees?
• And House Bill 4103 creates an incentive structure to be prudent with resources.
• And HB 4103 creates an incentive structure to be prudent with resources. If you have to be.
• HB 4103 creates an incentive structure to be prudent with resources.

Bills: HB2016, HB2104, HB2105, HB2174, HB2256, HB2289, HB2477, HB2903, HB2939, HB2979, HB2996, HB4103

Keywords: tax penalties, filing, tax returns, administration, Arizona Revised Statutes, agricultural property, classification, county assessor, property inspection, appeal process, property tax, agricultural classification, Department of Revenue, property valuation, inspection notice, inspection report, on-site inspection, full cash value, rural land, farm land

Summary: The committee first approved the March 9, 2026 minutes and held House Bills 29 and 2939 at the sponsor’s request. It then took up House Bill 2016, which would eliminate the late-filing penalty for taxpayers with zero income tax liability; after discussion about whether taxpayers still need to file to establish that they owe nothing, the committee adopted an amendment narrowing the bill to income tax filers and passed the bill 4-3. The Department of Revenue said it was neutral on the bill but supported the amendment. The committee next heard House Bill 2289, which updates the property-value examples used in bond/override election pamphlets and truth-in-taxation notices from older low values to $300,000. Supporters said the figures are outdated and should better reflect current home values; opponents questioned whether $300,000 was the best benchmark and whether adding another example would confuse voters. The bill passed 4-3. The committee also approved House Bill 4103, which bars school districts from calling bond elections if enrollment is below 50% of capacity. Supporters argued districts should use or monetize excess space before asking taxpayers for more debt, while school administrators and others said the measure would block needed maintenance, safety upgrades, and local decision-making. It passed 4-3. Two related agricultural property bills, House Bills 2104 and 2105, were both amended and passed 4-3. HB 2104 creates a four-year period after a successful agricultural property tax appeal during which assessors generally may not reclassify or reinspect the property absent changes in use, ownership, splits, or improvements. HB 2105 requires advance notice of inspections and inspection reports and provides a three-year inspection exemption after the most recent inspection, with similar exceptions. Farm and ranch groups said the bills provide fairness and certainty after successful appeals; county assessors opposed them as limiting oversight and creating unequal treatment. The committee also passed House Bill 2256 unanimously, which sets notice and title procedures for salvage auction dealers when insurance claims are denied or unpaid, and House Bill 2979 unanimously, which updates credit union regulatory timelines and procedures. Later, the committee passed House Bill 2996 unanimously, clarifying that certificates of insurance are informational only and cannot expand coverage or rights, with penalties for misrepresentations. It also heard House Bill 2174, which renames and updates regulation of insurance modeling and data organizations, requires model filings, and revises related reinsurance provisions; the discussion focused on how DIFI would regulate models versus the companies that create them, but no vote was taken in the portion provided. Finally, House Bill 2477 was introduced to conform Arizona’s 529 plan to federal law by increasing the K-12 withdrawal limit to $20,000, adding post-secondary credentialing expenses, and allowing rollovers to ABLE accounts and Roth IRAs if requirements are met; the sponsor and Treasurer’s Office supported it as a cleanup/conformity measure, and discussion began on how the new rollover options would work.

Transcript Highlights:

• If we add up bond proceeds, moving anti-clockwise, vehicle-related fees, federal funds, and fuel tax,
• There were increases to passenger and truck vehicle weight fees, the rental car tax, and driver's license
• fees. 0.1% of state sales tax will go to transportation beginning in 2027-29.
• There were increases to passenger and truck vehicle weight fees, the rental car tax, driver's license
• fees. 0.1% of state sale tax license fees. 0.1% of state sale tax will go to transportation beginning

Summary: The Senate Transportation Committee met on October 16, 2025, for a budget and revenue overview, a traffic safety presentation, and a discussion of potential transit and active transportation grant programs. Committee staff reviewed the adopted 2025-27 transportation budget, noting $15.5 billion in expenditures, the large share for WSDOT, and the mix of revenue sources including fuel tax, vehicle-related fees, federal funds, Climate Commitment Act revenue, and new 2025 revenues from SB 5801 and SB 5802. Staff said the 2025 session produced a balanced four-year plan, preserved major project schedules, maintained highway preservation funding, and added money for culverts, local preservation, and other priorities. They also described a September forecast showing lower motor fuel consumption than previously expected, but still enough revenue growth to keep the transportation plan balanced. For the 2026 supplemental, staff said agency requests were relatively modest overall, with most capital requests reflecting reappropriations and timing shifts rather than new projects, while WSDOT’s addendum identified much larger future needs for maintenance, preservation, paving, culverts, and safety work. Senators asked for more detail on how revenues are distributed by fund type and geography, how much of the maintenance and preservation request is actual maintenance versus equipment, whether paving needs could be supported through bonding, and how electric vehicle sales trends might affect forecasts. The committee then heard a remote presentation from Dr. Jessica Chikino of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety on traffic safety trends and countermeasures. She said U.S. traffic fatalities have risen sharply over the past decade, with especially large increases for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorcyclists, and argued that the U.S. lags other high-income countries in roadway safety. Her presentation highlighted IIHS’s “30 by 30” goal to reduce fatalities 30% by 2030 through safer speeds, stronger impaired-driving countermeasures, better pedestrian protection, and safer commercial vehicles. She discussed research linking higher speed limits to higher fatality risk, the benefits of lower urban speed limits, speed safety cameras, traffic calming, lighting, pedestrian beacons, and safer intersection design. She also described ongoing work with Bellevue on smart signal technology and pedestrian safety pilots. Committee members thanked her for the presentation and said they would share the materials with others. In the final work session, the committee revisited transit and active transportation grant concepts that had been included in the Senate budget proposal but did not advance in 2025. Barb Chamberlain of WSDOT’s Active Transportation Division explained how grant programs need runway, staff capacity, applicant readiness, and clear criteria, and compared program design to getting a plane off the ground. She discussed the proposed Senior Transportation Emphasis Program and regional trails/cycle highways concepts, noting that some projects could be structured as funding-first programs while others would work better as project-line or project-first models. She said regional trail projects are already eligible under existing programs but often score lower because current criteria emphasize safety and population served. Justin Leighton of the Washington State Transit Association then reviewed transit grant programs and argued that transit safety and security needs remain underfunded, including operator barriers, lighting, shelters, behavioral health coordination, and non-uniformed security staff. He said many transit capital programs are oversubscribed, that operator barrier retrofits alone could cost $20 million to $30 million, and that agencies face uncertainty about how recent sales tax changes apply to security-related contracts. No votes were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• fees because it's just...
• We did do a structural analysis and found that the structure would not, as I mentioned, even if we Exposed
• So our students pay a fee. But it's not viewed as a tuition.
• Our little structure there helps sort it out.
• Each tribal administration structure varies; we all know that.

Transcript Highlights:

• The the 14.5 million has been returned to the consumer, the the fines and fees associated with their
• There's a stream is going to the consumers in the form restitution and there's fines and fees that are
• Lloyd's syndicate operate similar to a subsidiary within their group structure.
• You pay all this insurance fees and now we wiped out and we're waiting on insurance and some businesses
• Well, with that, I will turn it back over time to all and the structure and take questions before going

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair and members, Representative Myers, the delivery fee is imposed on the seller, and the structure
• <00:37:34.000> at fee they aren't collecting that fee at fee they aren't collecting that fee
• One of the things, too, when we put these fees in, when we put the gas fees, we put the delivery fee
• <00:56:16.559> in the gas fees we put the delivery fee in the gas fees we put the delivery
• fee on that so fee on or 3% credit card fee on that so it's<00:56:39.319> just<00:56:39.559><

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: House File 5 was heard in the Transportation Committee and moved by the author, Representative Jim Joy, to be referred to the Tax Committee. Joy described the bill as a package to make Minnesota more affordable by fully eliminating the Social Security tax subtraction, ending the motor fuels tax indexing, repealing the retail delivery fee, and studying vehicle registration/license taxes compared with neighboring states. Committee fiscal staff explained the bill’s fiscal effects across the general fund, highway user tax distribution fund, transportation advancement account, and metro county sales tax allocations, including that the delivery fee repeal would reduce Transportation Advancement Account revenue and that the bill would shift some revenue sources to offset losses. Several stakeholders testified. The Minnesota Grocers Association strongly supported repealing the retail delivery fee, arguing it is costly and complex for retailers to administer, especially small businesses, and that the costs are ultimately passed on to consumers. The Minnesota Propane Association also supported repeal, saying the fee is burdensome for propane businesses, that only a small share of deliveries are actually subject to it, and that compliance costs can exceed the fee revenue collected. Fiscal staff noted that delivery fee revenue forecasts have fallen below earlier projections, and explained that the fee is imposed on sellers with several exemptions, including a $100 transaction threshold and exemptions for some sales such as bars, restaurants, nonprofits, and certain small businesses. Opposition came from local government groups. The League of Minnesota Cities said it supported the Transportation Advancement Account and its 2023 funding sources, including the delivery fee and motor vehicle parts sales tax, and warned that the bill would prematurely alter a funding structure that cities rely on for predictable transportation revenue. The Minnesota Association of Small Cities said small cities had long lacked dedicated transportation funding and wanted a stable, ongoing revenue stream, but were neutral on the exact source as long as it was reliable. Metro Cities echoed support for stable, predictable transportation funding for metro-area cities. The committee took testimony and discussion only; no final vote was recorded in the excerpt beyond the motion to refer the bill to the Tax Committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• Generation within a corporate structure Generation within a corporate structure uh<01:05:01.400>
• It's not about the legal structure itself; it's about the beneficiary structure and, ultimately to some
• It's not about the legal structure itself; it's about the beneficiary structure and, ultimately to some
• It's not about the legal structure itself; it's about the beneficiary structure and, ultimately to some
• It's not about the legal structure itself; it's about the beneficiary structure and, ultimately to some

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Agriculture and Environment hearing on January 27, 2025, took up multiple measures, beginning with a proposed constitutional amendment, HB 559, to recognize a right to clean water and air, a healthful environment, climate, native ecosystems, and beaches. The Attorney General’s Office testified with concerns that the amendment’s broad language could create challenges for future legislatures and environmental enforcement, while the Climate Commission and DLNR supported it. Environmental and advocacy groups, including Climate Protectors Hawaii, 350 Hawaii, Greenpeace Hawaii, and others, strongly supported the measure, arguing it would strengthen decision-making and protect Hawaii’s natural resources. Committee members raised questions about how the amendment would interact with existing constitutional protections and recent litigation, and the AG’s office said the proposal could lead to broad judicial interpretation and possible liability issues. The hearing then moved on without a recorded vote on this bill. The committee next heard SB 552, which would establish a healthy soils program in the Department of Agriculture and require annual reporting and funding. The Climate Change Commission supported the bill, and the Department of Agriculture said it stood on its submitted testimony but noted existing commissions and the greenhouse gas sequestration task force already address similar objectives, suggesting SB 552 may duplicate current efforts. Agricultural and environmental advocates, including the Hawaii Farmers Union, Hawaii Farm Bureau, and others, supported the concept of a consolidated healthy soils program, saying it would better organize existing efforts, improve access for producers, and support conservation practices. The Agribusiness Development Corporation said it would support either DOA or ADC administering the program, and committee discussion focused on implementation, program overlap, and whether the bill should better integrate existing compost reimbursement and related efforts. The final measure discussed in the excerpt was SB 678, which would create an Agricultural Development Food Security Special Fund, dedicate a portion of the environmental response, energy, and food security tax to it, and appropriate funds equal to 3% of the state budget for agriculture. The Department of Agriculture strongly supported the bill, saying the funding would align with its goals and help support farmers and ranchers. The Tax Foundation of Hawaii and the Department of Budget and Finance raised concerns that the proposed special fund may not meet statutory criteria. Farm and industry groups generally supported the measure but suggested changes, including adding uses related to local food sourcing, distribution, and biosecurity. Committee members questioned the scale of the appropriation, noting it could amount to roughly $250 million and a major increase in DOA’s budget, and discussed whether the department could realistically implement such a large program. The hearing ended with testimony counts noted for the measures heard, and the chair indicated the committee would reconvene later for any unfinished business.