Transcript Highlights:

• The fund is a special fund, funded by fees from renewals for foresters and application fees for people
• After 30 years, we had to increase fees.
• We've run up against that in one of our fees, the application fees, and so we're asking that we can get
• If we look at the history of the fee and where we are currently, as proposed with this new fee for this
• As an example, 63% of our facilities were constructed prior to 1960, and 80% were constructed prior to

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:05:17.120> that the original general fund construct that the original general fund construct
• They continued our constructs around school construction being funded, if it meets very certain criteria
• 2024, in the current law for construction, that principal and... uh for construction, that principal
• In the new construct, what we're doing is we're actually evening out in Act 73.
• And then the very last thing in the House construct in the bill...

Keywords: 926, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And are now looking for construction funding.
• a fee program.
• The next one is how to structure the fees.
• You could do it as a flat fee for all manufacturers on an annual fee, or you could base it on other things
• So how do we, before we get to... and I'm concerned about the fees: where do the fees start and stop,

Bills: HF3220

Keywords: school safety, school security, emergency access, law enforcement access, master key box, secure key box, entry device, school grants, education finance, Department of Education, charter schools, school districts, cooperative units, appropriation cancellation, one-time appropriation, school safety plan, emergency preparedness, public safety, school building security

Transcript Highlights:

• We can do planning, design and construction, design only, or construction only.
• And then there is a percentage fee that, say— Across it, and then there is a percentage fee that, say
• Counties and cities could decide what that fee could be. I mean, it could be a fee on haircuts.
• Counties and cities could decide what that fee could be. I mean, it could be a fee on haircuts.
• fee, and then they put a system fee on top that they kind of glean off of that.

Summary: The task force met to focus on funding systems and incentive structures for a proposed regional waste infrastructure effort, including how a future WIPA framework might support solid waste planning in the Willamette Valley. Staff and members heard presentations from DEQ on the Clean Water State Revolving Fund, from Business Oregon on the Special Public Works Fund, and from Oregon State Treasury on state bonding capacity and the bond issuance process. Presenters explained how their programs are structured, how projects are scored or approved, what kinds of public entities and projects are eligible, and how interagency coordination and co-funding can work. DEQ emphasized that its revolving loan fund is driven by water-quality benefits and public-health criteria, while Business Oregon described a broader infrastructure loan program for public entities with no scoring system, and Treasury outlined the state’s debt-capacity process and the differences between general obligation and lottery bonds. Members used the presentations to discuss whether similar funding tools could support solid waste infrastructure, especially for transfer stations, regional hubs, and related facilities that may need to be built before Coffin Butte reaches the end of its lifespan. Several questions centered on whether public-private partnerships could qualify, whether equipment inside facilities could be financed, how repayment would work, and whether planning costs could be covered. DEQ and Business Oregon both said they could potentially collaborate on scoring or co-funding, but noted eligibility limits and the need for public ownership in many cases. Treasury said bond capacity is limited and competitive, especially for lottery bonds, and that project authorization generally runs on a two-year cycle, though unused authority can sometimes be reauthorized. In task force discussion, members debated whether the group should pursue a dedicated funding lane for the seven-county region rather than having local governments compete with other statewide needs. Some members stressed the importance of criteria to avoid stranded assets and to ensure funding is available when projects are ready, while others raised concerns about how cities and counties would generate revenue to repay debt during construction and early operations. The group also discussed flow control, system fees, and the need for regional collaboration among counties, cities, and haulers to create enough waste volume to support new infrastructure. Staff noted that pre-session filing materials for the legislature are due September 11, and the chair said the August meeting will focus on organizational structure and identifying partners. During public comment, Representative Kevin Mannix submitted written testimony supporting the WIPA concept and urging the task force to endorse it. Commissioner Bubba King of Yamhill County urged the task force to compare alternatives objectively and warned against adding bureaucracy before evaluating existing infrastructure and costs. Commissioners Kevin Cameron and Roger Nyquist of Marion and Linn counties described regional hub-and-spoke concepts, transfer stations, and intermodal options, emphasizing the need for planning, strategic siting, and collaboration with haulers and local governments.

Transcript Highlights:

• , it requires marketplace facilitators to remit this fee to the Department of Tax and Fee Administration
• We bring to our projects, our construction building projects, and our communities.
• Most residential or construction workers in general do not work full-time.
• When you're going to lower the construction workers' wage?
• Ken Ferrer, the Sacramento City Building and Construction Trades Council. Council.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We have not increased our fees since 2015, and some fees have been eliminated since that time.
• That was the program that they've got. application fees that are charged to the application fees that
• to invest right back into the construction industry through workforce development and construction education
• construction industry through workforce development, construction education, and craft training.
• application fees, their their license application fees, all<00:56:20.160> those<00:56:20.319>

Keywords: Appropriations - Room 216, 22 January, 2026; 8:00 AM, 925, all

Summary: The hearing began with the State Board of Architecture’s budget presentation. The executive director described the board’s mission to regulate architecture, landscape architecture, and certified interior design to protect public health and safety. He highlighted the board’s consolidated structure, license totals, high reciprocity rate, recent rule changes to reduce barriers to practice, and a proposed FY 2027 budget of $368,123, which included a 5% staff salary increase and higher operating costs. He also noted a newly identified need to modernize the licensing system, estimated at at least $25,000, and asked that the board not be reduced below the requested level. A board member also praised the small staff’s responsiveness and effectiveness. The State Board of Public Accountancy then presented its budget and policy requests. The executive director said the board regulates CPAs and CPA firms, oversees the CPA exam process, and has about 3,600 active individual licensees and 800 firms. The board requested only a 3% compensation increase for staff, plus a special request to allow an audit supervisor to repay the cost of a Becker review course through payroll deduction as part of succession planning. She also described a board-approved waiver program that began January 1, eliminating application fees for CPA exam candidates and retakes; 42 candidates had used the waiver in the first two weeks. In response to questions, she said the board does not assist CPAs with IRS disputes, but it does investigate complaints from the IRS, SEC, PCAOB, or others. Finally, a representative presented for the Board of Licensed Professional Counselors. She explained that the board regulates licensed counselors and psychotherapy providers, meets frequently, and has two staff members. The board’s main request was for additional investigative capacity: a full-time investigator and related funding, because complaints are currently handled by part-time investigators, contractors, and sometimes board members, which can require recusals from hearings. She said the state auditor had recently flagged complaint backlogs at regulatory agencies, supporting the request. The board also sought funding for a contractual administrative position, salary progressions, and a one-time technology increase to modify its new licensing system for the counseling compact and better search functions. Members questioned the board about its large cash balance, which was reported at about $860,000, and whether it should provide fee relief or other benefits to members; the presenter said the board would look into that and noted that revenues had increased significantly in recent years, partly due to out-of-state and telehealth-related licensing demand.

Transcript Highlights:

• , delays in the ever payment of fees.
• It clarifies that permits fee permit fees must be limited to the actual reasonable cost and must be proportional
• We do disk on our base fee.
• Yeah members, the regulatory burden construction is unbelievable.
• You pay a transaction fee to the operator, new purchase, bitcoin.

Transcript Highlights:

• construction education. construction education.
• a regional construction training fund. a regional construction training fund.
• fees during funding models or transfer fees during real<00:47:14.480> estate<00:47:14.960>
• <00:48:39.119> is Math in the field in construction is Math in the field in construction is
• workforce in construction specifically. workforce in construction specifically.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:07 Roll Call 00:00:25 Discussion of Lexington’s Housing Affordability Partnership 00:02:26 Discussion of Northern Kentucky’s Housing Blueprint 00:30:12 Discussion of Religious Institution Land Use 00:57:33 Discussion of Free-Market Solutions to Kentucky’s Housing Crisis 01:04:18 Adjournment 01:26:37, 958, all

Summary: The committee met without a quorum and began informally, with members noting this was the final information-gathering meeting on housing before a November meeting to discuss findings and report back to the LRC. The main presentation focused on the Lexington Affordable Housing Partnership, a public-private effort supported by a $10 million state allocation. Presenters described Fayette County’s housing shortage, citing a gap of more than 22,000 units, rising home prices, and the challenge of assembling land and capital for affordable projects. The partnership explained that five local banks created a $3 million capital investment fund to buy and hold land at no interest, with deed restrictions keeping the site at 80% or below area median income and allowing the banks to seek Community Reinvestment Act credit. The first project is a 12.5-acre former Transylvania University baseball field, planned for about 242 units, including detached homes, townhouses, garden-style apartments, and senior housing. Speakers said the project required extensive neighborhood engagement and zoning/development approvals, but that the planning phase is now largely complete and infrastructure work should begin soon. Financing details included roughly $64 million in additional funding through tax credit equity, market-rate loans, city support, Kentucky Housing Corporation resources, and donations from nonprofit partners. Developers said the multifamily bond applications are due to Kentucky Housing Corporation the next day, and they expect the land purchase to be repaid into the revolving fund once the property is entitled and closed, allowing the original $3 million to be redeployed for future projects. They estimated rental units could be filled within about six months of completion, while for-sale units would come online over 12 to 36 months. In discussion, members asked about regulatory barriers and project timelines. Presenters pointed to rising construction costs tied to new federal and state requirements, and one member highlighted the need to continue reviewing planning and zoning reforms to speed development plan approvals and reduce delays. The group also endorsed a possible statewide $20 million housing fund, a residential infrastructure fund, and efforts to avoid additional regulatory burdens on housing development.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Internal Revenue Service's fee structure begins at a couple hundred and includes fee amounts well
• The Internal Revenue Service's fee structure begins at a couple hundred and includes fee amounts well
• unlikely that a specific or capped fee unlikely that a specific or capped fee amount<00:08:29.120
• Minnesota Building and Construction Minnesota Building and Construction Trades<00:26:27.919>
• uh there have been union construction uh there have been union construction workers<00:27:01.120

Bills: HF2048, HF2360, HF2006, HF950, HF912, HF3140, HF2931

Keywords: individual income tax, retirement contributions, tax corrections, annuity contracts, tax year attribution, tax credit, economic development, community investment, data disclosure, Minnesota regulations, tax increment financing, municipal authority, job creation, transferred increment, public hearing, nonresident employees, income tax exemption, Minnesota taxation, employment duties, tax withholding

Transcript Highlights:

• This is the selection process for a construction manager at risk delivery.
• We don't need to pay a monthly service fee.
• First one I'll address is service fees.
• Nobody is justifying or advocating for the service fees.
• It’s a fee-for-service for the IT staff.

Summary: The task force reviewed survey results from state agencies on potential statutory revisions, with Levi reporting 70 proposals from 20 agencies and noting that about 33 might become agency pre-file bills. Members discussed the need to share the survey more broadly within higher education and to better coordinate issues involving IT and other cross-agency functions. The task force then heard from the Office of Management and Budget on three topics: concessions, architect/engineering pre-qualification, and legal notices. OMB said the concessions law is outdated and inconsistent with current practice, and suggested a collaborative rewrite to allow best-value evaluation, raise the threshold, and standardize solicitation templates. On architect/engineering pre-qualification, OMB proposed expanding authority beyond current state-agency limits and creating uniform templates. On legal notices, OMB proposed modernizing publication requirements, exploring online and abbreviated notices, and working with newspapers and other stakeholders on technology and accessibility improvements. Members asked about where concession revenues go, whether political subdivisions must follow the same rules, and how to move from discussion to action. The task force agreed to have OMB work with Legislative Council and affected stakeholders to develop bill drafts, and the motion passed unanimously. The University of North Dakota then presented a series of proposed revisions focused on public buildings and procurement. UND asked to rework the definition of construction so routine maintenance and one-for-one replacements over $250,000 would not automatically trigger public-improvement requirements, suggested raising the threshold to $500,000, and asked for more flexibility based on project complexity and risk. UND also proposed changes to public bid advertisements to reflect electronic bidding, revisions to construction manager-at-risk selection criteria, changes to architect/engineer procurement rules, an increase in the direct-hire design threshold, and a higher legislative-consent threshold for privately funded projects. The task force supported having UND work with counsel and OMB to develop bill drafts, and that motion also passed. The Department of Public Instruction concluded with proposed cleanup to credentialing and education statutes. DPI recommended reviewing its credential categories for relevance, possibly transferring credentialing authority to the Education Standards and Practices Board, removing outdated school safety patrol language, clarifying waiver provisions, and updating dyslexia screening reporting requirements so the statute reflects current practice. Members focused mainly on whether the dyslexia reporting requirement should remain, and DPI said the screening itself would continue even if reporting language were revised. No votes were taken on DPI’s suggestions, and the task force recessed after the presentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• of those attorneys' fees. ...Now moved for final passage.
• You pay that fee, and you never get it back.
• It includes provisions to make sure construction of a single-family home.
• we're going to fix the fees so they won't be gouging.
• SB1055 by Nichols, relating to the permit fees for groundwater.

Bills: SB15, SB35, SB290, SB1365, SB2568, SB18, SB427, SB1860, SB1864, SB2675, SB596, SB2858, SB3058, SB816, SB1163, SB1484, SB1898, SB1777, SB1802, SB2692, SB315, SB1585, SB1626, SB2058, SB2050, SB2105, SB2245, SB2764, SB2611, SB2497, SB2452, SB2243, SB1705, SB1244, SB1361, SB438, SB578, SB584, SB2690, SB2521, SB2487, SB2342, SB2063, SB125, SB2041, SB1962, SB1413, SB6, SB2878, SB13, SB30, SJR87, SB7, SB127, SB293, SB441, SB3059, SB57, SB512, SB1718, SB140, SB2055, SB2075, SB2018, SB1534, SB1567, SB785, SB1233, SB1580, SB1663, SB413, SB447, SB519, SB467, SB1579, SB1191, SB1021, SB1838, SB2807, SB2835, SB546, SB2121, SB2167, SB2024, SB1032, SB1049, SB1266, SB1400, SB1302, SB401, SB1596, SB1281, SB1242, SB1343, SB1346, SB2753, SB2221, SB1719, SB2177, SB552, SB646, SJR1, SB15, SB800, SB790, SB748, SB571, SB1957, SB1923, SB1896, SB1760, SB1335, SB2368, SB2477, SB2587, SB2972, SB2986, SB2965, SB1563, SB1467, SB1164, SB1137, SB614, SB705, SB961, SB918, SB955, SB869, SB850, SB863, SB1610, SB1055, SB2206, SB457, SB2337, SB1362, SB926, SB1494, SB251, SB456, SB500, SB1307, SB2615, SB2995, SB2321, SB973, SB974, SB865, SB506, SB781, SB1522, SB1558, SB510, SB667, SB763, SB2073, SB1858, SB1660, SB505, SB2900, SB1433, SB1540, SB1964, SB1300, SB1644, SB2217, SB2373, SB2431, SB1758, SB2480, SB3039, SB3047, SB3073, SB2920, SB2781, SB826, SB766, SB2460, SB527, SB1946, SB2885, SB1243, SB2610, SB2595, SB857, SB2501, SB66, SB268, SB331, SB618, SB414, SB1394, SB2425, SB898, SB993, SB442, SB735, SB784, SB2538, SB1919, SB1013, SB2215, SB2322, SB626, SB570, SB747, SB2183, SB673, SB1015, SB1447, SB1370, SB1784, SB1897, SB2873, SB2891, SB2933, SB2540, SB2681, SB2695, SB1965, SB2203, SB872, SB875, SB1030, SB1277, SB1730, SB1681, SB1152, SB2969, SB2747, SB2705, SB2541, SB1708, SB2080, SB2721, SB1986, SB2392, SB2539, SB2857, SB2799, SB2785, SB2782, SB1531, SB1927, SB1263, SB1098, SB35, SB290, SB1365, SB2568, SB18, SB427, SB1860, SB1864, SB2675, SB596, SB2858, SB3058, SB816, SB1163, SB1484, SB1898, SB1777, SB1802, SB2692, SB315, SB1585, SB1626, SB2058, SB2050, SB2105, SB2245, SB2764, SB2611, SB2497, SB2452, SB2243, SB1705, SB1244, SB1361, SB438, SB578, SB584, SB2690, SB2521, SB2487, SB2342, SB2063, SB125, SB2041, SB1962, SB1413, SCR9, SB21, SB1198, SB1405, SB2601, SB2778, HB5560, HB762, HB1584, HB 107, HB 114, HB138, HB4386, HB2495, HB581, HB3348, HB5323, HB4341, HB6, HB171, HB143, HB449, HB3486, HB4263, HB5246, HB2, HB2011, SB17

Keywords: SB 15, Texas Local Government Code, zoning preemption, housing affordability, small lots, lot size, lot density, single-family zoning, residential subdivision, municipal land use, local control, state preemption, parking requirements, setbacks, infill development, missing middle housing, lot width, lot depth, homebuilders, housing supply

Transcript Highlights:

• You would have to double those fees, right?
• Construction is tied to that.
• We have a $172 registration fee, while Louisiana's is $504.
• Vehicle registration fees were going to hit UNI.
• And so Can you kind of give an update on the electric vehicle fees?

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:28:36.360> across a 25% increase in filing fees across a 25% increase in filing fees across
• <00:37:19.240> uh Um we are in phase D construction uh Um we are in phase D construction uh
• construction manager selection is construction manager selection is ongoing.<00:40:45.760> We<
• , construction manager, and Architect, construction manager, and financial<00:40:55.680> advisor
• <00:48:24.600> is occupy while the construction is occupy while the construction is ongoing

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Budget Review Subcommittee on Justice and Judiciary received an update from the Administrative Office of the Courts on implementation of House Bill 504, the judicial branch budget, and court facility projects. AOC leaders said they do not anticipate problems balancing the outgoing biennium or fiscal year 2026, and explained that the budget changes were driven by the need to reduce costs while preserving required constitutional, court-rule, and statutory services. They also said the new filing fee increases authorized by HB 504 took effect that day and are expected to generate up to $5 million, while the reorganization is projected to save about $3 million in general fund dollars. The bulk of the presentation focused on a major reorganization of the Office of Statewide Programs, which includes specialty courts, family and juvenile services, and pretrial services. AOC said the plan eliminates 170 positions and creates 109 new ones, mainly by reducing middle-management layers, expanding regional service delivery, and cross-training staff. Officials said 110 employees had already been offered or accepted placements, 24 had chosen voluntary separation, and the final number of employees leaving remains fluid until the process concludes around August 1. They emphasized that specialty court programs were not eliminated, but state-funded treatment court contracts and behavioral health liaison positions were removed, with treatment costs shifted to Medicaid or participants where appropriate. Members asked about the process, staffing impacts, specialty court participation, juvenile services, and how AOC will monitor the changes. AOC said the reorganization was developed by leadership, HR, and legal staff under direction of the Chief Justice and approved by the Supreme Court, and that it is intended to improve efficiency and frontline support rather than reduce services. They said specialty court participant levels are being watched closely, that CDW services will continue to use outside providers for programming, and that the agency will keep judges and stakeholders informed as the new structure goes into effect. No votes were taken, and the committee did not approve minutes because a quorum was not present.

Transcript Highlights:

• process construction in the construction process construction in the construction process yeah<00
• Do you have impact fees?
• You got KH to Alamana Construction, KH to Alamana Land, Leeward Construction, or charter.
• You got KH to Alamana Construction, KH to Alamana Land, Leeward Construction, or charter.
• of the impact fees were what impact fee of the impact fees were what impact fee districts<02:16:

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Regulation HP 1731 by compost relating to the physician's Assistant licensure Compact authorizing a fee
• Chat relating to the creation of the Texas Local Government Accountability Association authorizing a fee
• Relating to the Interstate Dental and Dental Hygiene license or Compact authorizing fees, referred to
• HB 1887 by McCaffrey links the birth records and adopted persons authorizing a fee for the Committee
• HB 1937 by Craddock relating to the certain tax and fee collection procedure.

Transcript Highlights:

• ><00:02:09.280> the<00:02:09.360> Senate construction bill started in the Senate construction
• there are 17 projects, construction there are 17 projects, construction projects<00:10:38.560>
• own uh uses their own construction own uh uses their own construction equipment,<00:12:08.480>
• , recommend fees.
• , evaluate their um current fees, evaluate their um current fees, recommend<00:19:10.160> fees

Bills: HB0078, HB0087, SF0070, SF0068, SF0017, SF0043

Keywords: forest health, grant program, state forester, wildfire prevention, environmental conservation, habitat improvement, water development, feasibility studies, appropriations, water management, rehabilitation, irrigation, public works, agricultural supply, municipal water, funding, maintenance projects, tax assessments, state law, forestry management

Transcript Highlights:

• This section would permit license fees.
• These fees are being put facilities.
• That'll be in lieu of the handling fees.
• That'll be in lieu of the handling fees.
• for those state construction dollars. for those state construction dollars.

Keywords: 926, house, all

Summary: The House took up several Senate proposals of amendment and, by voice vote, concurred in each. On House Bill 928, technical corrections to fish and wildlife statutes, the House suspended the rules, heard a section-by-section explanation of changes to hunting violation points, license expiration dates, license fees, and Champion Lands reporting, and then concurred after both the committee and Ways and Means reported favorable straw polls of 11-0. On House Bill 915, the extended producer responsibility program for beverage containers, the House also suspended the rules and heard a detailed summary of Senate changes affecting handling fees, redemption requirements, PRO administration, collection-site standards, reporting, and effective dates; Environment reported a favorable straw poll and Ways and Means noted a modest fiscal impact from higher liquor bottle handling fees, after which the House concurred. The House then took up Senate Bill 328 on housing and common interest communities. The General and Housing Committee explained the Senate’s further amendments, including changes to the treasurer’s housing credit facility, consultation requirements, VHIP funding provisions, municipal housing planning, duplex and accessory dwelling unit rules, temporary multi-unit provisions, downtown and village center benefits, and common-interest-community reporting on vegetable gardens. Appropriations and Environment both reported no additional fiscal concerns and favorable straw polls, and the House concurred in the Senate proposal of amendment. Finally, the House considered House Bill 542 on PCB testing in Vermont schools. The Senate strike-all amendment would extend the testing deadline to 2035, create a future special fund for testing and remediation, require PCB testing before major renovation projects using state construction dollars, and direct ANR to report on remaining costs and funding options. After questions about how the amendment would affect schools that had already tested or completed remediation, Education explained that existing remediation reimbursements would continue and that the amendment mainly delays the mandate and sets up a future funding mechanism. The House concurred, then recessed until 5:20 p.m. to prepare for additional Senate bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• a lot of that is our construction a lot of that is our construction program<00:09:56.839> and
• that can be uh deployed by construction that can be uh deployed by construction teams<00:26:11.520
• the DMV collects the registration fees the DMV collects the registration fees and<00:33:58.399><
• Just want, on my mind, you mentioned fees, so there are some fees that you all control and set up and
• mentioned fees so there are some fees mentioned fees so there are some fees that<01:57:31.159>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee met with New Hampshire DOT Commissioner Bill Cass and Finance Director Danielle Shandra to review the agency’s FY 2026 budget. Cass gave a high-level overview of DOT’s mission, organization, funding structure, and staffing trends, noting the agency has about 650 employees across five divisions. He said the Governor’s recommended FY 2026 budget totals $95.99 million, essentially flat from FY 2025, with funding primarily from Turnpike funds, Highway funds, federal sources, and a small General Fund share for non-highway units. Members asked about how Turnpike and Highway funds are treated in state accounting, and DOT explained that while they are enterprise funds restricted to their purposes, they are considered unrestricted from the statewide perspective and are appropriated through the budget process. A major topic was staffing and budget targets. DOT said its full-time staffing level has remained relatively flat since 2014 even as vehicle miles traveled increased and vacancies rose. To meet budget targets, the department unfunded seven permanent positions and nine temporary full-time positions, and later noted additional reductions in Finance, including the elimination of two full-time positions, reduced print shop equipment purchases, and deeper cuts to overtime, temporary help, equipment, and supplies in FY 2027. DOT also explained that it shifted funding for one unmanned aerial system position from General Funds to Highway Funds, saying the change was workable because the position supports highway-related work and federal-aid-eligible activities. Members asked for clarification on the state transit operating match, and DOT explained that the Legislature had previously provided about $1.8 million annually in General Funds to help local transit agencies meet federal match requirements, but that funding was not included in this budget. DOT said that could reduce the ability to draw down some federal transit funds, though the impact may not be immediate because those funds can be used over several years. The department also described its unmanned aerial system program, saying it has been used for about five years for mapping, survey work, construction oversight, and storm damage assessment, and that it now has about five drones and two full-time positions supporting the program. DOT said it is expanding cross-training so more employees can operate drones without adding positions. No votes or formal actions were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• . in holding fines and fees over the heads of people who cannot pay them.
• dollars worth of fees.
• and a reinstatement fee on top of that before someone can resume driving again.
• I just have to pay fees upon fees upon fees. So I really hope that you rule in favor of this bill.
• It is very... ...on fees. So I really hope that you rule in favor of this bill.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Transportation held a public hearing on several bills related to driver’s license suspensions, junior operator training, online driver education, and regulation of e-bikes/scooters. A major focus was the Road to Opportunity Act (H. 3662/S. 2368), which would end license suspensions and registration holds for unpaid fines and fees unrelated to road safety, create hardship waivers and payment options, and replace suspension with nonrenewal in some cases. Supporters included the Attorney General’s office, ACLU, CPCS, Greater Boston Legal Services, transportation and anti-poverty advocates, and several affected residents who described job loss, housing instability, and difficulty paying toll and fee debts. They argued the current system punishes poverty, disproportionately affects Black and Latino residents, and is costly to enforce. Some testimony also noted that the bill would preserve suspensions for dangerous driving offenses. District Attorney Marion Ryan testified in favor of two bills: one allowing partial payment plans for certain RMV penalties and another closing a loophole that makes the penalty for violating a hardship license less severe than driving after a full suspension. Senator Sear and Representative Reed also spoke for the Road to Opportunity Act, while the AAG said the Attorney General supports it. Committee members asked about RMV implementation and whether the agency supports payment plans; Ryan said the RMV has been cooperative but believes legislation is needed. No votes were taken during the hearing. The committee also heard testimony on bills affecting young drivers. Senator Lovely and Representative Cruz supported a bill to create a junior operator license training fund, expand access for low- and moderate-income families, require refunds in some cases, and allow earlier passenger privileges. Another bill would make virtual instructor-led driver education permanent; AAA and several driving school owners supported it as an access and convenience measure, while other instructors opposed it, arguing in-person instruction is safer and more effective. Finally, Senator Collins and others testified for a transportation safety bill regulating motorized bicycles, scooters, e-bikes, and mopeds, increasing fines, requiring insurance for commercial use, and requiring public hearings and accessibility review for new bike lanes. Advocates for blind and disabled pedestrians supported that bill, while some transportation and business voices backed it as a safety and planning measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• This $4.4 million proposal increases water use permit and application fees and water use fee rates, which
• To increase the daily permit fees from $7 to $10 and the annual permit fee from $35 to $45.
• as the next construction season.
• Again, regarding the fee increases, can you explain to me how fee increases from $7 to $10 or $35 to
• So, Commissioner, would you say that the DNR supports the fees and fee increase mechanism for users of