Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 210, it's an act to amend Title 42 relative to retroactivity. Return to the calendar.
• It is an act to amend Title 42 and Act 492 of the 2024 Regular Session to provide for retroactivity.
• What we did is we change the retroactivity for statewide elected officials, and that's basically what
• What we did is we change the retroactivity for statewide elected officials, and that's basically what

Bills: SCR12, HB221, HB509, HCR58, SB78, SB25, SB80, SB132, SB155, SB157, SB202, SB228, SB250, SB414, SB433, SB479, SB513, SCR9, SCR58, SB65, SB215, SB249, SB269, SB282, SB296, SB323, SB363, SB369, SB474, SB490, SB492, SB500, SB514, HCR32, HB17, HB41, HB73, HB223, HB244, HB759, HB906, HB966, HB1006, HB1009, HB1086, HB1107, HB1112, HB1215, HB1242, SB217, SB283, SB469, HB36, HB42, HB74, HB119, HB159, HB259, HB302, HB414, HB459, HB776, HB848, HB956, HB1017, HB1028, HB1095, SB208, SB312, SB382, SB389, HB210, HB258, HB359, HB368, HB468, HB552, HB732, HB784, HB870, HB953, HB1117, HB1236

Keywords: logging, recognition, John Keith, environment, safety, Mississippi River bridge, Trump Expressway, transportation, federal funding, Louisiana highways, injection wells, public hearing, geologic sequestration, environmental impact, public comment, Ascension Parish, state capitol, economic development, community partnership, celebration day

Transcript Highlights:

• then it would essentially, you would be able to, I guess, make an argument to seek those funds retroactively
• I guess, make an argument to seek those funds retroactively, and some of those funds may not be available
• It also allows the effects of certain provisions to operate retroactively to earlier dates.
• It also allows the effects of certain provisions to operate retroactively to earlier dates.

Summary: The Finance and Tax Committee met with a quorum and considered two Senate proposed bills. The first, SPB 7046, was the Senate tax package. It included changes to Live Local property tax exemptions, charter school distributions from voter-approved property tax levies, limits on special assessments for RV parks, revisions to fiscally constrained county funding and eligibility, a permanent sales tax exemption for small propane tanks, a hunting/fishing/camping sales tax holiday, restrictions on governmental net zero policies, and new voting thresholds for certain local millage actions. Staff estimated the bill would reduce general revenue by about $77 million in FY 2026-27 and about $50 million recurring. An amendment making the charter-school distribution change prospective starting July 1, 2026, was adopted. A late-filed amendment by Senator Gaetz on disability tax exemptions was withdrawn for lack of a fiscal analysis. The charter school provision drew the most debate. Senator Jones and Senator Bernard raised concerns that expanding eligibility to charter schools authorized through alternate authorizers could reduce funding available to traditional neighborhood public schools and that the effective date did not give districts enough time to plan. Senator Avila argued the change corrected an omission from earlier legislation and ensured public schools, including charter schools, were treated equally. Several speakers supported the fiscally constrained county provisions, while the Florida Association of Counties urged grandfathering for counties that could currently opt out of the Live Local exemption and asked the committee to review language on millage thresholds and net zero provisions. SPB 7046 was ultimately reported favorably as a committee bill by a roll call vote. The committee then took up SPB 7048, which updates Florida’s conformity to the Internal Revenue Code as of January 1, 2026, and partially decouples from federal changes in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The bill addresses federal changes to bonus depreciation, Section 179 expensing, research and experimental expenses, business meals, and business interest deductions, with some provisions phased in or adjusted over time. The Florida Chamber testified in support of continued conformity but expressed concerns about administrative burdens and the bill’s partial decoupling structure. After brief debate, the bill was reported favorably as a committee bill by roll call vote, and the committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• second question would be why, when we come back in January, could we not take this up and make it retroactive
• This particular one, retroactive, we do that all the time: make something retroactive, make it retroactive
• for this year, because we would be in the next year, make it retroactive and then also put the other
• But my question is, could we retroactively pick up 2026 at the same time we do 2027? Yes, ma'am.

Summary: The committee first considered House Resolution 1016, which would have allowed introduction of a bill by Representative Richmond addressing disclosure and restrictions for certain real-estate arrangements where buyers purchase interests in entities rather than direct ownership of property. Richmond said the measure was aimed at transparency, consumer protection, and preventing private tribunals or discriminatory practices, while several members questioned whether it would affect homeowners associations, hunting clubs, arbitration clauses, or duplicate existing law. After discussion, the committee voted down the resolution. House Resolution 1006, sponsored by Representative Schultz, proposed increasing the Homestead Tax Credit by $75, from $600 to $675, using a fund created by Amendment 79 and supported by sales tax revenue. Schultz argued the fund could support the increase now and that families needed relief amid high prices. The committee approved the resolution. The committee then heard House Resolution 1007, presented by Senator King and Representative Eaton, which sought to change how turnback funds are distributed to counties, with a focus on giving counties more predictable annual funding for roads, jails, water, sewer, public safety, and other infrastructure. Members raised concerns about taking $150 million off the top of sales tax revenue and about whether the bill should be handled through budget language instead; the resolution failed. House Resolution 1008, by Representative Wooten and Senator King, would have amended the LEARNS education program to reduce costs, limit or change eligibility, and add performance-based requirements and reporting for certain school-choice funding. Supporters said the program was financially unsustainable and needed accountability, while opponents argued the proposal would create larger problems and that the issue should be handled in the regular session. The resolution failed after a point of order prevented reading a supporting letter into the record. Finally, House Resolution 1009 and House Resolution 1013, both tied to Senator Bryant’s proposals on local control over crypto mines and data centers, were discussed together with testimony about water use, energy demand, and local opposition; both failed. House Resolution 1015, which would have amended the IDEA economic-development bill to remove eminent domain authority and address board accountability, also failed after members said more concerns remained to be worked out.

Transcript Highlights:

• second question would be why, when we come back in January, could we not take this up and make it retroactive
• This particular one, retroactive, we do that all the time, make something retroactive, make it retroactive
• for this year, because we would be in the next year, make it retroactive and then also put the other
• But my question is, could we retroactively pick up 2026 at the same time we do 2027? Yes, ma'am.

Summary: The committee first considered House Resolution 1016, presented by Rep. Marcus Richmond, which sought permission to file a bill aimed at consumer protection in certain housing arrangements where buyers purchase an interest in an entity rather than the property itself. Richmond said the measure was intended to improve transparency, prevent deceptive real estate practices, and ensure disputes would be handled in Arkansas or federal courts rather than private tribunals. Members raised concerns about overlap with existing law, possible effects on homeowners associations, arbitration clauses, hunting clubs, religious organizations, and the bill’s 25-acre exemption. After discussion, the committee voted down the resolution. House Resolution 1006, by Rep. Bart Schultz, proposed increasing the homestead tax credit by $75, from $600 to $675, using a fund created for property tax relief. Schultz argued the increase was supported by the annual report on the fund and was timely because of higher costs for gas and groceries. Members asked about using special language instead, whether the increase could be made retroactive later, and whether the governor had included it on the call. The committee approved the resolution. The committee then heard House Resolution 1007, presented by Sen. Brian King and Rep. James Eaton, which would have changed how turnback sales tax revenue is distributed to counties, with the first $150 million of sales tax revenue going into a fund for county infrastructure and each county receiving an equal share. Supporters said it would help counties with roads, jails, water, sewer, and other critical needs, while opponents questioned whether taking revenue off the top would harm other state services and whether the issue was urgent enough for a fiscal session. The resolution failed. House Resolution 1008, by Rep. Jim Wooten and Sen. King, sought changes to the LEARNS Act and school choice funding, including performance-based eligibility and reporting requirements. Wooten argued the program was financially unsustainable and that accountability was needed; members questioned whether the proposal would create a larger emergency and whether it should instead be handled through budget language. The resolution failed after a point of order interrupted the closing remarks. Finally, House Resolution 1009, presented by Rep. Ron McNair and Sen. King, aimed to restore local control over crypto mines and data centers, citing concerns about water use, electricity demand, Chinese ownership, and litigation tied to prior legislation. Members questioned whether the issue was truly emergent and whether the resolution was the right vehicle. The resolution failed. House Resolution 1015, by Rep. Howard Beatty, proposed amending the prior IDA bill to address concerns raised by constituents, including board accountability and removing eminent domain authority. Supporters said it would improve the bill before next session, but the resolution also failed. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• So is it prospective for new incentives in the future, or is it retroactive that they would maybe have
• There's no provision in the bill that talks about retroactivity. Senator Smith. I'm good.
• The bill that talks about retroactivity. Senator Smith. I'm good on questions. Thank you, Mr.
• And the fact that this bill could possibly reach out 20 years retroactively to hurt a company in the
• A retroactive contract after a job is done, just because the intent of the bill may say that...

Summary: The committee first took up SB 1236, which would condition state economic development incentives on employers at subsidized companies using secret-ballot union elections and prohibiting neutrality agreements. The sponsor said the bill is meant to protect workers and taxpayer dollars, and he noted he would amend the Attorney General enforcement language to allow appeals. Supporters argued it protects secret ballots and transparency, while opponents said it is a form of union-busting, could conflict with federal labor law, and would burden contractors and workers. After debate, the committee reported the bill favorably on a roll call vote, with Senators Bracey Davis, Smith, and Errington voting no and the remaining recorded votes in favor. The committee then heard CS/SB 198, which regulates cryptocurrency kiosks to combat fraud, especially against seniors. The bill requires kiosk registration, fraud warnings, blockchain analytics, transaction limits, receipts, and refund protections for certain first-time transactions involving non-U.S. wallets. Supporters from consumer and senior advocacy groups said the bill would help stop widespread scams, while one industry witness praised the bill’s fraud protections but suggested narrowing the daily limits and new-customer period. The committee reported the bill favorably by roll call vote. Next, the committee considered CS/SB 1356 on dog breeding, pet sales, and breeder registration. The sponsor described it as a work in progress aimed at ending inhumane breeding conditions, improving consumer disclosures, and creating breeder standards and penalties; an amendment removed state oversight of local animal shelters. Pet store representatives supported many animal welfare provisions but objected to the three-day financing waiting period, shelter-space requirements, expanded reimbursement, and litigation exposure. Animal welfare supporters backed the bill, and the committee reported it favorably. The committee also heard SB 1722 on app stores and minors’ access to apps. The bill requires age verification, parental consent for minors, notice of app changes, and enforcement by the Department of Legal Affairs. Supporters said it would better protect children online and help enforce existing age-based restrictions, while opponents warned it could require overcollection of personal data, create privacy and constitutional problems, and duplicate tools parents already have. After debate, the committee reported the bill favorably. Finally, the committee took up CS/SB 422, which would bar use of ADS-B aviation data to calculate or collect certain airport fees, with an amendment adding departures to the covered activities. A pilot supported the bill as a safety and privacy measure, while airport advocates opposed it, saying it would undermine airport finances and force less efficient fee collection methods. The transcript ends during testimony on this bill, before final action is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• I wanted to make it retroactive because the constituent that came to me that expressed issues with it
• > retroactive<00:39:16.760> because<00:39:17.000> the make it retroactive because
• the make it retroactive because the constituent<00:39:17.640> that<00:39:17.760> came<
• that it seems about the retroactivity that it seems like<00:39:38.119> your<00:39:38.280>
• And that was going to be one of my questions as well about retroactivity.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• However, there are some other changes particularly around eligibility and retroactive coverage that have
• However, there are some other changes particularly around eligibility and retroactive coverage that have
• However, there are some other changes particularly around eligibility and retroactive coverage that have
• However, there are some other changes particularly around eligibility and retroactive coverage that have
• <00:35:15.200> coverage eligibility and retroactive coverage eligibility and retroactive coverage

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: Minnesota Management and Budget Commissioner Aaron Campbell, State Economist Dr. Tony Becker, and State Budget Director Anna Mingi presented the November 2025 budget and economic forecast. Campbell said the state now projects a nearly $2.5 billion surplus at the end of the 2026-27 biennium, about $575 million better than the end-of-session estimate, but also a projected negative balance of about $2.9 billion in FY 2028-29, reflecting a worsening structural imbalance. He said the budget reserve stands at $3.4 billion, with cash flow and budget reserves totaling $3.8 billion after a $244 million addition, and emphasized that Minnesota’s AAA bond rating and reserve policy remain strengths even as future sessions will need to address the long-term gap. Becker said the national economic outlook has changed only modestly since February, but growth remains below trend through the forecast horizon. He cited slower consumer spending, weak private investment, continued tariff uncertainty, lower projected immigration, and modest inflation that stays near 3% through 2026 before easing. Revenue forecasts for the next biennium were revised up to $66.3 billion, driven mainly by higher individual income tax receipts and other revenue, partly offset by lower sales and corporate tax forecasts. He also noted risks from federal policy changes, the recent shutdown’s effect on data availability, and possible equity market volatility. Mingi said general fund spending is projected to rise sharply, with current biennium spending up $3.4 billion from end-of-session estimates and planning-year spending up $1.9 billion. She attributed much of the increase to carryforward from prior one-time appropriations, discretionary inflation, and especially Medical Assistance. MA costs are projected to be about $2.5 billion higher over 2025-29, largely because managed care rates rose more than expected due to higher utilization and higher-cost services, including pharmacy costs, while long-term care and disability waiver costs also increased. In response to questions, officials said the federal reconciliation bill had only a relatively small effect on the health care changes, and that the carryforward amounts reflect unspent prior appropriations that now show up in later years rather than new spending.

Transcript Highlights:

• That would resolve that retroactive concern there.
• That would resolve that retroactive concern there.
• <00:27:24.960> They<00:27:25.279> did and then enacted retroactively.
• They did and then enacted retroactively.
• additional costs have been retroactively additional costs have been retroactively applied<01:07:

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The committee opened with housekeeping items, approved the minutes and consent agenda, and reminded the public that JLCAR’s role is limited to determining whether agency rules are within statutory authority, not to decide policy. Testimony was to be limited, and members noted that policy concerns should be addressed through the legislature rather than the committee process. The first major item was Public Utilities Commission rule 25-215 concerning natural gas suppliers. Staff said the proposal had been postponed because the PUC appeared to lack authority to impose fines and penalties in this rule set, especially suspending or revoking registrations, and recommended either a conditional approval removing those provisions or a preliminary objection for lack of statutory authority. PUC counsel responded that the cited authority had been incorrect, that the Department of Energy now has most registration rulemaking authority, but argued the commission still has jurisdiction over mediation and dispute resolution and may still have authority over fines because natural gas suppliers are not expressly excluded from public-utility status. Committee members discussed the split between PUC and DOE authority and the possibility that the transition in authority had not been fully cleaned up in statute. The committee then voted to grant a waiver of the time limit and postpone the item for another month so the agencies could work with counsel and clarify which parts of the rule could proceed. Members also urged that any needed legislative fix be brought forward quickly, noting that the Senate was not taking up non-germane amendments and suggesting the House as the likely venue for a cleanup bill. The committee next took up Department of Energy EN900 and EN1000 rules. Staff said the EN900 net-metering rules had been postponed previously and that the main remaining issue was a retroactive requirement in EN909.03(b), which the agency agreed to revise so the language would apply only on or after the 2026 effective date of the chapter. The agency described the EN900 rules as implementing net metering authority transferred from the PUC and expanding the chapter to cover municipal group net metering and low- and moderate-income community solar projects. The EN1000 interconnection rules were described as implementing 2024 legislation requiring uniform procedures for distributed energy resources. The department said both sets of rules were developed through extensive stakeholder input and asked for approval subject to the oral amendment already discussed."}】【。json

Transcript Highlights:

• ><00:12:10.880> patient<00:12:11.880> and But they're under no obligation to pay retroactively
• over the years. but they're under no obligation to pay but they're under no obligation to pay retroactively
• :28.480> ends<00:12:28.720> up<00:12:28.880> being<00:12:29.240> a retroactively
• so it ends up being a retroactively so it ends up being a burden<00:12:30.440> including<00:12
• um and then resisted my retroactively um and then resisted my efforts<00:32:06.519> to<00:32:

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Tax Committee first approved the minutes from the previous meeting and then took up Senate File 11 at the request of the Judiciary Committee. The bill was removed from the table, recommended to pass, and referred to Judiciary. Members explained that the request was tied to data practices language in the bill and Judiciary’s jurisdiction over that subject. The committee then heard Senate File 268, as amended by the A1 amendment. Senator Nelson said the bill would extend a sales tax exemption for certain physician-prescribed, non-durable medical goods to publicly and privately held health plans, aligning them with treatment already given to Medicare, Medicaid, and other government-paid plans. Testifiers from Corner Home Medical and the industry said current tax rules are confusing, audits are burdensome and expensive, and providers often end up paying tax themselves because insurers do not pay retroactively. They argued the bill would reduce administrative burden and create parity in the tax code. The committee adopted the A1 amendment and laid the bill over. Finally, the committee heard Senate File 88, also amended by an A1 technical change. Senator Klein said the bill is intended to prevent the Department of Revenue from issuing retroactive assessments when taxpayers relied in good faith on prior audit guidance, so long as there was no material change in law, court interpretation, federal adjustment, or written notice from the commissioner. Department of Revenue staff said they had no formal position but explained how the bill would affect sample audits and noted it would require more detailed written guidance; they said normal audits would not change much. Supporters from the CPA Society and several senators said the bill would provide certainty and protect taxpayers from unexpected back taxes, while one senator questioned whether the bill was needed and whether it would bypass settlement or litigation. The bill was laid over after discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• changes um if we had against retroactive changes um if we had language<00:54:31.280> like<00:
• Thank you. retroactive yeah thank you and um that retroactive yeah thank you and um that that'd<00:58
• , you know, prevent retroactivity.
• um you know prevent retroactivity um you know prevent retroactivity<02:00:21.320> um<02:00:21.520
• um do know here that we retroactivity um do know here that we are<02:00:23.239> talking<02:00

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I think for this current fiscal year, maybe we've only had one or two requests for retroactive approvals
• have retroactive requests for approval. have retroactive requests for approval.
• <00:36:53.160> approvals,<00:36:53.680> which<00:36:53.920> I'm for retroactive
• approvals, which I'm for retroactive approvals, which I'm very<00:36:54.440> proud<00:36:54.720
• As a matter of for retroactive approval.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee first approved the August 12 minutes and then handled a large agenda of 355 contracts totaling about $278.7 million. It agreed to defer three Office of Energy Policy items to the October 2025 meeting and reviewed a deferred Kentucky Educational Television contract without objection. The main substantive discussion centered on two University of Louisville legal services PSC amendments and a Seven Counties Services MOA item. For the University of Louisville items, members questioned a large increase in hourly rates and the scope of the legal services, especially complex litigation work and a Colorado estate matter. University officials said the contracts followed an RFP, involved specialized litigation, included local counsel where required, and were expected to be offset by savings in other PSCs and by a potential financial recovery in the Colorado matter. The committee also discussed whether the $125 hourly rate was a statutory requirement or committee policy; the chair later said staff would verify whether it was an executive-branch regulation or statutory rate. Both University of Louisville items were ultimately approved, though Senator Meredith voted no on one and Senator Douglas explained his support while urging future adjustments and more information sharing. The Seven Counties Services contract drew questions about how the $18.7 million would be used and whether federal changes could affect future funding. Cabinet officials described 988 crisis response, outpatient mental health and substance use treatment, prevention, recovery, and harm-reduction services, and said they were monitoring federal developments daily. Representative Petrie and Senator Thomas pressed the cabinet on the long-running Seven Counties bankruptcy and the need to push for resolution; officials said the matter was pending on a motion for reconsideration and that they would try to help move it along. The contract was approved. At the end of the meeting, the committee approved the remaining agenda items as reviewed without objection, but Senator Meredith voted no on the blanket approval motion because of numerous retroactive contract requests and what she said were insufficient explanations such as administrative error or staff being on conference. She said retroactive approvals should be rare and supported stronger internal controls.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's really not about the retroactive claims, but about future claims.
• reserves to pay any of these claims during that period of time, they will reassess their members retroactively
• Some call them retroactive premiums, but you get the idea. They go back.
• SELF has already built about $300 million in retroactive premiums in the last couple years.
• in that they need to pay claims. and don't have reserves to do that then that's what generates a retroactive

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, as it pertains to our language being retroactive.
• Uh, and it might be better for us to look forward as opposed to looking retroactively.
• Um, as it pertains to our language being retroactive.
• <00:26:58.960> Any opposed to looking retroactively.
• Any opposed to looking retroactively.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• were responsible for these premium receipts tax, the bill that came out of committee would have retroactively
• were responsible for these premium receipts tax, the bill that came out of committee would have retroactively
• captive Says the prohibition established under subsection A shall apply to any existing and retroactive
• <00:20:54.920> tax<00:20:55.280> liabilities<00:20:55.960> under and retroactive
• tax liabilities under and retroactive tax liabilities under sections<00:20:56.640> of<00:20:56.720

Keywords: Senate streaming session for Thursday, March 26, 2026, 960, senate, all

Summary: The Maryland Senate convened with 39 members present and a quorum. The session opened with an invocation by Bishop Antonio Palmer of Kingdom Celebration Center, whose remarks were journalized. The President and members also welcomed several guests to the chamber, including former Delegate Sean Terrence, students from Charles H. Flowers High School and Garrison Forest School, Dr. Lee Snyder as doctor of the day, and Dr. Barbara Ann Palmer in recognition of Women’s History Month. The President also noted that the next day would be pro forma and that some scheduled items would be moved to the following week. The Senate considered Executive Nominations Report No. 6, covering gubernatorial nominees for boards and commissions including the State Board of Education, MEDCO, and the University System of Maryland Board of Regents. On motion of the committee chair, the report was special ordered to Tuesday, with members asked to review the list for recusals or related issues. The chamber then took up Senate Bill 890, which concerns an insurance premium receipts tax exemption for captive insurance procured by nonprofit hospitals and health care systems. On SB 890, the Senate adopted the committee amendments and then adopted a floor amendment offered by the bill sponsor. The amendment was described as replacing the bill’s earlier approach with a two-year moratorium on collection of any related liabilities, followed by a Maryland Insurance Administration report back on ongoing investigations. One senator raised concern that the amendment’s language could require the state to refund taxes already paid by hospitals and others, potentially costing millions, and asked for more time to review it; the motion to special order the bill was defeated. After discussion, the amendment was adopted and the bill was ordered printed for third reading. At the close of the floor session, committee and delegation announcements were made, including Finance, Triple E, Judicial Proceedings, Budget and Tax, Executive Nominations, and several county delegations. A senator from District 6 also spoke about the anniversary of the Key Bridge collapse and thanked colleagues for bipartisan work on related legislation and recovery efforts.

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill repeals existing laws imposing the transit accommodations tax on cruise ships, effective retroactive
• the transit accommodations tax on cruise ships<00:15:23.279> effective<00:15:24.000> retroactive
• <00:15:24.880> to<00:15:25.440> January ships effective retroactive to January ships
• effective retroactive to January 1st<00:15:27.279> um<00:15:27.920> 2026<00:15:28.800>

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:

• This is Senator Hughes's bill relating to a court order for retroactive child support, including retroactive
• This is the bill we just voted on, Senator Hughes's bill relating to a court order for retroactive child

Transcript Highlights:

• So, and this would be in effect a retroactive tax? Yeah, it’s not a retroactive tax.
• tax yeah it's um it's not a retroactive tax yeah it's um it's not a tend<00:16:40.240> to<00:
• 16:40.319> be<00:16:40.480> retroactive<00:16:41.160> it's<00:16:41.480> tend
• Those haven't come to fruition, and maybe "retroactive" isn't the word I'm using.
• Those haven't come to fruition, and maybe "retroactive" isn't the word I'm using.

Keywords: 928, house, all

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

Transcript Highlights:

• Madam Chair and members, the bill in front of the committee today is effective retroactively to tax year
• Madam Chair and members, the bill in front of the committee today is effective retroactively to tax year
• <00:34:26.359> to is effect is effective retroactively to is effect is effective retroactively
• <00:35:08.240> um<00:35:08.960> another<00:35:09.320> issue forward retroactively
• um another issue forward retroactively um another issue would<00:35:09.920> be<00:35:10.520><

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I want to ask why is your language now including the language that the law is to be reenacted retroactively
• I do not see this had a provision to retroactively apply and enactment. My question, Mme.
• If you want to talk about the retroactive dates, we can bring that up with a constitutional lawyer.
• SOMETHING THAT WAS LEGAL AND THEN RETROACTIVELY MAKING IT ILLEGAL TO ATTEMPT TO APPLY THE CRIMINAL ELEMENT
• A BINARY TRIGGER BAN AND THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO REINTRODUCE IF YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE RETROACTIVE

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• cause of action with attorney's fees and additional costs, which are exacerbated by the bill's retroactive
• And, in addressing our concerns, we also feel that the retroactivity piece should be expressly excluded
• And so I understand the retroactivity piece that relates to something that occurred in the past, but
• you would be able to bring a state, because this would be a separate cause of action that is now retroactive
• piece as well... ...for conduct that's being done by our federal agents, and to the retroactivity piece

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The committee heard several bills, beginning with SB 99, which would require courts and law enforcement to better recognize military protective orders in domestic violence cases and allow civilian judges to consider those orders when reviewing restraining order requests. Supporters, including the Department of Defense and military-related organizations, said the bill would close jurisdictional gaps that leave military families vulnerable off base. The bill drew no opposition and was approved on a unanimous vote, with members also expressing support for the author’s request to be added as coauthors. Members then heard SB 1237, a pay equity reporting enforcement bill that would increase penalties for repeat noncompliance with California’s employer pay-data reporting requirements. The author and supporters from Power California Action and HOPE argued that stronger penalties are needed because the state is still missing pay data for hundreds of thousands of workers and wage gaps persist, especially for women of color. There was no opposition testimony, but one member voted no; the bill passed to Appropriations and was placed on call. SB 1387 followed, proposing to allow Jewish identity to be reported as an ethnic category in state demographic data collection. Supporters said the change would improve data accuracy and help identify discrimination, while opponents from Jewish Voice for Peace and other Jewish speakers argued the bill was unworkable, unnecessary, and could be harmful or exceptionalizing. The committee approved the bill on a unanimous vote to Privacy. The committee also approved SB 932, which would require assignees filing civil actions to identify the original party in the case caption, after testimony that the change would improve transparency and help courts, the public, and journalists track assigned claims. SB 988, an auto glass industry bill, drew the most extensive debate: the author and the National Insurance Crime Bureau said it would curb fraud, restrict certain assignment-of-benefits practices, and improve consumer safety, while independent glass shops and their associations warned it could restrict consumer choice and favor insurers or large networks. Despite those concerns, the bill passed to Appropriations. SB 1296, requiring landlords to disclose pet policies before collecting application fees, also passed after supporters described the bill as a narrow transparency measure and opponents raised concerns about pet addenda and eviction procedures. Finally, SB 747, the “No Kings Act,” would create a state cause of action for constitutional violations by federal officers; supporters cited abuses by ICE and Border Patrol and the need for accountability, while law enforcement groups warned about uncertainty around qualified immunity and retroactivity. The bill was supported by several members, but the transcript ends before a final committee vote is shown.