Transcript Highlights:

• You would have to double those fees, right?
• 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?
• One of them is development.

Transcript Highlights:

• The P3 partner and developer is PMB LLC, a healthcare real estate developer with over 130 projects to
• , design engineering fees, construction engineering fees, inspection and engineering fees, other.
• <00:48:25.560> fees, fees, construction engineering fees, fees, construction engineering fees
• inspection and engineering fees other. inspection and engineering fees other.
• developable land. developable land.

Keywords: 0:00:01 Call to Order and Roll Call 0:00:28 Approval of Minutes 0:00:40 Information Items 0:01:13 Rpt from Postsecondary Institutions 0:26:46 Project Rpt from Finance and Admin Cabinet 0:30:53 Lease Rpt from Finance and Admin Cabinet 0:39:20 Rpt from OFM – KIA 0:52:42 Econ Development – EDF Grants 0:55:15 OFM Debt Issues 0:58:43 Informational Discussion 1:44:36 Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The committee first handled routine business, including a quorum call, approval of minutes, and informational items on school district financing and KCTCS equipment purchases. It then considered two KCTCS capital projects after initially rolling them together and later unrolling them: a Fire Commission Fire Academy maintenance building project that had grown from an original $2 million authorization to $4.7 million because of design changes, soil issues, and higher mechanical costs, and a $1.5 million renovation of the Blake Lee building at Somerset Community College for a health science simulation lab. Members questioned the large cost increase on the fire academy project and the adequacy of front-end due diligence, while KCTCS said the project was bid and ready to proceed and that a 15% contingency had been included. Both projects were approved by roll call vote, with the Blake Lee project ultimately approved after the committee unrolled the items and took them separately. The committee next heard and approved a University of Kentucky public-private partnership for the Hamburg East Medical Office Building, a five-story, 220,000-square-foot facility with a not-to-exceed budget of $275 million. UK said the project is intended to expand outpatient access, consolidate some services, and support projected growth in patient volume; the building will house multiple specialties, urgent care, therapy, imaging, and a retail pharmacy. Members asked about possible community uses, consolidation of services, and whether the project would free up other space, and UK said it hopes to consolidate some services and free campus space. The project was approved by roll call vote. The committee then approved three UK lease renegotiations: a specialty pharmacy and infusion services lease at Wellington Way in Lexington, a Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences lease at Conte Terrace, and a College of Social Work lease at McGrath Park Way. Members asked about rising lease rates, occupancy, and whether space needs should be reduced; UK and the lessor’s representative said the pharmacy space remains busy, the ophthalmology lease was lower than before, and the social work lease had been negotiated down from a higher request. The committee also approved a Department of Military Affairs project amendment for a Mutual Field Maintenance Shop Restoration project, increasing federal funding by $1 million to $4.5 million because of higher construction costs, and approved a Kentucky State University Shanty Hall renovation project funded by bond and HBCU Title III funds. Finally, it approved a new lease for the Office of Mines and Minerals in Pike County, a new lease for the Cabinet for Health and Family Services in Pulaski County, and a lease renewal for the Cabinet for Health and Family Services in Kenton County after questions about rent increases and office utilization; the cabinet said the Kenton County space still has limited vacancy and remains in use by field staff. The meeting ended as the Kentucky Infrastructure Authority began presenting six sewer and water loans and six cleaner water program grant reallocations, with members agreeing to roll those items for later consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• So they will collect the permit fees, they will collect the impact fees, they will allow for development
• Some want to attract development. Some want to limit development.
• Some want to attract development. Some want to limit development.
• The cost of impact fees can be an impediment. The cost of impact fees can be an impediment.
• This works well short term because developers get to develop. Services are provided.

Summary: The committee held a work session on local government issues, beginning with an update from the State Building Code Council on four legislatively mandated code amendments now in CR-102 rulemaking: temporary emergency shelters, reduced minimum dwelling unit size, multiplex housing up to three stories and six units, and single-exit apartment buildings up to six stories. Council staff also described a separate embodied-carbon appendix proposal that remains under public review, with testimony both supporting and opposing it. Members asked about the rationale for some of the code limits, including the restriction on connecting multiplex buildings. The committee then heard a panel on annexations from MRSC, Pierce County, and the Association of Washington Cities. Witnesses reviewed annexation methods, including petition, election, and interlocal agreement approaches, and said larger annexations are increasingly using interlocal agreements because they can address infrastructure, revenue sharing, and public process concerns. They described barriers such as inconsistent local standards, the cost of infrastructure, referendum risk, census requirements, and the difficulty of persuading residents and local officials to support annexation. Members asked about the five-year restriction on residential zoning changes in one annexation method and whether a hearing examiner could reduce political pressure on local decision-makers. A second panel discussed subdivision reform. The Master Builders Association urged raising the short-plat threshold within urban growth areas to 30 lots as a simpler first step, citing permitting delays and added housing costs. The City of Spokane described implementation problems with recent housing laws, including uncertainty about how to review plats under HB 1110, lot-splitting administration, and added notice requirements for unit lot subdivisions. AWC said there was broad agreement that subdivision decisions should be more administrative, but public hearings remained a point of disagreement. The committee also heard from FutureWise, the Washington State Association of Counties, and Lewis County on county development regulation and enforcement, with witnesses emphasizing underfunded code enforcement, inconsistent standards between counties and cities, and the need for better coordination, incentives, and possibly stronger enforcement tools. No votes were taken; the chair said the committee would continue working on possible solutions in future sessions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Be giving them the ability to waive that fee? Yes, sir.
• From zero to 17.9 years of age, the fee is already waived.
• in those funds, authorizing fees.
• Members, this bill is a result of a proposed development in my district.
• In this development, for a significant investment, at least $80,000.

Bills: HB200, HB541, HB1803, HB30, HB175, HB249, HB721, HB851, HB897, HB 1128, HB1904, HB1916, HB5560, HB3071, HB5627, HB5435, HB3913, HB2921, HB2695, HB2688, HB3045, HB3483, HB3673, HB4213, HB4226, HB783, HB4373, HB4735, HB5155, HB5057, HB4984, HB4944, HB4813, HB5339, HB5196, HB5033, HB4853, HB3486, HB4211, HB74, HB4670, HB4730, HB4743, HB4603, HB4463, HB3892, HB4139, HB4752, HB4520, HB4517, HB4486, HB4437, HB4426, HB4396, HB4263, HB3487, HB3418, HB2284, HB2266, HB2229, HB4912, HB2189, HB4506, HB5269, HB5224, HB5195, HB3317, HB4166, HB3947, HB3358, HB3370, HB4438, HB3745, HB3602, HB3697, HB2001, HB1968, HB3371, HB3909, HCR7, SB1744, SB1364, SB1316, HB2026, HB3302, HB3368, HB1639, HB5652, HB4655, HB5654, HB5658, HB5656, HB4894, HB4996, HB5088, HB5650, HB4464, HB3751, HB5665, HB5661, HB 1237, HB2802, HB5437, HB2703, HB5666, HB5667, HCR113, HCR86, SB2196, SB463, SB856, SB1245, SB1169, SB509, SB985, SB305, SB552, HB1535, HB 123, HB1804, HB426, HB1773, HB1871, HB2035, HB2492, HB1411, HB4753, HB4666, HB4529, HB1499, HB1610, HB2028, HB1506, HB886, HB3546, HB796, HB223, HB3556, HB2448, HB4638, HB 111, HB180, HB 1027, HB 1178, HB610, HB 1277, HB1615, HB1620, HB5342, HB4885, HB4751, HB4530, HB4488, HB2149, HB2071, HB2282, HB2248, HB2243, HB2522, HB2310, HB2513, HB2300, HB1902, HB1813, HB3719, HB4284, HB3743, HB3778, HB5153, HB5147, HB4877, HB4850, HB3261, HB3005, HB3033, HB2849, HB2967, HB3531, HB1768, HB333, HB2914, HB2613, HB3717, HB3704, HB2697, HB3801, HB3099, HB3488, HB3477, HB3466, HB3396, HB3469, HB2594, HB2776, HB2564, HB2298, HB5331, HB5646, HB5247, HB5323, HB4384, HB3896, HB4014, HB3627, HB3594, HB2524, HB510, HB561, HB5111, HB5446, HB 1181, HB3963, HB2785, HB1661, HB2460, HB200, HB541, HB1803, HB30, HB175, HB249, HB721, HB851, HB897, HB 1128, HB1904, HB1916, HB5560, HB3071, HB5627, HB5435, HB3913, HB2921, HB2695, HB2688, HB3045, HB3483, HB3673, HB4213, HB4226, HB783, HB4373, HB4735, HB5155, HB5057, HB4984, HB4944, HB4813, HB5339, HB5196, HB5033, HB4853, HB3486, HB4211, HB74, HB4670, HB4730, HB4743, HB4603, HB4463, HB3892, HB4139, HB4752, HB4520, HB4517, HB4486, HB4437, HB4426, HB4396, HB4263, HB3487, HB3418, HB2284, HB2266, HB2229, HB4912, HB2189, HB4506, HB5269, HB5224, HB5195, HB3317, HB4166, HB3947, HB3358, HB3370, HB4438, HB3745, HB3602, HB3697, HB2001, HB1968, HB3371, HB3909, HCR98, HCR92, HCR126, HCR7

Keywords: juvenile offenders, parole eligibility, youth justice, criminal justice reform, inmate rehabilitation, direct patient care, healthcare, physicians, medical services, insurance regulation, dentist, dental hygienist, interstate practice, licensure, compact privilege, public health, military members, disaster relief, tax rates, local government

Transcript Highlights:

• by geography, our area development by geography, our area development districts<00:48:49.160>
• Fee for the fee-for-service system, that is embedded in the Medicaid statute.
• fee schedule.
• <01:21:05.240> for still just using the Medicaid fee for still just using the Medicaid fee
• , in the fee-for-service fee-for-service, in the fee-for-service world, world, world, there<01:36:54.120

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Medicaid Oversight and Advisory Board met on September 24, 2025, approved the minutes from the September 9 meeting, and then continued its discussion of Medicaid waivers with Leslie Hoffman and Carmen Hancock from the Department for Medicaid Services. Members asked for updates on the 2024 waiver waitlist management assessment recommendations, including aligning waiver policies, standardizing applications and waitlist placement, and modernizing data systems. DMS said that work is being done jointly with Aging and Independent Living and Behavioral Health/Developmental and Intellectual Disabilities through task forces, that ARPA spending delayed action, and that implementation timelines extend through March 2027. The board also reviewed per-member waiver cost averages for fiscal years 2023 through 2025 for ABI, ABI long-term care, HCBS, Model II, Michelle P, and SCL. DMS emphasized these figures were benefit-only averages based on paid claims, not full waiver costs, and explained that true budget neutrality is calculated on an aggregate basis against institutional care comparisons approved by CMS. DMS said all six waivers remain in compliance with budget neutrality and that the most recent 18-month lag review for FY 2022 and FY 2023 found costs at or below institutional care. Members also asked about unused waiver slots; DMS said slots generally cannot be reallocated mid-year if they have been used, except in cases such as death or reserved capacity, because CMS treats participants as unduplicated for the waiver year. A major portion of the meeting focused on the new child waiver created under House Bill 6. Legislators questioned whether the waiver’s design, including the exclusion of participant-directed services and the emphasis on high-acuity children with behavioral health, DCBS, or juvenile justice involvement, matched the bill’s intent to keep children at home. DMS said it used the $14.7 million appropriated for FY 2026 to develop the program, that there is no priority list, and that the waiver is intended to serve the highest-acuity children while also addressing residential needs for those sleeping in offices or placed out of state. Members also raised concerns about the rapid growth of the HCBS waiting list and asked for more detail on age and timing patterns, which DMS said it would provide later. Finally, DMS gave average processing times from application to eligibility determination and from approval to service start, and said the overall average from application to services beginning was about 80 days, while members requested follow-up information on the Carewise assessment contract and related costs.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's all intercorrelated with the small business development centers.
• community development.
• marriage licensing fees and adjusting the disposition of fees.
• Fees, raising marriage licensing fees, adjusting the disposition of fees.
• An act... ...relating to development districts, amending the Tax Increment for Development Act, amending

Transcript Highlights:

• privilege fees to retain customers. privilege fees to retain customers.
• fees just like the overdraft fee fees just like the overdraft fee Republicans<01:41:43.440> are
• overdraft fees at $5. I yield back. overdraft fees at $5. I yield back.
• without the fee. And and Mr. Mr. without the fee. And and Mr. Mr.
• This is not a junk fee.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Wednesday, April 9, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• are also direct workforce development are also direct workforce development fund<00:09:09.680>
• <00:16:11.120> Um governor's proposed fee adjustment.
• Um governor's proposed fee adjustment.
• Um, while we're not happy that the seal fee increases from $80 to $325, we understand that the fee has
• Um, while we're not happy that the seal fee increases from $80 to $325, we understand that the fee has

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• there needs to be a written fee there needs to be a written fee agreement.<00:10:15.360> It
• assist these CVSOs in the development assist these CVSOs in the development and<00:21:26.159>
• help veterans with with no fees help veterans with with no fees attached.<00:24:12.080> uh
• Our veterans benefits guide fees.
• And so I was these fee structures?

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• fees to pay off construction debt.
• We intend to develop a resident governance program that taps the incredibly diverse and... ...develop
• So if we did an apples-to-apples comparison of entry fees and monthly fees with existing buildings, of
• Thus, the higher entry fees, the much, much higher monthly fees because you are paying into what feels
• The entrance fee...

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The commission meeting focused on continuing care retirement communities (CCRCs), beginning with a presentation from Two Life Communities on its Opus Newton model, which is opening in the fall. Two Life described Opus as a middle-income, modern CCRC built around affordability, care coordination in residents’ apartments rather than separate care buildings, and resident-driven community life. Commissioners asked about financing, home care arrangements, affordability, Medicaid/MassHealth access, and the role of resident councils versus board representation. Two Life said it wants to remain within the CCRC framework, but expressed concern about proposals that would require multiple discrete care levels, impose deadlines on entrance-fee refunds, or require resident board seats. The commission then discussed possible recommendations. There was broad support for Senate Bill 478, which would require clearer disclosure of entrance-fee refund terms in a separate document for prospective residents. On refund timing, members were divided: some favored a one-year deadline or a deadline with waivers, while others opposed a fixed deadline because of financing risks and the potential impact on new development and current residents. Several members suggested keeping the status quo but adding better data collection and reporting on refund timing. On the CCRC definition and marketing, members debated whether the current statutory definition is too vague and whether the commission should recommend clearer standards or a certification-like process, while also noting resource limits for state oversight. Members also discussed the Age CCRC Consumer Guide, with general agreement that it should be updated and made more useful to consumers, possibly with clearer questions to ask and more information about facilities, though some cautioned against adding subjective financial-risk statements that would be hard to administer. On resident representation, several commissioners strongly supported requiring resident voting members on boards, while providers argued that strong resident associations and regular meetings with boards may be preferable and that communities should retain flexibility. The meeting ended with a request for written comments by July 11, draft recommendations to be circulated July 18, and a possible final meeting on July 21, with the commission aiming to finish by August 1.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's resulted in the fee savings, as Director Salih stated.
• I believe a strong economic engine in that area will promote other development to happen.
• These are the fees they pay to go to space, essentially.
• I think part of that is due to our marketing and the big push on the development side.
• That assessment fee is split.

Transcript Highlights:

• dollar from people or the fees. dollar from people or the fees.
• just raise fees. Thank you. just raise fees. Thank you.
• It pays for have to raise these fees. So I I come in have to raise these fees.
• licensing fees will go up.
• licensing fees will go up.

Keywords: 981, all

Summary: The House convened with a quorum, approved the corrected journal, and spent much of the opening period on recognitions and announcements. Members welcomed students and staff from the San Luis Valley BOCES Transition Program, recognized Purple Up Day and military children at the Capitol, noted committee meetings later in the day, and observed a moment honoring former Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell. Several members also shared personal remarks about being military children and invited colleagues to a Bible study. The chamber then took up Senate Joint Resolution 16, concerning retirement readiness and financial well-being. The sponsor said the resolution affirms Colorado’s commitment to strengthening retirement security through tools such as financial education, automatic enrollment, employer matches, and lifetime income options. The resolution was adopted by a vote of 59 ayes, 1 no, and 5 excused, with Representatives Rutnel and Lindsay listed as co-sponsors. The House next moved into special orders and considered House Bill 1233 on property tax procedures for non-residential properties. An amendment clarifying petty offense liability and appeal timelines was adopted, while another amendment on notice to property owners was defeated. Supporters said the bill adds penalties for false information, allows counties to request district court review, and improves fairness and accountability in non-residential property tax appeals; opponents argued it would impose costly new burdens on businesses. The committee report, as amended, and the bill were both adopted. The chamber also adopted Senate Bill 128, which exempts certain destination management company fees from sales and use tax. Supporters said the bill codifies current practice, clarifies the definition of destination management company, and avoids taxing services twice; the Finance Committee report was adopted first, then the bill passed. Consideration then began on House Bill 1195, which restricts the use of artificial intelligence in psychotherapy services. Sponsors described a multi-page amendment adding definitions, allowing certain FDA-approved AI uses, moving some provisions to the Consumer Protection Act, and clarifying liability and consent; members broadly supported the need for guardrails and patient protections, and discussion continued on additional consent language.

Transcript Highlights:

• Services to update these fees accordingly while maintaining accuracy to written regulation.
• Services to update these fees accordingly while maintaining accuracy to written regulation.
• Also, with that proper gut development, we do see less obesity.
• My daughter all the immune benefits I could while developing a strong emotional bond.
• Henry Benjamin developed a diagnostic and treatment protocol.

Bills: HB2049, HB2050, HB2051, HB2072, HB2082, HB2085, HB2177, HB2178, HB2179, HB2183, HB2195

Keywords: radiation therapy, particle accelerator, critical access hospitals, patient care, rural healthcare, AHCCCS, lactation care, breastfeeding, health services, healthcare access, Cesar Chavez, public holiday, state law, holiday repeal, Arizona Revised Statutes, childhood cancer, rare diseases, research funding, healthcare, clinical trials

Summary: The committee opened with attendance and member introductions, then heard a series of health-related bills, many focused on access to care in rural and underserved communities. HB 2049 would allow particle accelerators for radiation therapy in critical access hospitals and counties under 400,000 population under general supervision; sponsors and rural oncology witnesses said it would reduce travel burdens for cancer patients while maintaining safety protocols. HB 2050 updated radiologic technologist statutes to align with current national standards, adjust accreditation and clinical-hour requirements, and allow radiologist assistants to work under supervision rather than direct supervision; an amendment also added registered nurses to the list of professionals not needing a separate license to use diagnostic X-ray machines. Both bills were supported by testimony about workforce shortages and access, though one member voted no on HB 2050 over concerns about oversight and board authority. Both measures received do-pass recommendations, with HB 2050 amended. The committee then unanimously advanced HB 2082, which creates a Childhood Cancer and Rare Childhood Disease Research Commission to award grants for phase-one pediatric cancer and rare disease trials. Testimony came from families affected by pediatric brain cancer, including a parent who described traveling internationally for treatment and a college student currently undergoing treatment who urged the state to invest in research. Members expressed strong sympathy and support, and the bill passed 12-0. Next, HB 2015 would require Access to cover breastfeeding and lactation services in multiple settings; the sponsor and medical witnesses described breastfeeding as preventive care with benefits for infants and mothers, while Access testified neutral and noted a fiscal estimate was being developed and that the amendment would protect the state if CMS does not approve the services. The bill, as amended, also received a unanimous do-pass recommendation. The committee also approved HB 2177, which directs Access to seek CMS waivers so tribal and Indian Health Service facilities can be reimbursed for certain covered services, including dental care, for American Indian and Alaska Native members. The sponsor and a Sage Memorial Hospital representative said the bill would help rural tribal facilities keep services local and maximize federal matching funds; it passed unanimously as amended. HB 2178, requiring a state agency medical chief officer to hold an active medical or osteopathic license, was described as a cleanup measure after a lapse in licensure exposed a statutory gap, and it also passed unanimously. HB 2179, which clarifies definitions separating air ambulance from ground ambulance regulation, was supported as a technical clarification to avoid unintended consequences and likewise received unanimous approval. Finally, the committee advanced HB 2183, which creates an emergency medicine study committee to examine Arizona’s EMS system, including rural and urban capacity, workforce burnout, uncompensated care, and emergency department utilization. The sponsor said the study would help the state understand system pressures and identify policy solutions; firefighters, health care advocates, and an emergency medicine nurse practitioner testified in support, emphasizing the ER’s role as the safety net and the strain from staffing shortages, rural closures, and high volumes. The bill was still under discussion at the end of the transcript, with testimony continuing after the initial supporters spoke.

Transcript Highlights:

• This isn't just a line item in the budget; this is another fee on energy bills and another direct hit
• The bill directs the Department of Housing and Community Development to review and develop appropriate
• Senate Bill 285 directs the Department of Housing and Community Development to review and develop criteria
• This bill requires the Board of Education and the Virginia Board of Workforce Development, along with
• The Senate substitute adjusts that fee from $17 to $15 and adds reporting requirements.

Keywords: March 12, 2026 - Regular Session, 976, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So they will collect the permit fees, they will collect the impact fees, they will allow for development
• And new development regulations.
• Some want to attract development. Some want to limit development.
• A really good example of this, an obvious one, is impact fees. The cost of impact fees can be a...
• This works well short term because developers get to develop. Services are provided.

Keywords: 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And if developers are using dual use strategies in their energy projects, they get a 50% fee credit.
• Initially, it required the fee, it required the fund, it required the funding.
• It does not require a fee at this moment.
• It goes to the project if that fee were charged up. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
• So then who pays the fee? Is it the farmer or the energy product project?

Bills: SB2173, SB2028, SB2117, SB2127, SB2134

Keywords: landowner, energy negotiation, agricultural preservation, orphaned wells, renewable energy, raw milk, unpasteurized milk, milk products, dairy, pasteurization, food safety, consumer warning label, health warning, farm sales, direct-to-consumer sales, ungraded milk, goat milk, raw milk cheese, Oklahoma Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry, agricultural regulation

Transcript Highlights:

• and financing of certain water infrastructure matters under the jurisdiction of the Texas water development
• We find that they provide efficient local continuity improvementkaha » and that an arterial development
• AB 1050 by derazio relating to the award of an attorney fees in certain suits involving a groundwater
• , refer to the Committee on Trade, Workforce, and Economic Development, HB 1077 by Simmons, relating
• Refer to the Committee on Trade, Workforce, and Economic Development.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , and black lung fees.
• , and black lung fees.
• , and black lung fees.
• , and black lung fees.
• Uh they're fees, and black lung fees.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Some broadband providers report application fees up to $250 per pole.
• Other states have developed and applied their own formulas.
• Yes, so my understanding of that particular formula development was more that it was developed at that
• Um, would develop, uh, an approach.
• How do you develop your formulas that you're using right now would be?

Transcript Highlights:

• economic development infrastructure, $2 million.
• <00:13:45.160> public Minnesota business development public Minnesota business development
• program,<00:13:51.280> 2 business development grant program, 2 business development grant
• development infrastructure, 2 million. development infrastructure, 2 million.
• Uh for a one-time license fee reduction.

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: The committee took up a large bonding bill and reviewed the final spreadsheet of capital investments. Chairs and members repeatedly thanked staff, House and Senate negotiators, and the Governor’s team for a collaborative process. The bill was described as a statewide package rather than a partisan one, with major funding for higher education asset preservation, DNR projects, public safety, transportation, the Met Council, veterans facilities, corrections, DEED/local projects, and a large water infrastructure section. House Fiscal staff and Senate fiscal staff walked through the bill line by line. Highlights included University of Minnesota and Minnesota State asset preservation, education and language immersion school funding, DNR trail and flood mitigation projects, public safety facilities, local road and bridge grants, Met Council parks and I/I grants, veterans home and armory funding, corrections projects including the Faribault vocational expansion, and many local economic development and public facility projects across Greater Minnesota and the metro. The bill also included Public Facilities Authority water and wastewater grants, housing rehabilitation funding, historical society grants, a Minnesota Zoo operating transfer, airport appropriations, and several cancellations of prior appropriations to help finance the package. Members generally praised the bill and the bipartisan work behind it. Some Republicans emphasized the one-time license fee reduction and affordability, while also saying DEED’s business development infrastructure funding was too low. Senator Nelson highlighted long-awaited transportation projects such as Highway 14 and township roads. Senator Dibble supported the transportation investments but criticized the bill for having no transit funding, calling that a major omission. No vote was recorded in the excerpt, but the discussion centered on final review and support for moving the bonding bill forward.