Transcript Highlights:

• fee. The Senate does not pick that up. fee. The Senate does not pick that up.
• The board of social work has a fee establishing a new fee for the interstate compact.
• The board of social work has a fee establishing a new fee for the interstate compact.
• The board of social work has a fee establishing a new fee for the interstate compact.
• The board of social work has a fee establishing a new fee for the interstate compact.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We require clear disclosure to consumers before any fee is charged.
• To your point, these fees can already be charged, but then the accusation could be made that the fees
• Who determines whether an allowable fee is reasonably related to?
• Who’s making money off of the fee believes is reasonable.
• Using the fee structure to gouge people further.

Summary: The Commerce and Tourism Committee heard and reported favorably several bills. SB 386, by Sen. Trumbull, would create consumer rights and manufacturer obligations for defective farm equipment, modeled on lemon-law concepts, and passed without opposition. SB 528, also by Sen. Trumbull, would strengthen Florida’s manufacturing sector through Department of Commerce responsibilities, a chief manufacturing officer role, workforce grants, and reporting requirements; it drew questions about whether it differed from last year’s bill and was supported by several appearance forms before passing favorably. SB 806, a right-to-repair bill for portable wireless devices and agricultural equipment, drew the most testimony: supporters said it would expand consumer choice and repair access, while dealers and industry representatives argued existing manufacturer agreements already provide access and warned the bill could disrupt dealer/manufacturer relationships and future technology; it nevertheless passed favorably. The committee also approved SB 696 on trademark registration, which would modernize the trademark classification system, allow online applications, and clarify document verification procedures, and SB 930, which creates a 15-member Florida Retirement Savings Task Force to study retirement coverage gaps and recommend policy options without imposing employer mandates. SB 826, by Sen. Leak, would address reward cards that function like gift cards but expire, while excluding loyalty programs; the Florida Restaurant and Lodging Association raised concerns about unintended consequences and the need for tighter definitions, but the bill was reported favorably after the sponsor said the language would be refined. SB 874 would expand professional licensure reciprocity for experienced out-of-state surveyors and mappers to address workforce shortages, and it also passed favorably. After a pause, the committee took up CS/SB 838 on electronic payments of retail installment contracts. Sen. Yarbrough said the bill clarifies that reasonable convenience fees for optional electronic payments are permissible, provided they are disclosed and a fee-free option remains available, to reduce ambiguity and litigation. Members questioned whether the bill could authorize or expand fees and whether the “reasonable” standard was sufficiently clear; the sponsor said the fees are tied to processor costs and are not intended as revenue. An amendment adding the word “retail” was adopted, and the committee substitute was reported favorably. Several members later asked to be recorded as voting in the affirmative on bills they had missed, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is getting rid of the delivery fee.
• the fee also administering the fee the fee also creates<00:31:43.880> some<00:31:44.120> confusion
• No one wants fees increased.
• No one wants fees increased.
• No one wants fees increased.

Bills: HF5

Keywords: tax modification, transportation funding, electric vehicle tax, Social Security subtraction, retail delivery fee, motor vehicle registration, state budget, transportation policy, 1183, house

Summary: The Transportation Committee resumed consideration of House File 5, which would reduce transportation-related revenues while also providing tax relief, including a subtraction for Social Security income, elimination of the delivery fee, and a cap on automatic gas tax indexing. The committee adopted the A1 author’s amendment, which added the phrase “using existing resources,” and then proceeded to public testimony. Representative Joy described the bill as making Minnesota more affordable, while several members and testifiers raised concerns about the impact on transportation funding and road maintenance. MnDOT Commissioner Nancy Doppenberg testified that reductions in planned transportation investments would worsen pavement, bridge, and roadway conditions, reduce construction projects and jobs, and add to an already large funding gap. Committee discussion focused on the estimated revenue losses from the bill, including about $45 million in fiscal year 2026 and $55 million annually from repealing the delivery fee, plus additional losses from capping gas tax indexing, for a combined transportation revenue reduction of about $131 million in the 2026-27 biennium. Members also asked about bridge aesthetics, paint, transit impacts, and whether other mandates and cost increases should be considered alongside revenue reductions. Supporters of the delivery fee repeal, including the Minnesota Grocers Association and Minnesota Retailers Association, argued the fee is costly to administer, confusing to consumers, and disproportionately burdens small businesses and lower-income or disabled consumers who rely on delivery. The Minnesota Association of Townships and the Minnesota Transportation Alliance emphasized that rural and local governments face major road and bridge funding needs and warned that reducing revenue would shift costs to property taxpayers or leave projects unfunded. No final vote on the bill was taken in the portion of the meeting provided; the committee continued with testimony and member questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Some are hooked to the single fee program.
• Hooked to the single fee program, and then the single fee transponders are not transferable between vehicles
• The single-fee transponders are married...
• And not pay the fee again.
• any fee increase or be public hearings.

Keywords: 994, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Infrastructure Committee first returned to engrossed House Bill 4419, which would require the West Virginia Parkways Authority to hold public hearings and give notice before increasing tolls, rents, fees, or charges, and would allow legislative auditing of related revenues and sinking funds. The committee debated two amendments related to E-ZPass transponders: one from the Senator from Jefferson to clarify that the Parkway Authority would not be required to read every plate failed on a 4-4 tie, and one from the Senator from Wetzel to codify a restriction on transferring single-fee transponders between vehicles was rejected after discussion with counsel and the Parkways Authority about current policy, convenience for users, and possible effects on the bill. The committee then approved a motion to send HB 4419 to the full Senate with a recommendation that it do pass, but first be referred to Finance, and a separate motion to send it to Finance passed. The committee also considered engrossed House Bill 4563, on which Senator Randolph moved for a second reference to Finance because of fiscal concerns. After discussion of the newly filed fiscal note and the bill’s potential revenue impact, that motion failed by a 4-5 division vote. The committee then voted to report HB 4563 to the full Senate with a recommendation that it do pass. Finally, the committee took up House Bill 4538, which increases fines and penalties for failing to obey traffic control instructions or speeding in construction and work zones, and also references penalties tied to distracted driving provisions. Counsel noted the bill’s possible overlap with existing vehicular homicide penalties and that it had no fiscal note. Jason Pizzitella of the Contractors Association testified in support, emphasizing work-zone safety and recent fatalities, while senators from Fayette, Randolph, and Jefferson also supported the bill and discussed the need to protect workers and drivers. The committee adopted a motion to report HB 4538 to the full Senate with a recommendation that it do pass, and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Providers may offer certain services that do require a fee, such as expedited delivery fees, and also
• , late fees, or interest.
• simply paying bills late and accumulating fees, late fees, penalty fees, interest, and.
• Is this a membership fee?
• Um, we know that these fees have gone up. Some didn't charge membership fees, now they do.

Bills: SB27, SB30, SB293, HB4, HB2974, HB5138, SJR36, SJR50, SJR63, SCR12, SCR39, SB2023, SB62, SB666, SB847, SB284, SB854, SB810, SB1505, SB583, SB507, SB1434, SB1772, SB2016, SB1122, SB731, SB397, SB508, SB1436, SB287, SB1882, SB393, SB1791, SB209, SB2429, SB1085, SB1975, SB2717, SB1262, SB636, SB2056, SB884, SB1200, SB1845, SB2458, SB801, SB3014, SB3013, SB758, SB2797, SB2076, SB2876, SB1640, SB1449, SB1181, SB1234, SB2926, SB2841, SB1528, SB1854, SB317, SB1250, SB2082, SB1237, SB2819, SB629, SB2608, SB1602, SB2009, SB867, SB640, SB1698, SB2680, SB913, SB1071, SB1086, SB1087, SB1483, SB1444, SB1553, SB1556, SB1703, SB2133, SB2297, SB2298, SB2622, SB2955, SB2334, SB1367, SB2044, SB2363, SB2565, SB1888, SB3036, SB3057, SB3043, SB3063, SB3035, SB203, SB2688, SB2522, SB2459, SB2655, SB2251, SB1884, SB2928, SB2566, SB2549, SB2553, SB2919, SB1944, SB1232, SB1798, SB2603, SB2607, SB2683, SB1319, SB3045, SB3071, HB796, HB1523, HB5294, HB748, HB3395, HB180, HB3171, HB146, HB5596, HB5694, HB1135, HB3225, HB186, HB1449, HB3793, HB112, HB104, HB3336, HB3520, HB3320, HB5663, HB2399, HB111, HB3483, HB4580, HB3748, HB632, HB4730, HB5690, HB5689, HB3385, HB4359, HB5381, HB123, HB5606, HB1057, HB3664, HCR141, HCR40, HCR59

Keywords: judicial conduct, judges discipline, judicial compensation, retirement benefits, judicial transparency, SJR 50, constitutional amendment, Texas Constitution, Article VIII, securities tax, transaction tax, occupation tax, financial markets, broker-dealer, stock exchange, securities exchange, trading platform, clearing agency, transfer agent, FINRA

Bills: SB27, SB30, SB293, HB4, HB2974, HB5138, SJR36, SJR50, SJR63, SCR12, SCR39, SB2023, SB62, SB666, SB847, SB284, SB854, SB810, SB1505, SB583, SB507, SB1434, SB1772, SB2016, SB1122, SB731, SB397, SB508, SB1436, SB287, SB1882, SB393, SB1791, SB209, SB2429, SB1085, SB1975, SB2717, SB1262, SB636, SB2056, SB884, SB1200, SB1845, SB2458, SB801, SB3014, SB3013, SB758, SB2797, SB2076, SB2876, SB1640, SB1449, SB1181, SB1234, SB2926, SB2841, SB1528, SB1854, SB317, SB1250, SB2082, SB1237, SB2819, SB629, SB2608, SB1602, SB2009, SB867, SB640, SB1698, SB2680, SB913, SB1071, SB1086, SB1087, SB1483, SB1444, SB1553, SB1556, SB1703, SB2133, SB2297, SB2298, SB2622, SB2955, SB2334, SB1367, SB2044, SB2363, SB2565, SB1888, SB3036, SB3057, SB3043, SB3063, SB3035, SB203, SB2688, SB2522, SB2459, SB2655, SB2251, SB1884, SB2928, SB2566, SB2549, SB2553, SB2919, SB1944, SB1232, SB1798, SB2603, SB2607, SB2683, SB1319, SB3045, SB3071, HB796, HB1523, HB5294, HB748, HB3395, HB180, HB3171, HB146, HB5596, HB5694, HB1135, HB3225, HB186, HB1449, HB3793, HB112, HB104, HB3336, HB3520, HB3320, HB5663, HB2399, HB111, HB3483, HB4580, HB3748, HB632, HB4730, HB5690, HB5689, HB3385, HB4359, HB5381, HB123, HB5606, HB1057, HB3664, HCR141, HCR40, HCR59

Keywords: judicial conduct, judges discipline, judicial compensation, retirement benefits, judicial transparency, SJR 50, constitutional amendment, Texas Constitution, Article VIII, securities tax, transaction tax, occupation tax, financial markets, broker-dealer, stock exchange, securities exchange, trading platform, clearing agency, transfer agent, FINRA

Transcript Highlights:

• Under the stuff that some old at the gas station, their licensing fee I think is a hundred bucks, right
• Does this require a $500... dollar fee on every package? Every product.
• The amendment makes clear that school district cannot require parents to pay attorney's fees in their
• Before a school board, parents can only be liable for attorney's fees if they bring a frivolous suit
• They just cannot require the parent to. to pay attorney's fees if the grievance is at a local level.

Bills: SCR5, SCR13, SB3, SB6, SB10, SB12, SB13, SB15, SB17, SB18, SB19, SB24, SB35, SB57, SB65, SB112, SB284, SB290, SB388, SB400, SB402, SB412, SB495, SB499, SB502, SB509, SB621, SB706, SB740, SB815, SB842, SB854, SB875, SB893, SB917, SB974, SB1025, SB1061, SB1073, SB1106, SB1268, SB1281, SB1300, SB1362, SB1379, SB1447, SB1451, SB1555, SB1902, SJR36, SJR12, SCR13, SCR25, SCR5, SCR22, SCR12, SCR24, SB495, SB412, SB10, SB18, SB565, SB372, SB842, SB765, SB62, SB19, SB666, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB706, SB847, SB290, SB13, SB1248, SB740, SB14, SB1006, SB504, SB917, SB925, SB388, SB1902, SB1121, SB995, SB857, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB35, SB6, SB815, SB3, SB1281, SB1379, SB1300, SB1497, SB1499, SB1498, SB1451, SB1061, SB15, SB65, SB241, SB304, SB402, SB499, SB621, SB974, SB1023, SB1024, SB1025, SB1106, SB686, SB112, SB371, SB204, SB400, SB609, SB1447, SB670, SB502, SB427, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1555, SB1362, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB987, SB1539, SB893, SB447, SB875, SB406, SB509, SB985, SB965, SB17, SB1119, SB1505, SB12, SB24, SB57, SB1194, SB1253, SB1215, SB1532, SB1268, SB1302, SB856, SB650, SB583, SB673, SB840, SJR57, SCR8, SB213, SB681, SB1172, SB1252, SB378, SB610, SB918, SB1343, SB608, SB487, SB955, SB957, SB988, SB990, SB1019, SB1021, SB1120, SB251, SB958, SB535, SB761, SB1, SB541, SB315, SB379, SB1018, SB1737, SB266, SB1415

Keywords: SCR 5, Senate Concurrent Resolution 5, Texas School for the Deaf, TSD, Robert Rives, gymnasium naming, building naming, honorary resolution, commemorative resolution, deaf education, hard of hearing, Gallaudet University, alumni hall of fame, football coach, school facility naming, education K-16, State Affairs, Texas Legislature, public school tribute, water rights

Bills: SCR5, SCR13, SB3, SB6, SB10, SB12, SB13, SB15, SB17, SB18, SB19, SB24, SB35, SB57, SB65, SB112, SB284, SB290, SB388, SB400, SB402, SB412, SB495, SB499, SB502, SB509, SB621, SB706, SB740, SB815, SB842, SB854, SB875, SB893, SB917, SB974, SB1025, SB1061, SB1073, SB1106, SB1268, SB1281, SB1300, SB1362, SB1379, SB1447, SB1451, SB1555, SB1902, SJR36, SJR12, SCR13, SCR25, SCR5, SCR22, SCR12, SCR24, SB495, SB412, SB10, SB18, SB565, SB372, SB842, SB765, SB62, SB19, SB666, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB706, SB847, SB290, SB13, SB1248, SB740, SB14, SB1006, SB504, SB917, SB925, SB388, SB1902, SB1121, SB995, SB857, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB35, SB6, SB815, SB3, SB1281, SB1379, SB1300, SB1497, SB1499, SB1498, SB1451, SB1061, SB15, SB65, SB241, SB304, SB402, SB499, SB621, SB974, SB1023, SB1024, SB1025, SB1106, SB686, SB112, SB371, SB204, SB400, SB609, SB1447, SB670, SB502, SB427, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1555, SB1362, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB987, SB1539, SB893, SB447, SB875, SB406, SB509, SB985, SB965, SB17, SB1119, SB1505, SB12, SB24, SB57, SB1194, SB1253, SB1215, SB1532, SB1268, SB1302, SB856, SB650, SB583, SB673, SB840, SJR57, SCR8, SB213, SB681, SB1172, SB1252, SB378, SB610, SB918, SB1343, SB608, SB487, SB955, SB957, SB988, SB990, SB1019, SB1021, SB1120, SB251, SB958, SB535, SB761, SB1, SB541, SB315, SB379, SB1018, SB1737, SB266, SB1415

Keywords: SCR 5, Senate Concurrent Resolution 5, Texas School for the Deaf, TSD, Robert Rives, gymnasium naming, building naming, honorary resolution, commemorative resolution, deaf education, hard of hearing, Gallaudet University, alumni hall of fame, football coach, school facility naming, education K-16, State Affairs, Texas Legislature, public school tribute, water rights

Transcript Highlights:

• And they’re very specific impact fees. They’re very specific impact fees under that NRS.
• fees under 278B. 278B is impact fees for new development, and now you just say impact fees.
• Senate Bill 103 does define, I believe, building fees and sewer fees, for example.
• fees.
• We've been waiving sewer connection fees and building permit fees.

Keywords: 909, all

Transcript Highlights:

• First, attorney's fees.
• still a junk fee.
• We have mandatory fees, we have optional fees, and we have what are called situational fees, meaning
• Then there are fees authorized by law, such as a fee for a bounced check, parking fees, electric vehicle
• Are you saying that those additional fees, not the discretionary fees or individual fees like dog washing

Summary: The committee heard several bills, beginning with AB 1521, the Judiciary Committee’s civil law omnibus measure. The bill makes a number of minor, mostly clarifying changes, including repealing obsolete Government Code provisions, allowing juvenile courts to hear petitions to establish records of birth, death, or marriage, requiring notice of probate petitions to the Department of Child Support Services, and correcting typos in existing law. It had no opposition and was moved on a do-pass basis to Appropriations, though it was later placed on call pending additional votes. Members then heard AB 57, which would reserve at least 10% of California’s Home Purchase Assistance Program funds for descendants of formerly enslaved people. The author and supporters framed it as a reparative, race-neutral-by-lineage effort to address historic housing discrimination and the racial wealth gap, while opponents argued it was an unconstitutional racial proxy and should instead be based on individual injury. The bill drew strong support and opposition testimony, was amended, and was approved on a do-pass as amended vote to Appropriations, then placed on call. AB 495, the Family Preparedness Plan Act, was heard next. The bill would expand and standardize caregiving and guardianship tools for families facing immigration-related separation, including broader use of caregiver authorization affidavits, recognition of non-relative extended family caregivers, and a new short-term guardianship process that preserves parental rights. Supporters said it would reduce trauma and help children remain with trusted caregivers; there was no opposition testimony. The committee approved it on a do-pass to Human Services vote and placed it on call. The committee also heard AB 392, which would address non-consensual sharing of sexually explicit media by requiring uploader consent certifications, faster takedown procedures, and civil remedies against uploaders and hosting sites. A survivor testified in support, and members discussed implementation details and possible amendments; the bill was moved on a do-pass as amended basis to Appropriations and placed on call. AB 692, which would prohibit employer “stay-or-pay” debt agreements that require workers to repay training or other costs if they leave or are terminated, also advanced despite opposition from business and industry groups concerned about impacts on signing bonuses and voluntary training programs. It was sent to Appropriations on a do-pass as amended vote and placed on call, along with AB 1234, a wage-claim enforcement bill aimed at reducing Labor Commissioner delays and adding consequences for employers who fail to participate in the process. The committee also heard AB 394, which expands protections for transit workers and allows transit agencies to seek restraining orders against violent riders; it received broad support, some concern about system-wide bans, and was discussed with amendments that preserved judicial discretion.

Transcript Highlights:

• and also support cruise industry. green fee and climate u mitigation, green fee and climate u mitigation
• <00:22:18.720> is these issues that the green fee is these issues that the green fee is trying
• this revenue to align with the green fee this revenue to align with the green fee objectives<00:
• fee, and we collect those revenues.
• 00:29:02.320> to<00:29:02.559> our fee which is the fee to tie up to our fee which is the

Bills: SB2816

Keywords: enterprise zones, economic development, innovation enterprise, job creation, Hawaii, 910, house, all

Summary: The committees heard House Bill 2195, HD1, which would replace the existing transit accommodations tax on cruise ships with a per-passenger infrastructure fee collected by the Department of Transportation and deposited into a new cruise ship special fund. Testimony included support from Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings and comments from the Tax Foundation of Hawaii warning that the bill should remain narrowly tied to harbor-related uses to avoid potential Tonnage Clause issues. The Department of Transportation testified that cruise-related harbor work includes pier repairs, dredging, terminal upgrades, and shore power, and said a dedicated revenue stream would help prioritize cruise infrastructure needs. The Attorney General’s office said it had submitted written comments but did not address questions about the litigation or constitutional background. Members questioned whether the new special fund was necessary when the existing harbor special fund already finances similar improvements. DOT said the funds overlap and suggested the bill could be amended to use the harbor special fund with a separate cruise subaccount, while still preserving a dedicated revenue stream and separate accounting. DOT also said it currently collects port entry, dockage, and per-head passenger fees from cruise ships and that existing cruise-related expenditures from the harbor special fund have not been challenged. The chair ultimately recommended moving HB 2195 forward as introduced, while continuing discussions about the fund structure and awaiting further clarity from the Attorney General and DOT. In decision-making, the committees voted to pass HB 2195, HD1, as is. They also voted to pass House Bill 916, HD1, relating to the low-income housing tax credit, which would allow certain state low-income housing tax credits to offset state transient accommodations taxes in the same county and make Act 129 of 2016 permanent. Both the Committee on Tourism and the Committee on Economic Development and Technology adopted the chair’s recommendation to pass HB 916, HD1, unamended. The hearing was then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• We understand that nobody likes paying impact fees.
• After 20 years of not raising an impact fee, when that impact fee does finally get adjusted for growth
• You know, this isn't about not paying impact fees.
• Every person I talk to is willing to pay impact fees.
• And so I think it's not about not paying impact fees.

Summary: The committee met with a quorum present and heard a series of bills, mostly local claims and growth-management or permitting measures. SB 16, SB 14, and SB 24 were uncontested claims bills providing relief for injuries or damages involving the City of St. Petersburg and Miami-Dade County; each was described as settled or favorably reported by a special master, and each was reported favorably without debate. SB 288, a negotiated bill on rural electric cooperatives, was presented as a clarification to protect co-op authority over generation and power purchases while preserving consumer protections; it drew support from industry stakeholders and was reported favorably. SB 830 created a public-records exemption for certain local administrators and their families’ personal information, citing threats against city managers, and it also passed favorably. The committee also considered several land-use and permitting bills. SB 1138 would create a registry of qualified professionals to conduct pre-application review for plats and development, aiming to reduce delays and backlogs; local government groups raised concerns about preemption and preserving quasi-judicial authority, but the bill passed favorably with one no vote. SB 168 expanded public nuisance law to include gambling houses, increased penalties, and authorized attorney’s fees and foreclosure of unpaid fees; it was reported favorably. SB 686 revised the agricultural enclave statute to create a public-hearing process for certain residential projects in urban service areas, with a sunset date later amended to June 30, 2026; conservation and planning groups raised concerns about local planning authority and public participation, but the bill passed favorably. SB 548, a growth-management and impact-fee cleanup bill, clarified plan-based methodology, extraordinary circumstances, interlocal agreements, and refund procedures for impact fees. Local government and development stakeholders testified that it would improve predictability while preserving flexibility, though some sought further refinement on fee increases and refunds; the bill was amended and then reported favorably. SB 1234 addressed building permits and inspections, including permit validity, small-project exemptions, temporary hurricane protection, standardized permit forms, and expanded use of private providers; county officials objected to reduced oversight, while builders and private-provider advocates supported the measure. After testimony and debate, the bill was reported favorably. At the end of the meeting, Senator Jones requested to be recorded on several votes, and the committee adjourned after no further business.

Transcript Highlights:

• have to pay the fee.
• It just said that if there's a fee, say there's a material fee or something like that.
• fee.
• fees.
• Yes ma'am, we call it a fee. There’s a response... Yes, we call it a fee.

Bills: HB61, HB327, HB253, HB297

Keywords: home school, career and technical education, public schools, K-12 education, enrollment policy, parental leave, state employees, adoption, employee benefits, aircraft tax, aviation tax, sales tax exemption, use tax exemption, lease tax, rental tax, commercial aircraft, air carrier, airline, aircraft parts, maintenance

Transcript Highlights:

• change will help align the filing fee change will help align the filing fee with<00:04:24.840>
• the $1,000 filing fee is quite an outlier in relation to other filing fees.
• It's not really a fee. It's not like you pay your fee and it's gone.
• It's not really a fee. It's not like you pay your fee and it's gone.
• It's not really a fee. It's not like you pay your fee and it's gone.

Bills: HF414, HF768, HF359

Keywords: data practices, filing fee, government transparency, complaints, public access, free speech, human rights, censorship, protected speech, Minnesota Department of Human Rights, real property, partition, eminent domain, transfer on death deeds, property rights, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• They don't handle the question of fee caps; they emphasize fee disclosure.
• fees.
• There are no mandatory fees, no late fees, and no interest.
• fees.
• There are no mandatory fees, no late fees, and no interest.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several financial services bills, with the main focus on cryptocurrency kiosk regulation, financial literacy, and earned wage access. Legislators and witnesses described widespread crypto-related scams targeting older adults, often involving impersonation, urgency, spoofed phone numbers, and rapid transfers through kiosks that are difficult to trace or recover. Supporters of the kiosk bills said Massachusetts needs licensing, registration, transaction limits, warning notices, receipts, refund protections, and other safeguards; some also urged a “pause” or hold on transactions to give victims time to reconsider and allow law enforcement to intervene. The Attorney General’s office, AARP, local law enforcement, and several prosecutors and sheriffs backed the consumer-protection approach, while Bitcoin Depot supported a narrower regulatory framework but opposed low fee caps and strict daily limits, arguing they would function like a ban and reduce legitimate use. Witnesses from Waltham police, Middlesex and Essex County law enforcement, and the AG’s office said crypto scams are growing quickly, losses are often unrecoverable once funds move, and current tools are limited. They described cases involving elderly victims losing thousands of dollars, and said warnings alone are not enough because scammers keep victims on the phone and guide them through the process. Some witnesses said a temporary hold or refund mechanism has worked in at least one case, while others emphasized that transaction limits and visible disclosures could reduce harm even if they do not stop fraud entirely. The AG’s office also said it would submit written opposition to separate earned wage advance legislation, while DailyPay testified in support of that bill, saying earned wage access helps workers bridge short-term gaps without debt or credit reporting. The committee also heard support for mandatory financial literacy education from Representative Jim Hawkins, who said high school students need instruction on credit, debt, and inflation before they enter adulthood. In addition, the committee took testimony on litigation financing bills from insurance industry representatives, who argued for disclosure and regulation of predatory litigation lending and warned about foreign interference and reduced plaintiff recoveries. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing; members asked questions throughout, and the chair noted the need to move testimony along because of time constraints.

Transcript Highlights:

• Some fees date back to 1959, while the most recent fee adjustments for some programs were made in 2013
• Some fees date back to 1959, while the most recent fee adjustments for some programs were made in 2013
• We commissioned an independent fee study to demonstrate in detail appropriate fee recommendations for
• So our rationale for the... ...limited fee approval.
• So the fees reference refers to examination fees as they are charged every four years based on our statute

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee 5 on State Administration heard presentations from Go-Biz and the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation on the Governor’s budget proposals. Go-Biz described California Jobs First, the state’s 10-year economic development strategy, and emphasized support for small businesses, workforce development, and targeted investment in sectors such as ag tech, life sciences, semiconductors, and advanced manufacturing. Members raised concerns about federal policy changes, tariffs, tourism, housing, child care, and whether state incentives are truly additive; Go-Biz responded that it tracks federal actions closely, works with chambers and advocates, and uses programs like California Competes to target jobs that would not otherwise come to California. The committee then reviewed the proposal to restore the California Competes grant program with $60 million. Go-Biz said the grant would help businesses that cannot use the nonrefundable tax credit, and explained the program’s five-year contracts, milestone-based awards, and recapture provisions. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the grant could be effective but recommended stronger oversight and clearer eligibility criteria, while also noting the 30% cap in trailer bill language may be too restrictive given the smaller funding level. Public testimony supported the grant and suggested considering refundability or transferability for the tax credit to broaden access for smaller and startup businesses. Members also heard the CHIPS-related proposal for $25 million to support Natcast’s semiconductor design and collaboration facility in Sunnyvale. Go-Biz and public witnesses argued the state investment would help secure a major federal research facility, retain engineering talent, and leverage billions in broader investment, while the LAO recommended rejecting the item because of its dependence on uncertain federal funding and the state’s budget condition. The committee also considered a $17 million continuation of CA RISE, which supports employment social enterprises; Go-Biz and several grantees cited strong job placement and workforce outcomes, while the LAO recommended rejection absent a more rigorous evaluation, noting prior LA RISE evidence did not show long-term employment gains. Finally, the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation presented budget requests for IT security and rent increases, and a trailer bill to raise fees across several programs. DFPI said decades-old fee schedules, inflation, and new regulatory responsibilities have created a structural deficit and warned the department could face insolvency without adjustments. The LAO recommended approving the fee increases only on a three-year limited-term basis and asked for more detailed revenue plans for programs not covered by the proposal, so the Legislature can assess actual collections and market impacts before making the changes permanent.

Transcript Highlights:

• We collect over 125 fees.
• fees on this list.
• However, it didn't make this fee report because we weren't charging the fee yet.
• The fee on the blackout plate is an additional $25 on top of the registration fee.
• One is for data processing fees. The other is for telecommunication fees.

Summary: The Government Finance Committee met with new leadership, approved the December 11 minutes, and received a series of informational updates on the state’s finances and related policy issues. The Office of Management and Budget reported the general fund is tracking very close to forecast, with revenues about $2 million above forecast and an estimated ending balance of about $397 million, higher than previously expected. OMB also reviewed balances in major funds, including the budget stabilization fund, legacy fund, foundation aid stabilization fund, social services fund, and strategic investment and improvements fund, and answered questions about oil tax revenues and fund management. The Tax Department provided updates on taxable sales and purchases by county and industry, noting Cass County as the largest county by taxable sales and that retail trade remains the largest industry sector. Tax Commissioner Brian Kroshus also discussed the federal One Big Beautiful Bill Act and its estimated effects on North Dakota income tax collections, explaining that the projected revenue impacts are measured against a 2025 baseline and that some provisions are temporary while others are permanent. He also reported that primary residence tax credit applications were running ahead of last year, with more than 154,000 received so far and an expectation of roughly 160,000-plus applications. The committee also heard fee-study presentations from the Department of Transportation and the Information Technology Department. DOT explained that driver’s license fees cover only about half of program costs and that the shortfall is subsidized by the highway fund, while also noting recent changes such as the blackout plate and motor vehicle excise tax distribution changes. NDIT described its internal service fund model, current billing structure, and possible future changes to simplify invoices and billing frequency. Legislative staff also updated the committee on office space needs in Bismarck-Mandan and on legislative branch space planning, and subcommittees reported progress on fixed-route transit funding and regional jail capacity, including a visit to the Burleigh-Morton detention facility and discussion of future prison bed needs. No formal votes or legislative actions beyond approving the minutes were taken, and the committee adjourned with its next meeting set for June 25.

Transcript Highlights:

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

Keywords: 995, all

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

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 1417 really deals with those indigent defense fees and probation supervision fees, and also
• has a study to look at all fees.
• supervision fees.
• supervision fees.
• DOCR has said it spends nearly $1 million administering the fees and trying to collect the fees.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee met to review fiscal aspects of House Bills 1417 and 1425, both part of a broader criminal justice reentry package. HB 1417 would eliminate the $35 public defender application fee and end court-ordered reimbursement of indigent defense costs, while also removing the $55 monthly community supervision fee. Testimony from the Commission on Legal Counsel for Indigents and the Department of Corrections said the bill would replace lost revenue with general fund appropriations of about $310,000 for indigent defense and $1.5 million for supervision fees, and that the fees are rarely collected and can hinder reentry. Representative Clemene said the bill is intended to reduce barriers to successful community reintegration and improve data and supervision practices. HB 1425 would create and fund front-end diversion, deflection, and pretrial services programs. Supporters described it as allowing prosecutors and local jurisdictions to divert appropriate low-level offenders from prosecution, establish deflection programs for people with behavioral health needs, and expand pretrial services. The bill includes a pilot program in three counties, a $1 million appropriation to DOCR for one FTE and contracts with local providers, $750,000 to DHS for treatment services, and $55,000 for a study of pretrial services cost savings. Committee members asked several questions about how the pilot counties would be chosen, how the consultant study would be procured, and what services the DHS funds would cover. The committee also heard House Bill 1603, which would provide a $500,000 matching grant for Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act compliance, with $100,000 available to each of North Dakota’s five tribes if matched. Sponsor testimony said the funds would support a Historical Society NAGPRA compliance committee and help catalog and repatriate human remains and cultural items in coordination with tribes. After questions about the federal mandate and the difficulty of identifying artifacts, the committee voted 4-0 to give HB 1603 a do-pass recommendation, with Senator Meyer assigned to carry it forward.