Video & Transcript Research : 'service fees'

Page 93 of 500
HI
Transcript Highlights:
  • increase mental health services increase mental health services statewide. statewide. statewide.
  • 21.359> service,<00:35:22.079> which the the service, which the the service, which >
  • services.
  • Department of Human Services on Zoom. Department of Human Services on Zoom.
  • We're not human services. >> Oh, wait. We're not human services.
Summary: The committee heard testimony on SB 2047, relating to pharmacy benefit managers. The Insurance Division said the bill would require new enforcement resources and estimated an appropriation of about $1.5 million and five positions. Kaiser Permanente asked for an amendment to exclude HMOs from the definition of third-party PBMs, saying the bill should not interfere with integrated care models. PCMA and the Hawaii Pharmacist Association supported narrowing amendments, with pharmacists objecting to section 3 and warning the bill as amended could create major operational burdens and a significant general fund cost. No vote was taken in the portion provided, and the chair moved on to the next measure after questions. The committee then took up SB 2080, which would allow Hawaii to join the psychology interjurisdictional compact. Supporters, including DCR, the Hawaii Association of Health Plans, the Hawaii State Association of Counties, the Grassroot Institute, and others, said the compact would expand access to psychology services, especially for people in rural areas or those needing continuity of care while traveling. Opponents, including the Board of Psychology and a Shamanad University psychology professor, raised concerns about client safety, crisis-response procedures, enforcement costs, FBI background checks, and possible loss of state control over training and specialization standards. The board said Hawaii’s current 1,900-hour internship/postdoc requirement is higher than the compact’s standard and that the state is still implementing a separate provisional licensing law that may address some access issues. The discussion focused on whether the compact would meaningfully reduce shortages and whether Hawaii should instead pursue changes within its existing licensing system. Finally, the committee heard SB 2277 on hospital price transparency. The Office of Consumer Protection initially noted the bill could require significant staffing, but later testimony from SHIP suggested the measure could be handled more simply by working with the Healthcare Association of Hawaii and publicly posting violations. The Healthcare Association of Hawaii opposed the bill, arguing hospitals already must comply with federal CMS transparency rules and that adding state requirements would increase costs and legal exposure, especially if violations were treated as unfair or deceptive trade practices. Steve Fenberg testified in support, saying the bill would simply codify existing federal requirements in state law and that he was open to amendments removing state enforcement and the unfair trade practice language. No final action was taken in the excerpt provided.
HI

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

WAM Public Hearing 02-19-2026

Ways and Means

Transcript Highlights:
  • We also then, sorry, Joseph Compost, Deputy Director, Department of Human Services.
  • Compost deputy director department<00:05:16.639> of<00:05:16.800> human<00:05:17.039> services
  • c><00:05:18.160> Um<00:05:18.639> we<00:05:18.880> also department of human services
  • Um we also department of human services.
Summary: The Committee on Ways and Means met for decision-making only and adopted recommendations on a long list of Senate bills, with no oral testimony taken. Early actions included SB 99 to pass unamended, SB 585 to pass with a date correction to 2015, SB 2060 to pass with amendments involving public project lists, legislative approval for fund transfers, and removal of certain appropriations, and SB 2069 to pass with amendments extending a sunset date and requiring transit-oriented development zoning. The committee also advanced several other measures, including SB 2110, SB 215, SB 2259, SB 2382, SB 2442, and SB 2485 unamended, while SB 2152, SB 2315, SB 2446, SB 2919, SB 2577, SB 2580, and SB 2861 were moved with various amendments, mostly date changes, appropriation blanks, or technical clarifications. A substantial portion of the meeting focused on SB 2211, where Department of Human Services officials explained how the department was covering costs by using restricted funds and shifting Med-QUEST funding, and noted a need for $14 million plus support for $16.5 million in ACA enhanced tax credit subsidies. The chair indicated the bill would move forward with amendments, including blanking the appropriation pending more information on lapses, and the recommendation was adopted. SB 2544 was also amended to remove a specific appropriation and replace it with a blank cap on funds from DUR, and SB 2342 was amended to require projects to be in transit-oriented development zones and to reflect prior committee concurrence. The most extended debate was on SB 3326, which would address utility restructuring. One senator opposed the bill, arguing it could raise rates, worsen reliability issues, and disrupt an existing utility without a clear plan, especially given island-specific conditions. Supporters argued the bill would separate generation from transmission and distribution, create competition, protect union jobs, and respond to aging infrastructure and financial weakness in the utility sector. After recesses and discussion of the Public Utilities Commission’s role, the chair changed the recommendation from pass unamended to pass with amendments requiring the PUC to conduct a study, provide an interim report before the next session, and a final report the following session. That amended recommendation was adopted, and the meeting then adjourned with no further business.
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Local Government (Part I) Apr 28th, 2025

Local Government

Transcript Highlights:
  • area median family income, eligible professionals are corrections officers, firefighters, emergency service
  • I'm gonna file a lawsuit and I get my attorney's fees if I win, but if I lose, I don't have to pay the
  • city's attorney's fees.
  • and service delivery.
  • It simply ensures accountability by providing injunctive relief and covering attorneys' fees.
HI

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

EDU Informational Briefing 01-30-2026

Hawaii Senate Floor Meeting

Transcript Highlights:
  • And then we're also a direct service provider.
  • or funding for direct services to schools um throughout the state.
  • So um also a direct service provider.
  • or funding for providing direct services or funding for direct<00:02:40.080> services<00:02:40.480
  • ><00:05:34.639> know,<00:05:34.880> cafeterias services like in, you know, cafeterias services
HI

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

Senate Floor Session 04-07-2026 11:30am

Hawaii Senate Floor Meeting

Transcript Highlights:
  • Hawaii provides a lifeline for families and caregivers across the islands, offering critical support services
  • is possible when visionary leadership, community partnership, and cultural grounding converge in service
  • historically faced structural barriers to opportunity by offering culturally informed financial services
  • Beyond these services, the organization has developed a comprehensive ecosystem of opportunity through
  • Semio Ani Una Mariano has dedicated 23 years to public service in Hawaiʻi.
HI

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

Senate Floor Session 04-10-2026 11:30am

Hawaii Senate Floor Meeting

Bills: SB1432, SB2024, SB2043, SB2060, SB2069, SB2153, SB2259, SB2319, SB2321, SB2338, SB2360, SB2396, SB2405, SB2407, SB2544, SB2550, SB2552, SB2578, SB2580, SB2607, SB2614, SB2671, SB2800, SB2805, SB2816, SB2835, SB2877, SB2892, SB2928, SB2934, SB3063, SB3199, SB3233, SB3325, HCR8, HCR10, HCR11, HCR13, HCR14, HCR18, HCR19, HCR22, HCR24, HCR31, HCR32, HCR33, HCR35, HCR54, HCR62, HCR63, HCR66, HCR67, HCR82, HCR83, HCR85, HCR91, HCR93, HCR94, HCR96, HCR98, HCR102, HCR104, HCR105, HCR106, HCR110, HCR111, HCR116, HCR117, HCR118, HCR121, HCR122, HCR123, HCR124, HCR125, HCR127, HCR128, HCR137, HCR139, HCR140, HCR141, HCR144, HCR146, HCR162, HCR165, HCR166, HCR173, HCR178, HCR179, HCR180, HCR181, HCR182, HCR185, HCR189, HCR191, HCR192, HCR193, HCR194, HCR200, HCR202, HCR6, HCR36, HCR42, HCR43, HCR44, HCR53, HCR57, HCR61, HCR64, HCR69, HCR84, HCR101, HCR103, HCR107, HCR112, HCR126, HCR136, HCR154, HCR161, HCR175, HCR186, HCR187, HCR188, HCR197, HCR203, HCR204, HCR206, HB1870, HB1588, HB2429, HB2386, HB2583, HB2361, HB2270, HB2137, HB1643, HB1682, HB1692, HB2078, HB1553, HB1667, HB1700, HB1728, HB2293, HB2096, HB1959, HB1511, HB1961, HB1858, HB1897, HB2088, HB2093, HB2279, HB2314, HB2505, HB2433, HB963, HB1705, HB1550, HB469, HB1334, HB1710, HB1737, HB1753, HB1881, HB2309, HB1713, HB1741, HB2062, HB463, HB1839, HB1664, HB2455, HB2417, HB1898, HB1573, HB1768, HB1962, HB2101, HB1782, HB2033, HB1518, HB1642, HB1752, HB2097, HB2282, HB1696, HB1823, HB1886, HB2152, HB2413, HB2503, HB1875, HB1519, HB1509, HB1628, HB1810, HB1990, HB2023, HB2540, HB1679, HB1888, HB2576, HB2592
HI

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

Senate Floor Session 04-09-2026 11:30am

Hawaii Senate Floor Meeting

Bills: SB1432, SB2024, SB2043, SB2060, SB2069, SB2153, SB2259, SB2319, SB2321, SB2338, SB2360, SB2396, SB2405, SB2407, SB2544, SB2550, SB2552, SB2578, SB2580, SB2607, SB2614, SB2671, SB2800, SB2805, SB2816, SB2835, SB2877, SB2892, SB2928, SB2934, SB3063, SB3199, SB3233, SB3325, HCR8, HCR10, HCR11, HCR13, HCR14, HCR18, HCR19, HCR22, HCR24, HCR31, HCR32, HCR33, HCR35, HCR54, HCR62, HCR63, HCR66, HCR67, HCR82, HCR83, HCR85, HCR91, HCR93, HCR94, HCR96, HCR98, HCR102, HCR104, HCR105, HCR106, HCR110, HCR111, HCR116, HCR117, HCR118, HCR121, HCR122, HCR123, HCR124, HCR125, HCR127, HCR128, HCR137, HCR139, HCR140, HCR141, HCR144, HCR146, HCR162, HCR165, HCR166, HCR173, HCR178, HCR179, HCR180, HCR181, HCR182, HCR185, HCR189, HCR191, HCR192, HCR193, HCR194, HCR200, HCR202, HCR6, HCR36, HCR42, HCR43, HCR44, HCR53, HCR57, HCR61, HCR64, HCR69, HCR84, HCR101, HCR103, HCR107, HCR112, HCR126, HCR136, HCR154, HCR161, HCR175, HCR186, HCR187, HCR188, HCR197, HCR203, HCR204, HCR206, HB1870, HB1588, HB2429, HB2386, HB2583, HB2361, HB2270, HB2137, HB1643, HB1682, HB1692, HB2078, HB1553, HB1667, HB1700, HB1728, HB2293, HB2096, HB1959, HB1511, HB1961, HB1858, HB1897, HB2088, HB2093, HB2279, HB2314, HB2505, HB2433, HB963, HB1705, HB1550, HB469, HB1334, HB1710, HB1737, HB1753, HB1881, HB2309, HB1713, HB1741, HB2062, HB463, HB1839, HB1664, HB2455, HB2417, HB1898, HB1573, HB1768, HB1962, HB2101, HB1782, HB2033, HB1518, HB1642, HB1752, HB2097, HB2282, HB1696, HB1823, HB1886, HB2152, HB2413, HB2503, HB1875, HB1519, HB1509, HB1628, HB1810, HB1990, HB2023, HB2540, HB1679, HB1888, HB2576, HB2592
NV
Transcript Highlights:
  • Division of the Department of Health and Human Services.
  • The bill amends NRS 427A to enable Aging and Disability Services to provide and coordinate services for
  • council or similar body to which services are provided.
  • And so for services contracts, obviously those aren't just price.
  • Division of the Department of Health and Human Services.
AL

Alabama 2026 Regular Session

Alabama Senate Finance and Taxation Education Committee Apr 1st, 2026

Finance and Taxation Education

Transcript Highlights:
  • <00:27:11.200> people, we have this heart for service people, we have this heart for service
  • If it was something for<00:27:43.160> the<00:27:43.280> service<00:27:43.720> member
  • <00:27:44.000> themselves, for the service member themselves, for the service member themselves
  • services in the community that they need.
  • Um, we restored a couple things uh in the rehab services, the office of disability.
HI
Transcript Highlights:
  • services we provide. services we provide.
  • And in order to do that, we need services. We need stable services.
  • <02:48:58.120> And services. We need stable services. And services.
  • with the green fee. with the green fee.
  • to the green fee. to the green fee.
NM

New Mexico 2025 Regular Session

House - Commerce and Economic Development Feb 3rd, 2025

House Commerce & Economic Development Committee

Transcript Highlights:
  • Like, you're paying for your service, you have the fee clearly lined.
  • B, fully and clearly disclose all fees associated with these services.
  • There is no interest; it's a one-time fee that you pay as a service fee to access your wages early, just
  • We are in an economy now that is based on fees for service.
  • I guess, whether it is a loan, if it's free fee-for-service, you know, under...
CA
Transcript Highlights:
  • Interchange fees are fees that card acceptors pay to card Interchange fees are fees that card acceptors
  • a network fee, or the processor's fee.
  • So it's really not a service that is fee-free across the board statewide.
  • Okay, and then on an ongoing basis, what funds the service fees?
  • Okay, but the state of California would be paying... ...paying whatever service fees, the cost of operating
Summary: The Assembly Banking and Finance Committee heard several bills, beginning with AB 407, which would expand the California Pollution Control Financing Authority. The author said the measure would increase flexibility and access to resources, and the bill was approved 7-0 and sent to the Committee on Local Government. The committee also adopted the consent calendar, which included AB 76, by a 7-0 vote. A lengthy portion of the meeting focused on AB 1065, which would prohibit swipe fees on the sales tax portion of credit card transactions. Supporters, including small business owners, restaurant and grocery representatives, and a payments-policy expert, argued the bill would reduce costs for merchants and consumers and rein in dominant card networks. Opponents, including banks, credit unions, and payment industry groups, argued the bill is likely preempted by federal law, would be difficult to implement, and could disproportionately affect community banks and credit unions. After extensive questioning about preemption, fraud, implementation, and consumer impacts, the committee rejected the bill on a 6-0 vote, but then granted reconsideration by a 7-1 vote. The committee then heard AB 1365, which would create the Cal Account Program, a zero-fee, zero-penalty state banking account for unbanked and underbanked Californians. Supporters said the program would help low-income households, survivors of abuse, and others facing barriers to traditional banking, while opponents from community banks and credit unions argued existing low-cost accounts and the Bank On program already address the need and raised concerns about cost, feasibility, and duplication. The bill advanced on a 6-0 vote and later received enough votes on the reopened roll to move forward to the Committee on Labor and Employment. The committee also approved AB 1052, which would create a legal framework for digital assets and address unclaimed digital property and restrictions on public officials issuing or promoting digital assets, and AB 1180, which would create a pilot program for paying state fees with digital financial assets and require a report on broader adoption. Both bills passed with broad support after brief testimony and discussion. Final roll calls later confirmed AB 1052 and AB 1180, along with AB 407 and AB 1365, were moved out of committee.
CA

California 2025-2026 Regular Session

Assembly Banking and Finance Committee Apr 21st, 2025

Banking and Finance

Transcript Highlights:
  • fees.
  • But there are also several fees that come with most credit unions, so it's really not a service that
  • All the fees and startup and organizing... okay, and then on an ongoing basis, what funds the service
  • fees?
  • Okay, but the state of California would be paying whatever service fees the cost of operating this.
Keywords: 988, house, all
MN

Minnesota 2025 1st Special Session

Transportation committee approves HF5 1/22/25

Transcript Highlights:
  • And so what we're seeing over the last year here with this service fee or the delivery fee is that nobody's
  • And so what we're seeing over the last year here with this service fee or the delivery fee is that nobody's
  • And so what we're seeing over the last year here with this service fee or the delivery fee is that nobody's
  • And so what we're seeing over the last year here with this service fee or the delivery fee is that nobody's
  • c> here with this service fee or the the here with this service fee or the the delivery<00:48:54.400>
Keywords: 1183, house
Summary: House File 5 was heard in the Transportation Committee and moved by the author, Representative Jim Joy, to be referred to the Tax Committee. Joy described the bill as a package to make Minnesota more affordable by fully eliminating the Social Security tax subtraction, ending the motor fuels tax indexing, repealing the retail delivery fee, and studying vehicle registration/license taxes compared with neighboring states. Committee fiscal staff explained the bill’s fiscal effects across the general fund, highway user tax distribution fund, transportation advancement account, and metro county sales tax allocations, including that the delivery fee repeal would reduce Transportation Advancement Account revenue and that the bill would shift some revenue sources to offset losses. Several stakeholders testified. The Minnesota Grocers Association strongly supported repealing the retail delivery fee, arguing it is costly and complex for retailers to administer, especially small businesses, and that the costs are ultimately passed on to consumers. The Minnesota Propane Association also supported repeal, saying the fee is burdensome for propane businesses, that only a small share of deliveries are actually subject to it, and that compliance costs can exceed the fee revenue collected. Fiscal staff noted that delivery fee revenue forecasts have fallen below earlier projections, and explained that the fee is imposed on sellers with several exemptions, including a $100 transaction threshold and exemptions for some sales such as bars, restaurants, nonprofits, and certain small businesses. Opposition came from local government groups. The League of Minnesota Cities said it supported the Transportation Advancement Account and its 2023 funding sources, including the delivery fee and motor vehicle parts sales tax, and warned that the bill would prematurely alter a funding structure that cities rely on for predictable transportation revenue. The Minnesota Association of Small Cities said small cities had long lacked dedicated transportation funding and wanted a stable, ongoing revenue stream, but were neutral on the exact source as long as it was reliable. Metro Cities echoed support for stable, predictable transportation funding for metro-area cities. The committee took testimony and discussion only; no final vote was recorded in the excerpt beyond the motion to refer the bill to the Tax Committee.
MN

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

Committee on Transportation - 02/19/25

Transportation

Transcript Highlights:
  • the fee.
  • <00:13:03.320> are retake fee um and all these fees are retake fee um and all these fees are
  • The filing fee is...
  • and vehicle services.
  • most<01:14:37.840> of services and vehicle services most of services and vehicle services
Keywords: 1187, senate, all
MA

Massachusetts 2025-2026 Regular Session

Joint Committee on Financial Services Jun 21st, 2026 at 10:30 am

Joint Committee on Financial Services

Transcript Highlights:
  • So no, we can't take those fees out of what we give to our service.
  • Many payment companies have expanded the types of services they provide now, and so those fees for those
  • , not the processor fee, not the acquiring fee, just that.
  • So we're paying fees on money that isn't ours. 100% of tips go to our service staff.
  • They publish fee schedules, which have hundreds of categories of fee rates for interchange fees.
Keywords: 995, all
Summary: The Joint Committee on Financial Services heard testimony on several bills focused on financial security, banking regulation, and payment-card fees. Treasurer Deborah Goldberg supported the Massachusetts baby bonds proposal (H. 48) and also endorsed bills on matched savings (H. 1158/S. 737) and retirement planning/Secure Choice (H. 1143/S. 722), arguing these measures would help address wealth inequality, build assets, and improve retirement readiness. Supporters of baby bonds included policy experts and health advocates from Children’s Health Watch and Boston Medical Center, who said early-life asset building could improve long-term economic and health outcomes for children in low-income families. AARP also urged passage of the retirement planning bill, citing the large share of private-sector workers without access to an employer retirement plan. Representative Donato testified for H. 1143, describing it as a voluntary retirement-savings opportunity for workers at small employers. The committee also heard testimony on H. 3933, concerning the Massachusetts Credit Union Share Insurance Corporation, from former Bank Commissioner Mike Hanson, who defended the state’s full deposit insurance system for credit unions and savings institutions as a longstanding consumer-protection model. The Massachusetts Bankers Association raised concerns about the bill’s technical provisions and broader credit union/bank competitive issues, while the Cooperative Credit Union Association supported related legislation allowing modest compensation for credit union directors (S. 821/H. 1338) and flexibility for state financial institutions to grow through partnerships (S. 723). Bankers opposed those credit union bills, arguing they would upset a level playing field and blur long-standing distinctions between banks and credit unions. A major portion of the hearing focused on H. 1259/S. 688, which would prohibit card interchange fees on the tax and gratuity portions of restaurant transactions. Restaurant owners and the Massachusetts Restaurant Association testified in favor, saying the fees are a significant and growing expense, especially as most customers now pay by card; they argued the bills would save restaurants money without affecting state revenue. Credit union, banking, and payments-industry representatives opposed the bills, saying interchange helps fund fraud protection and payment infrastructure, that the proposal would create compliance burdens and likely litigation, and that it would mainly affect Massachusetts-chartered institutions while national banks could be preempted. Committee members noted that a commission on payment-card fees is being established and said the issue would be studied further. The hearing also included support for a separate bill on virtual credit cards for dental providers, with dentists saying automatic virtual-card payments impose hidden processing fees and fraud risks.
TX

Texas 89th Regular

S/C on Telecommunications & Broadband May 2nd, 2025

S/C on Telecommunications & Broadband

Transcript Highlights:
  • Video service means...
  • on the cable service.
  • You cannot sign up for cable service; it directs you to a streaming service.
  • Phone companies pay a fee on one particular service.
  • Cable companies pay a fee on one particular service, and now we’re trying to find ways to exempt some
MN

Minnesota 2025 1st Special Session

House Transportation Finance and Policy Committee 1/22/25

Transportation Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:
  • Chair. fee they aren't collecting that fee at fee they aren't collecting that fee at the<00:37:55.680
  • from services such as Amazon delivery, Uber Eats, and DoorDash, specifically the 50-cent fee on orders
  • And so what we're seeing over the last year here with the service fee or the delivery fee is that nobody's
  • <00:49:14.400> fee<00:49:14.960> or<00:49:15.240> the year here with the service
  • fee or the year here with the service fee or the the<00:49:15.559> delivery<00:49:15.920>
Keywords: 1183, house
Summary: The Minnesota House Transportation Finance and Policy Committee met on January 22, 2025, for its first meeting and took up House File 5, introduced by Representative Jim Joy and moved to the Tax Committee. Joy said the bill would make Minnesota more affordable by eliminating the Social Security tax, repealing the motor fuels tax inflator, removing the retail delivery fee, and changing vehicle-related taxes and metro-area sales tax allocations. Committee fiscal staff reviewed the bill’s fiscal effects, including impacts on the general fund, the Highway User Tax Distribution Fund, the Transportation Advancement Account, and the split between Metropolitan Council and metropolitan counties. Testimony was largely divided along stakeholder lines. The Minnesota Grocers Association and Minnesota Propane Association supported repealing the retail delivery fee, arguing it creates administrative burdens, requires costly software changes, and raises costs that are passed on to consumers; propane representatives said the fee is especially burdensome because most of their deliveries are exempt but still require tracking and reporting. In contrast, the League of Minnesota Cities, Minnesota Association of Small Cities, Metro Cities, and Minnesota Association of Townships emphasized the need for stable, predictable transportation funding for local roads and said they support the Transportation Advancement Account and related revenue streams, though some were neutral on the exact source of funding. The League and small cities groups said local governments need reliable annual revenue and that past funding has been inconsistent. Committee members asked about who pays the delivery fee, its exemptions, and how much revenue it has generated versus earlier forecasts. Fiscal staff said current estimates for delivery fee revenue are below original projections, and explained the fee’s exemptions and $100 transaction threshold. Representative Joy said his intent was to keep small cities and townships whole as the bill moves forward. No vote was taken in the portion of the meeting provided; the bill was heard and referred as noted at the outset.
MN

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

Going after late fees charged by utilities 3/10/26

Minnesota House Floor Meeting

Transcript Highlights:
  • Um, and then typically there's also a fee for reconnecting service um, that's added on top of that.
  • also a fee for reconnecting service<00:04:32.560> um,<00:04:32.720> that's<00:04:32.960
  • Reconnection fees for non-payment. Reconnection fees for non-payment.
  • program is funded by late fees. program is funded by late fees.
  • Our reconnection fee is $28, which does not fully cover our cost to disconnect and reconnect service
Keywords: 1183, house
Summary: The committee heard House File 3912, as amended, and the author moved that the bill be laid over for consideration in a future omnibus bill. The amendment was adopted without objection. Representative Holland described the bill as an energy affordability measure that would bar utilities from charging certain fees during the cold weather rule for customers above 50% of state median income, prohibit reconnection fees after shutoff for nonpayment, and create a framework for regulating late fees. He argued that late fees are often high, compound monthly, and disproportionately burden low-income households, citing utility debt and disconnection figures and noting that the need for relief is concentrated in greater Minnesota. Annie Levenson Faulk of the Citizens Utility Board supported the bill, saying reconnection fees and late fees fall on households already struggling to pay for essential service. She said reconnection fees should be treated as part of the cost of doing business and that late fees should be limited to a reasonable approximation of actual carrying costs, with protections for low-income customers. She also said the issue is already being considered in utility rate cases before the Public Utilities Commission, but that legislative action is still appropriate. Nick Martin of Xcel Energy and Katherine O'Donnell of CenterPoint Energy opposed the bill in its current form while emphasizing their companies’ commitment to affordability and customer assistance. Xcel said the bill would shift reconnection costs to other customers and could undermine a proposed arrears management program funded by late payment charges; Xcel also noted that the PUC is already reviewing these issues in its rate case. CenterPoint said it already offers extensive outreach, payment plans, and assistance programs, does not charge late fees once a customer is on a payment plan, and that its reconnection fee does not fully cover costs. After testimony and brief discussion, the chair noted the helpful information from utilities, the author said he was open to further work on the bill, and the bill was laid over.