Transcript Highlights:

• Students with waivers do still pay institutions tuition, fees, housing, and food.
• The net tuition plus housing and food and fees collected from students with a waiver was $110.9 million
• So this is for the next... ...and fees, as well as the tuition rates.
• General funds, of course, is based on the amount allocated to the institutions.
• That budget is allocated in response to the legislative intent.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee first reviewed the 2024-25 tuition waiver report for the North Dakota University System. Staff explained that waivers were reported for degree-seeking students and broken out by residency, institution, and waiver type. Members asked about partial versus full waivers, institutional discretion, athletic waivers, and whether campuses have published guardrails or transparency requirements. Staff said most waivers are set by institutions, with some statutory and board-required categories, and that athletic waivers are a small share of total waiver dollars. The report showed total gross tuition of $354.5 million, tuition waived of $38.9 million, and 11,193 of 42,040 students receiving some waiver. Members also discussed how waivers affect net tuition revenue, housing and food collections, and whether campuses are using waivers strategically compared with scholarships and other funding sources. The committee then heard a presentation on tuition rates by campus and State Board policy. Staff explained the board’s tuition factors for resident, Minnesota reciprocity, contiguous-state/U.S. nonresident, and international students, and noted that campuses often seek exceptions based on program-specific competition and enrollment goals. Members asked whether rates are based on cost or competition, and staff said campuses typically bring forward estimates and market comparisons when requesting special rates. The presentation also reviewed general fund appropriations versus net tuition revenue by campus, and members discussed how local tuition decisions and waivers do not directly affect the state funding formula, though they do affect institutional revenue and reserves. Questions were also raised about the Higher Learning Commission’s financial composite indicator and how it differs from the more intuitive reserve and revenue figures. The committee next received a broad overview of non-higher-education entities affiliated with the State Board of Higher Education, beginning with NDSU agriculture-related units. Dr. Greg Lardy described the State Board of Agricultural Research and Education, the NDSU Extension Service, the Agricultural Experiment Station, and the branch research centers, emphasizing their statewide role in crop and livestock research, extension education, and county-based outreach. He outlined funding mixes for extension, the experiment station, and branch stations, noting that grants and contracts support both research and education, while the agronomy seed farm is self-funded through seed sales. Members asked about the new and vacant FTE pool, R1 research status, matching requirements for grants, and whether state appropriations count toward research expenditures. Dr. Lardy also highlighted major research impacts, including crop varieties, virtual fencing, AI-assisted weed control, and NDAWN weather data. The Northern Crops Institute and the Upper Great Plains Transportation Institute also presented. NCI described its role in market development, technical services, and education for regional agriculture, its governance through the Northern Crops Council, and its funding from state appropriations, other states, and earned revenue. Members asked about the source of out-of-state funding, intellectual property, and the institute’s international reach. UGPTI then outlined its transportation research, federal and state funding structure, and work on road and bridge condition assessments, travel demand modeling, and workforce training. No votes were taken during the portion of the meeting reflected in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• And of the funding projections that we use, the department receives a statutory allocation of that.
• So there's just no revenue left there after everybody else gets their allocation of a motor fuel tax.
• And we're starting to see some revenues realized there based on a registration fee on an electric vehicle
• And we expect to have those funds, with the exception of about 20 million dollars, completely allocated
• the state election board revolving fund that consists mainly of two Things: one, candidate filing fees

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Section 4 would limit late fees in manufactured home parks to no more than 8% of the delinquent rent
• ><00:08:56.280> would<00:08:56.520> limit<00:08:57.040> late<00:08:57.400> fees
• <00:08:57.800> in Section 4 would limit late fees in Section 4 would limit late fees in manufactured
• So, looking at line 64 for the Housing Taxes and Fees Task Force, while there is no appropriation in
• Task Force, while the Taxes and Fees Task Force, while the there<00:21:47.520> is<00:21:47.640

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: The conference committee on the housing omnibus bill began with member introductions and a staff walk-through comparing House and Senate provisions. House Research staff reviewed major policy differences affecting Minnesota Housing Finance Agency operations, including limits on how much the agency may retain from state appropriations for administrative costs, new reporting requirements, restrictions on transfers between appropriated accounts, and House-only language requiring annual expenditure of investment income from state appropriations. Senate provisions were also summarized, including tighter rules on when appropriations may be placed into Housing Development Fund bookkeeping accounts, updated operating-cost reporting, and Senate-only changes to how investment earnings may be used. Staff also described shared and differing provisions on program-money transfers, a lived-experience earnings exemption, and a long list of Senate-only policy changes, including manufactured home park tenant protections, low-income housing tax credit and bond-related changes, a task force on housing taxes and fees, and repealers affecting Housing Development Fund authority and certain older programs. Fiscal staff then reviewed the budget impacts. The House side included one-time appropriations for workforce housing development, family homeless prevention and assistance, a Minnesota Nice Home Share pilot, and homebuyer education, along with debt service for $100 million in housing infrastructure bonds and transfers/cancellations that produced a net zero general fund impact across the budget window. The Senate side noted a fiscal note for the housing taxes and fees task force and a smaller housing infrastructure bond authorization, with corresponding debt service costs and a total Senate budget-window impact of about $1 million in general fund debt service. After the staff presentations, the committee moved to public testimony. Commissioner Jennifer Ho of Minnesota Housing said the bill’s housing infrastructure bonds and continued support for family homeless prevention were important, and she supported the lived-experience earnings exemption, while noting concerns about the interest-earnings provisions. Testifiers from Greater Minnesota groups praised the workforce housing investments and Senate updates to the state housing tax credit and infrastructure grant program, though they suggested changes to the geographic distribution language. HOME Line urged funding for statewide tenant hotline services, citing rising demand and asking for $1 million if additional money becomes available. The Minnesota Consortium of Community Developers supported the bill’s investments and emphasized the need to pair housing development with supportive services. Housing First Minnesota praised housing infrastructure bonds and other investments but criticized the omission of the Minnesota Starter Homes Act. The Minnesota Multi Housing Association began testimony opposing certain rent-control-related provisions in the House bill. No votes or final actions were taken during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• It also makes sure that the definition of the 10% doesn't apply to an administrative fee, which some
• governments now deem to be encumbered when they apply that administrative fee of 10%.
• The $7 billion that we're talking about in capital outlay, yes, it's been allocated by members of the
• to administer those fees, but goes actually towards the project, that project can get that one-time
• to administer those fees, but goes actually towards the project, that project can get that one-time

Bills: HB111, HB61, HB43, HB156, HB70, SB3, HB103, HB109, HB128, HB247, HJM2, HJM3, HM7, HM17, HM4, HM22, HM23, HM24, HM26, HM2, HM16, HM32, HM11, HM14, HM21, HM34, HM50

Keywords: water law, state engineer, civil penalty, compliance order, water rights, overdiversion, illegal diversion, groundwater storage and recovery, well license, permit violation, water enforcement, New Mexico water code, irrigation district, conservancy district, water diversion, unauthorized water sales, measuring device, district court appeal, water resources, water compliance

Transcript Highlights:

• If we take a look at that specifically, that is allocated based on...
• It's a straight per-pupil allocation. That's right. It's one-time money.
• What would you fund with your allocation? What types of activity?
• methodology as the best way to proportionally allocate those funds.
• methodology as the best way to proportionally allocate those funds.

Summary: The committee heard an overview of the May Revision’s Proposition 98 changes for K-12 and community colleges. The Department of Finance said the minimum guarantee rises by $6.4 billion over the Governor’s Budget across the three-year window, with higher guarantees in each year, full payment of the prior settle-up, and larger deposits into the school rainy-day fund. The LAO said the revenue and LCFF updates were reasonable, but urged caution about the settle-up approach and recommended using more of the available funding to protect ongoing programs and build budget resilience. Members focused heavily on the size of the proposed $3.9 billion settle-up, the $10.3 billion reserve deposit, declining K-12 enrollment, and how much of the new funding should be ongoing versus one-time. The committee then reviewed the community colleges portion of the budget. Finance described the May Revision’s higher SCFF COLA, additional funding for enrollment growth, a student support block grant, apprenticeship adjustments, and continued funding for deferred maintenance, Calbright, Common Cloud, and credit for prior learning. The Chancellor’s Office supported the core investments but asked for more funding for enrollment growth, changes to the growth formula, and a COLA for Student Equity and Achievement. The LAO recommended prioritizing the statutory COLA increase, noted that more than half of districts are already above current-year growth targets, and said the new adult learner demonstration project should be rejected because districts already have tools to support similar services. Members also discussed a $52 million current-year apportionment shortfall, which Finance said was discovered too late for the May Revision and would need to be addressed later. Finally, the committee took up the proposed implementation of the federal Workforce Pell program. Finance proposed one-time funding for the California Student Aid Commission and Cradle to Career to build eligibility and data systems, along with trailer bill changes to set up state approval processes. CSAC said the program is promising but highly complex, that California lacks the needed infrastructure, and that the state will need emergency regulations, data linkages, and ongoing funding beyond the one-time proposal. The LAO agreed that some initial funding is needed but warned that the amounts and ongoing costs remain uncertain and that the Legislature should carefully draft the trailer bill language. Members asked about timing, other states’ actions, and how the state would ensure the program is ready for students and institutions.

Transcript Highlights:

• the board, whether it was wastewater, water, um, water fees are going to be increased, uh, DMV fees,
• even our golf fees.
• seen the details of any of the green fee seen the details of any of the green fee proposals<01:30
• So, the green fee proposal is to drain.
• today my understanding is impact fees are close to 27% of the housing cost.”

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Here again, we’re just going to balance this on fees, and we go back to a fee that was pre-TABOR like
• I mean, fees are a legitimate idea. A fee for service is a legitimate idea.
• create a fee to fund who knows what grift.
• And what is this fee going to be? Because it’s for printing documents. It’s for a document fee.
• It’s for a document fee.

Keywords: 981, all

Summary: The House convened with a color guard presentation by Colorado Military Academy cadets and the pledge led by Olivia and Owen Curry. After roll call established a quorum, members approved the journal of Friday, March 6, 2026, as corrected. Several committees then announced upcoming hearings, including Agriculture, Water, and Natural Resources; State, Civic, Military, and Veterans Affairs; and Finance. The chamber then took up House Joint Resolution 1020, designating March 8, 2026, as International Women’s Day in Colorado. The resolution praised women’s contributions across history and society, highlighted Colorado’s early adoption of women’s suffrage, and recognized trailblazing women in the General Assembly. Sponsors and supporters spoke at length about women’s leadership, economic and civic contributions, and the need to continue advancing equality. The resolution also drew recognition of women and advocacy organizations present in the chamber. Representative Bradley and other Republican members criticized the resolution as partisan and said Republican women were not included in drafting or sponsoring it. They argued the measure should have been more inclusive and should have better reflected women’s roles in the home and the broader bipartisan history of women’s history observances. Bradley announced she would vote no. In response, Representative Ricks said an amendment would be accepted from the minority caucus to address concerns about traditional roles of women, and he moved Amendment L002 for consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• Are you aware that your subcommittees on appropriations met and allocated billions of taxpayer dollars
• HB 3753 by Cunningham ruling to the allocation of low income housing tax credits or for the Committee
• e-cigarettes in the state and directory of e-cigarette manufacturers and the products authorizing fees
• Jurisprudence, HB 3848 by Hernandez relating to electronic submission of inspection reports and filing fees
• 164 by Lowe proposing a constitutional amendment prohibiting the imposition of vehicle mileage tax or fee

Transcript Highlights:

• I want to focus on accountability to the taxpayers and, in the case of data seam, misguided allocation
• of their funding from Kentucky taxpayers, whether it's general fund appropriations or millions in fees
• of resources from the allocation of resources from the program's<00:03:33.599> purpose,<00:03
• So the allocation is not just a per-teacher breakdown. >> Um, so thank you.
• Um so the allocation is support as well.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The subcommittee met without a quorum and did not approve minutes, but heard testimony on budget line items for Data Seam and Teach for America. Andrew McNeel of Kentucky Free and representatives from the Commonwealth Policy Center argued that both programs rely heavily on recurring taxpayer support and should be re-evaluated. McNeel cited a 2020 Office of Policy and Audit examination of Data Seam, saying the program had received more than $30 million in state support since 2006, including $3.5 million in the current budget, and that the audit raised concerns about administrative overhead, alleged threats to districts, and the use of line-item language to justify sole-source contracting. He recommended suspending Data Seam funding this biennium, directing a new special audit, and requiring reimbursement of audit costs. The witnesses also urged the committee to withhold funding for Teach for America, saying the organization’s materials and history showed a commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion that they opposed. They pointed to past statements, leadership titles, and program language as evidence that DEI concepts remained embedded in the organization, and suggested any funding should be redirected directly to school districts instead. Mike Harmon and Richard Nelson echoed those concerns, while also saying long-running programs should be periodically reviewed for efficiency. Teach for America Appalachia representatives then testified in support of the program. Executive director C.D. Morton described the organization as a teacher-preparation and leadership-development program serving rural eastern Kentucky, saying it had recruited and supported more than 325 teachers since 2011, with about 30 current core members in several counties and roughly 2,800 students impacted daily. He said the program helps fill hard-to-staff vacancies, that about 80% of teachers stay for a third year, and that many alumni remain in education. In response to questions from Representative Bojanowski about retention and cost, Morton said more than 60% of alumni are still in education, but he could not give a precise classroom-teacher retention number beyond the program’s broader alumni data.

Transcript Highlights:

• This measure will allocate an additional $55 million, in addition to other allocations, to expand the
• This measure will allocate an additional $55 million, in addition to other allocations, to expand the
• This measure will allocate an additional $55 million, in addition to other allocations, to expand the
• This measure will allocate an additional $55 million, in addition to other allocations, to expand the
• This measure will allocate an additional $55 million, in addition to other allocations, to expand the

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• joined in partnership with the Pinal County Sheriff's Department, so the money was not directly allocated
• She added that $97,319 would be allocated for non-lethal pepperball equipment.
• He explained that the legislative intent clause states the training simulators allocated under subsection
• 20 days of the request's filing and allows the court to impose civil penalties and award attorney's fees
• Counties do not have the resources to make that allocation.

Bills: SB1046, SB1317, SB1376, SB1416, SB1448, SB1471, SB1493, SB1498, SB1502, SB1504, SB1538, SB1544, SB1550, SB1579, SB1581, SB1584, SB1624, SB1673

Keywords: telecommunications, broadband, internet infrastructure, critical infrastructure, cybersecurity, national security, foreign adversary, China, Chinese equipment, supply chain security, network equipment, microchips, Arizona Corporation Commission, telecommunications provider, communications infrastructure, Huawei, ZTE, state-owned enterprise, sanctions, infrastructure security

Summary: The committee first approved its February 4 minutes and announced several bills would be held, including SB 1317, SB 1416, SB 1419, SB 1490, and SB 1493. It then heard SB 1579, which would appropriate about $4.7 million from the state general fund to expand a law enforcement data-sharing pilot through the Department of Administration, with funds for DPS, county sheriffs, university police, and city/town police departments. Testimony from the sponsor, Flagstaff’s mayor, Eloy’s police chief, and Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office staff emphasized faster records access, better coordination, and officer safety; an amendment added $125,900 for the Scottsdale Police Department after it had been omitted. The committee adopted the amendment and gave SB 1579 a do pass recommendation by a 6-0 vote with one not voting. The committee next considered SB 1581, which appropriates about $1.4 million from the Peace Officer Training Equipment Fund for pepperball equipment and about $1.316 million for public safety training simulators, with an amendment increasing the Nogales Police Department’s pepperball allocation and expanding simulator funding so Yavapai County could buy two simulators with a three-year warranty. Supporters from Navajo County, Phoenix, Glendale, Flagstaff, and Cochise County described pepperball as a de-escalation tool and simulators as important for crisis-response and use-of-force training. The committee adopted the amendment and passed SB 1581 as amended on a 7-0 vote. SB 1673 was heard next and would appropriate $8.2 million from the general fund to the Law Enforcement Crime Victim Notification Fund, exempting the appropriation from lapsing. The sponsor and law enforcement witnesses said the automated notification system has improved victim communication, reduced workload, and sent millions of updates; committee members asked about funding sources and why a bill is needed for a constitutionally mandated program. The committee approved SB 1673 without amendment on a 7-0 vote. The committee also heard SB 1544, which would make adult probation records public on request, while requiring redaction or withholding of sensitive information such as victim data, minors’ information, medical or counseling records, active investigations, and confidential informants, and creating a process for written denials and court appeals. The sponsor said the bill is intended to increase transparency and data access, while witnesses raised concerns about risk-assessment language and confidential information; the sponsor said amendments would be brought later to clarify those provisions. The committee passed SB 1544 on a 4-3 vote. Finally, SB 1376, creating a civic leadership development special plate and fund for a youth mentoring nonprofit, passed unanimously, and SB 1550, a three-year Queen Creek pilot program to prevent runaway youth exploitation and improve investigations, also passed after testimony from Queen Creek officials and police; one senator voted no, citing concerns about how runaway youth are treated in other legislation. The committee then began hearing SB 1504, a pension bill modifying retirement dates and COLA timing for Tier 2 and Tier 3 public safety personnel, with supporters arguing it would improve recruitment and retention and opponents warning it would create significant unfunded liabilities, but the transcript cuts off before final action on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• expend the funds that they're allocated expend the funds that they're allocated uh<00:23:19.720>
• before if you had an allocation before if you had an allocation uh<00:23:29.000> either<00
• allocation allocation a<00:23:45.560> quarter<00:23:45.920> at<00:23:46.040> a<
• 36:48.440> the a fee share to the a fee share to the to<00:36:49.280> the<00:36:49.600>
• state, there'll be cost allocations state, there'll be cost allocations between<01:02:14.640>

Bills: SB8

Keywords: utilities, public service commission, energy regulation, appointment, emergency declaration, tax increases, consumer protection, The first couple minutes of the livestream was cut off. This recording restored the beginning of the meeting Meeting Start 00:00:00 Attendance Roll Call 00:00:51 Approval of Minutes 00:02:07 Legislator Comments 00:02:18 LIHEAP Public Hearing 00:04:19 PSC Update on RS 26 SB 8 00:32:18 WaterStep Presentation 01:04:08, 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• allocated that we could bring down all of the federal funds that could go towards those endeavors.
• Yes, it's like the one-time big allocator.
• So, how do y'all determine the allocation of resources to those different regional... groups?
• price and this really kind of contradicts national narratives that overstate. the impact of local fees
• By expanding impact fees so that these services that we've been discussing here this morning as public

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Contracts that include rental fees or fees for parents with income equal to or greater than the P1 675
• These sections increase DHS licensing fees and add fees for satellite facilities, and then deposit the
• fee amounts into an account.
• This is also a new proposal that will increase DHS licensing fees and add fees for program integrity
• by 320% and the annual department licensing fee by 25%.

Bills: HF2434

Keywords: healthcare, personal care assistance, worker retention, disability services, state funding

Transcript Highlights:

• Funding ASP, similarly to Empower, there's a $5,000 fee for those services.
• I will add about the fee: the $5,000 fee that started, that was the fee in 2012, and it has not increased
• I will add about the fee: the $5,000 fee that started, that was the fee in 2012, and it has not increased
• And then this is the fee that is for the program.
• Tuition and then this is the fee that is for the program per semester.

Summary: The meeting opened with routine business, including approval of the January 13, 2026 minutes, and a brief recognition of Autism Awareness Month. The task force then heard a presentation from the University of Arkansas College of Education and Health Professions on two student support programs: the Empower Program for non-degree-seeking students ages 18–24 with mild intellectual disabilities, and the Autism Support Program for degree-seeking students with autism. Speakers described academic coaching, peer and career coaching, residential supports, person-centered planning, internships, and scholarship/fee structures, noting that both programs charge a $5,000 per-semester fee and rely on scholarships and fundraising to offset costs. Members asked about dorm arrangements, individualized plans, and how students transition in and out of supports; presenters explained that Empower students remain in the program throughout, while Autism Support Program students may enter or leave services as needed. The committee next heard from Pulaski Technical College’s 3D program, a three-year transition and post-secondary program for students with intellectual and developmental disabilities focused on culinary, baking, and hospitality training. Presenters outlined integrated classes with traditional students, faded support over time, internships, and outcomes such as 97 students enrolled since the program began, 57 graduates, strong completion rates, and many graduates obtaining and retaining jobs in the food service industry. Members asked about how success is measured, why rates are not 100 percent, the role of integrated classes, tuition, and community partnerships; staff explained that grading includes technical and professional skills, tuition is $5,700 per semester, and scholarships such as GETS and FAFSA help reduce costs. They also noted plans to expand offerings and pursue accreditation through the Inclusive Higher Education Accreditation Council. Finally, the task force received a presentation from SLS Community, a Fayetteville nonprofit serving neurodivergent adults through residential supports, supported employment, community activities, and advocacy. Leaders described a long-term vision tied to the Cato Springs mixed-use development, where housing, jobs, clinical services, and community amenities would be integrated in a “live, work, play” model. They discussed a residential program, a new vocational program called Program Forge, community events, and the challenges of the “services cliff” after age 21, especially for adults with complex support needs. Members and parents spoke about the importance of trained direct support professionals, ABA-based supports, and the need for better funding and service models for adults. The meeting ended with announcements about upcoming autism-related events and a request for future discussion on task force appointments and broader issues around ABA oversight and misuse.

Bills: HR133, HR134, HR135, HR136, HR137, HR138, HR139, HR140, HR141, HR142, HR143, HR144, HR145, HR146, HR147, HR148, HR149, HR150, HR151, HR152, HR119, HR120, HR121, HR122, HR123, HR125, HR126, HR127, HR128, HR129, HR130, HR131, HR132, HCR53, HCR54, HCR55, HCR56, SCR3, SCR22, SB4, SB18, SB66, SB106, SB201, SB256, SB274, SB292, SB326, SB386, SB406, SB422, SB423, SB456, SB475, HCR3, HB1, HB3, HB27, HB71, HB214, HB225, HB241, HB244, HB306, HB312, HB313, HB314, HB345, HB366, HB383, HB446, HB473, HB511, HB514, HB655, HB730, HB743, HB836, HB983, HB1027, HB1037, HB1043, HB1082, HB1091, HB1096, HB1103, HB1126, HB1167, HB1174, HB1175, HB1230, HB1237, HB1238, SB162, SB349, SB350, SB382, SB383, HB76, HB132, HB181, HB210, HB250, HB265, HB275, HB291, HB322, HB342, HB475, HB486, HB616, HB635, HB639, HB690, HB740, HB757, HB761, HB774, HB808, HB855, HB872, HB883, HB886, HB903, HB949, HB962, HB996, HB1003, HB1036, HB1054, HB1071, HB1076, HB1078, HB1113, HB1132, HB1146, HB1232, HB1233, HB21, HB24, HB29, HB31, HB39, HB45, HB77, HB136, HB150, HB263, HB273, HB299, HB315, HB376, HB377, HB431, HB444, HB450, HB519, HB533, HB538, HB559, HB562, HB663, HB664, HB715, HB717, HB805, HB822, HB823, HB834, HB864, HB867, HB1017, HB1018, HB1068, HB1134, HB1137, HB1234, HB1235, HB1236, HB961, HB399, HB868, HB905, HB180, HB192, HB284, HB476, HB915, HB952, HB1006, HB401, HB51, HB58, HB140, HB982, HB1010, HB750, HB911, HB977, HB901, HR20, HR74, HB9, HB151, HB193, HB310, HB393, HB459, HB577, HB582, HB605, HB614, HB615, HB682, HB733, HB773

Keywords: commendation, leadership, energy sector, Shell USA, Louisiana pride, House Resolution 134, HR134, honorary resolution, Bob Lupo, Robert E. Smith Lupo, Lakeview, New Orleans, civic service, philanthropy, real estate development, Hurricane Katrina recovery, community service, charitable giving, public recognition, Louisiana House of Representatives

Transcript Highlights:

• is 518,000 this nursing's allocation is 518,000 this allocation<00:35:32.200> was<00:35:32.480
• , so for example this request, if allocated, would be allocated exactly to these things, not to our general
• , so for example this request, if allocated, would be allocated exactly to these things, not to our general
• > if<01:15:00.639> allocated<01:15:01.199> would example this request if allocated
• would example this request if allocated would be<01:15:01.480> allocated<01:15:02.080> exactly

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• And then about 18% of that is administrative fees.
• Do Do you charge any fees for any of your services? Who do you charge, and how do you charge?
• We do charge a market fee on that, like any business that promotes food and distributes food.
• In 2020, in FY25, annual funding was fully allocated within a month.
• So, as of right now, we are incorporating licensing fees and annual renewal fees for both the custom

Transcript Highlights:

• programs offered by the Texas State Technical College System and repealing the limitation on the allocation
• HB number 538 by Bernal relating to student access to certain academic records authorizing a fee.
• of a minimum domain providing authority to issue bonds providing authority to impose assessments of fees
• For certain housing developments that receive an allocation of low-income housing tax credits or for
• and the calculation of the penalty for filing a late application for such an exemption or allocation

Bills: HB14, HJR31, HB43, HB18, HB 106, HB36, HB26, HB149, HB 121, HB206, HB136, HB3114, HB2733, HB1732, HB3700, HB467, HB 1130, HB1846, HB1442, HB 1147, HB2176, HB2701, HB805, HB2890, HB 1154, HB1644, HB2118, HB1718, HB2488, HB2596, HB1971, HB2468, HB484, HB2578, HB3204, HB 1041, HB307, HB685, HB1710, HB538, HB2525, HB3125, HB2027, HB2894, HB3077, HB3684, HJR99, HB1399, HJR5, HB1330, HB2110, HJR2, HJR6, HB1587, HB14, HJR31, HB43, HB18, HB 106, HB36, HB26, HB149, HB 121, HB206, HB136, HB3114, HB2733, HB1732, HB3700, HB467, HB 1130, HB1846, HB1442, HB 1147, HB2176, HB2701, HB805, HB2890, HB 1154, HB1644, HB2118, HB1718, HB2488, HB2596, HB1971, HB2468, HB484, HB2578, HB3204, HB 1041, HB307, HB685, HB1710, HB538, HB2525, HB3125, HB2027, HB2894, HB3077, HB3684

Keywords: nuclear energy, advanced reactors, energy security, grant programs, Texas Advanced Nuclear Energy Office, farm products, tax exemption, ad valorem taxation, agriculture, Texas Constitution, livestock, producer, finance, young farmers, financial assistance, pest control, rural health, hospital funding, healthcare access, mental health services

Transcript Highlights:

• It imposes a fee on the largest emitters of greenhouse gases in Massachusetts that would go into a climate
• So this bill requires big polluters to pay a fee based on their share of historic emissions.
• The legislation would provide a new and equitable source of revenue by establishing a small fee on real
• Rather, this legislation would help the state and, of course, cities and towns better allocate funds
• Second, how this $1 billion is in total spent and allocated among the various adaptation measures...

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee hearing focused on a broad set of climate, energy, and environmental justice proposals. Early testimony strongly supported the Climate Change Superfund or “Polluter Pays” bill (H.1014/S.58), which would assess the largest fossil fuel emitters for a one-time fee based on historic emissions to fund climate adaptation. Sponsors argued the bill is modeled on Superfund cleanup principles, would target only the largest multinational polluters, would not be passed on to consumers, and would direct a significant share of funds to environmental justice communities. Committee members asked about the number of companies covered, consumer impacts, and whether the bill would address other forms of environmental destruction; sponsors said it was limited to major fossil fuel companies with a Massachusetts footprint and did not cover other pollution sources. The committee also heard testimony on a fusion energy compact proposal (S.673) that would direct the administration to develop a framework for a New England regional compact to accelerate fusion research, workforce development, and supply-chain growth. Supporters from MIT and the Association of Independent Colleges and Universities said fusion could become a major clean-energy and economic opportunity, but acknowledged the technology is not yet commercially viable and still has unresolved technical, cost, and waste-management questions. Members pressed on environmental impacts, siting, waste, costs, and whether the bill would create a compact or only a framework; sponsors said it would only create the framework and that the administration would need to negotiate with other states. Another major topic was a pilot program for nature-based climate solutions (H.971/S.??), backed by legislators, Boston Harbor Now, and UMass Boston’s Stone Living Lab. Witnesses said the bill would help speed permits for research and demonstration projects such as living shorelines, marsh restoration, and hybrid “green-to-gray” flood protections, while maintaining safeguards and protecting Indigenous and historic resources. Committee members asked how the proposal would interact with other permitting reforms and whether it could conflict with housing or wetland-related streamlining; supporters said it was complementary and aimed at making projects faster, more affordable, and more data-driven. The hearing also covered climate-safe buildings and climate adaptation funding bills. Supporters of H.1004/S.583 said current building codes do not adequately account for future flooding, heat, and wind, and the bill would add climate expertise to the building board, allow stretch resilience codes, expand floodplain standards, and create a retrofit program. Related testimony backed H.938/S.572, which would create a dedicated climate and community resilience fund financed by a small fee on property insurance premiums; advocates said it would provide stable long-term revenue for adaptation, especially in environmental justice communities, and help replace unreliable federal funding. One witness from CLF supported the climate-safe buildings and funding bills but opposed S.560/H.939 as too broad. The committee also heard testimony on airport air-quality legislation (H.997) calling for more monitoring and mitigation of ultra-fine particulate pollution around Logan Airport and Massport communities. No votes were taken during the hearing.