Transcript Highlights:

• Well, the Senate passed our appropriation, so I'm asking for a good vote that we could pass their appropriation
• That was a marked decrease from the original request.
• These are all general appropriations.
• Request? You're... Representative Beatty, for what purpose? Request? You're recognized.
• These are all general appropriations. And then Senate Bill 74 is also a general appropriation.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I will highlight that Special Appropriation Request for Internship when we get there, but I do before
• Besides that, I do want to talk about the special appropriation request.
• She played the instrumental part in developing the appropriation request that we did, our budget projections
• as Scott indicated, and then also, of course, the FY27 appropriation request.
• Finally, turning to page 12, the reason why you're all here, the FY27 appropriation request.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Legislative Analyst's Office?
• Legislative Analyst's Office: Gook to Shenjohn with the Legislative Analyst's Office.
• We find it appropriate that charging users for the operation and maintenance costs is appropriate and
• I respectfully ask for legislative support of the $50 million budget request for the California Arts
• I respectfully ask for legislative support of the $50 million budget request for the California Art Council

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Wouldn't that be more appropriate to say, is what I'm saying?
• Alan Boxberger for the Legislative Fiscal Office.
• But I will bring legislation the military affairs, but I will bring legislation to move it to the Louisiana
• So I guess my question really just a request of you.
• The ancillary appropriation executive budget overview.

Keywords: 965, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So that is what this request is on page 38.
• So, yes, I think it's appropriate.
• Once that happens, it would require a legislative effort to pass legislation and put the new formula
• We're requesting that it be appropriated again in FY27 to allow higher ed to update their famous system
• Page 188, you have a request here for $18 million... ...request here for $18 million, and it looks like

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So I am presenting the clerk's 25-26 budget legislative budget requests.
• Commission, we actually have a legislative budget request.
• Through the Justice Administrative Commission, we actually have a legislative budget request in their
• I propose appropriations for those facilities through their legislators, and I'm hoping for your support
• I propose appropriations for those facilities through their legislators, and I'm hoping for your support

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Criminal and Civil Justice heard an update from Department of Corrections Secretary Ricky Dixon on staffing, overtime, capital needs, and inmate population growth. Dixon said the prison population has risen by about 8,000 since January 2021 while staffing has not kept pace, forcing the agency to open 53 housing units without funded positions and rely heavily on overtime and National Guard support. He cited a $189 million deficit tied to salaries and overtime, noted that most staff have less than three years of experience, and argued the solution is to fully fund posts for operational housing units. He also reviewed the department’s fixed capital outlay projects, including repairs, new housing construction, and medical modular units intended to reduce outside hospital transports, and gave an update on the VINE victim notification system and its expansion. The committee then heard from Florida clerks of court representatives Jason Welty and Miami-Dade Clerk Juan Fernandez-Barquin, who described clerks’ court-related and county duties and said clerk budgets have not kept pace with the broader justice system. They requested reimbursements for injunctions for protection ($3.3 million), Baker Act/Marchman Act/sexually violent predator cases ($2.5 million), and juror management ($4.8 million), and said future funding for new judges should include the full courtroom system, not judges alone. Fernandez-Barquin also raised concerns about unfunded mandates, rising retirement and health costs, low court-side pay, and the need to revisit filing fees and trust fund allocations. Members asked about collections, payment plans, license suspensions, and whether some fees or trust fund distributions could be redirected; the governor’s budget had already picked up the $2.5 million request for Baker/Marchman/SVP cases. During public testimony, speakers urged broader criminal justice reforms and additional funding priorities. A prosecutor emphasized that adding judges requires funding for prosecutors, public defenders, and clerks as well. Other speakers called for parole or long-term sentencing reform to reduce prison populations and costs, criticized staffing and conditions in prisons, and raised concerns about inexperienced correctional officers, visitation delays, and lack of air conditioning in some facilities. The committee took no substantive votes on the items discussed and adjourned after hearing the presentations and public comments.

Transcript Highlights:

• Because if it's spreadsheet C, that was money you appropriated during the 2024 legislative session, and
• and an appropriation process.
• Neutral piece of legislation.
• And we have a request moving, hopefully this legislative session related to that. Thank you.
• Madam Chair, I thought we appropriated. Like $75 million last year in the 26th appropriation.

Transcript Highlights:

• I am respectfully asking for your aye vote at the appropriate time.
• I am respectfully asking for your aye vote at the appropriate time.
• We strongly encourage and request an aye vote. Thank you.
• I'm a legislative advocate with ACLU Cal Action.
• And for that reason, I respectfully request your support for AB 2122.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We're requesting additional services there.
• And then this year we have a legislative budget request that the governor has funded.
• only legislative budget request from this session.
• And lastly, Our only legislative budget request from this session.
• A lot of it's based on legislative input.

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment, and General Government heard budget presentations from all five water management districts for FY 2026-2027: Northwest Florida, Suwannee River, St. Johns River, Southwest Florida, and South Florida. Each district described its preliminary budget, major funding sources, staffing levels, and how most of its spending is tied to the four core missions of water supply, water quality, natural systems, and flood protection. Several directors noted budget reductions from the prior year largely because major projects were completed or because grant/appropriation funding is not yet fully reflected in preliminary budgets. Committee members repeatedly asked how districts project operations and maintenance costs, how projects are selected, and what share of staff and spending is devoted to core missions versus administration or regulatory work. Northwest Florida Water Management District said its preliminary budget is $93.4 million, down about 15%, with 97% of spending tied to core responsibilities and a request for additional regulatory services funding. Suwannee River Water Management District presented a $70.4 million budget, emphasized its rural/agricultural character and spring protection work, and highlighted the Water First North Florida reclaimed-water recharge project; members also discussed its need for an additional FTE to handle consumptive use permit reviews tied to a new lower Santa Fe rule. St. Johns River Water Management District presented a $181 million budget, highlighted major water supply, water quality, flood protection, and land management projects such as Taylor Creek Reservoir, Water First North Florida, Black Creek, Crane Creek, and Lake Jessup restoration, and said about 93% of its budget supports core missions. Southwest Florida Water Management District presented a $227.6 million budget, with major spending on alternative water supply, water control structure repairs, watershed projects, and land management; officials said 93.4% of the budget supports core missions and discussed rising construction costs for aging infrastructure. South Florida Water Management District presented the largest budget at $1.05 billion, focused on Everglades restoration, flood control, water supply, and ecosystem recovery; the director described major reservoirs and treatment projects, the EAA Reservoir, and ongoing efforts to improve water quality and restore flows to the Everglades and Florida Bay. The committee took no formal votes on the district budgets and adjourned after the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• That concludes my remarks, and I'm happy to take questions at the appropriate time.
• I believe SBE is working on that request, and so we'll follow up shortly. Okay.
• That concludes my remarks, and I'm happy to take questions at the appropriate time.
• That concludes my remarks, but happy to take questions at the appropriate time.
• We are requesting additional funding for $10 million. leaders pipeline initiative.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And my request is thank you very much.
• My request that is that interested in.
• That's going to be appropriations.
• </c><00:48:20.560><c> Um</c> became um a legislator. Um became um a legislator.
• We're going to pass this with blank<01:22:32.400><c> appropriation</c> blank appropriation blank appropriation

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint HHS and LBT meeting opened with accessibility concerns, as several blind attendees arrived after the general public had already been seated. The chair apologized and said future hearings would try to seat blind members earlier. The committee also announced the hearing was being streamed on YouTube, testimony would be limited to one minute, and written testimony was available online. The first bill heard was SB 2281, relating to the use of artificial intelligence in healthcare. The Department of Health supported transparency for patients but preferred disclosure through provider websites and office signage rather than a new regulatory program. The Hawaii Medical Association and Healthcare Association of Hawaii generally supported the bill’s intent but raised concerns about administrative burden and suggested a working group or model policies. Hawaii Pacific Health said it already uses AI for note-taking and patient portal functions and worried that written notice requirements could create too much consumer information. In response, the chair emphasized that patients should be informed when AI is used, especially if it affects diagnosis or consequential decisions, and said AI should not be making medical decisions. The committee later voted to recommend SB 2281 pass with amendments, including narrowing the definition of consequential decisions, removing certain language requested by DOH, adding a two-year implementation period, and setting a far-future defective date for further discussion; both committees adopted the recommendation, with the chair voting aye and the vice chair voting with reservations. The second major bill was SB 2852, a civil rights measure focused on digital access for people with disabilities. The Hawaii State Council on Developmental Disabilities, Hawaii Civil Rights Commission, Hawaii Disability Rights Center, and the National Federation of the Blind of Hawaii all supported the bill, arguing that existing law clearly protects physical access but should also make digital access explicit. Blind testifiers described how accessible technology, such as VoiceOver on iPhones, allows them to participate independently in public processes and warned that inaccessible digital systems can create barriers for thousands of blind residents. One testifier, an attorney with disability-law experience, supported the bill’s intent but said the draft had flaws, including no exceptions for archived materials, no distinction between small and large businesses, and concerns about the timing and choice of accessibility standards; he suggested delegating regulatory authority to the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission. The bill’s sponsor said he supported DAB’s proposed amendments, and the committee indicated those amendments would address many of the concerns raised. No final vote on SB 2852 was taken in the portion provided. The committee then took up SB 2751, which defines compounded prescription drugs for workers’ compensation purposes. The Department of Labor and Industrial Relations supported the bill but requested clarifying amendments to keep pharmacists as the primary professionals authorized to compound in licensed pharmacies and to limit any physician compounding authority to the physician’s own patient. Supporters included the Work Injury Medical Association of Hawaii, while Solera Integrated Medical Solutions opposed the measure, arguing the current definition was already broad enough and warning about cost inflation, especially with 503B bulk compounding facilities and physician dispensing. In questioning, members asked about rural access, reimbursement for 503B products, and late testimony suggesting definitions for 503A and 503B facilities, limits on physician dispensing to 30 days post-injury, and pre-approval for non-FDA-approved drugs. DLIR said not every rural community has licensed pharmacists available, that products with a national drug code are reimbursed at 140%, and that 503B facilities raise concerns because they are bulk manufacturers rather than patient-specific compounding operations. The meeting then moved into decision-making on SB 2281; the chair’s pass-with-amendments recommendation was adopted by both committees, with the vice chair voting with reservations.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chairman, that is pending any appropriations that you all make in the coming legislative session.
• Your revenues exceed total appropriations, and you have an extra pot of money that you can appropriate
• For special appropriations, we're coming forward with the same as always: a $5 million request to implement
• legislation, should that be necessary.
• For C2 requests, we have three.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So at the appropriate time, I'd move favorable.
• Because in my case, I've requested my child's cumulative ...me, because in my case, I've requested my
• For this legislation, it's related to IEPs.
• Julie Silva, Legislative Fiscal Office.
• This is simply requesting the Department of Education, or BESE, and the Department of ...simply requesting

Summary: The Senate Education Committee met to hear several education-related measures. It reported favorably, without objection, on House Bill 1215, which would transfer certain removed historical statues and monuments to the Office of State Parks, prohibit re-erection in the parish where they were removed, and require interpretive signage. The committee also advanced House Bill 682, which creates a school guardian program for honorably discharged veterans employed or contracted by local school systems or charter schools; testimony emphasized that guardians would be unarmed, trained, and used for mentoring and school safety. House Bill 1079, giving enrollment preferences in charter schools to children in early childhood programs, military families, foster children, and children in custody disputes, was also reported favorably, as was House Concurrent Resolution 81, directing the Department of Education to study options for districts facing declining enrollment. The committee then took up House Bill 1084, which would allow public postsecondary institutions to raise tuition and mandatory fees by up to 15 percent annually, with higher increases requiring Board of Supervisors approval. The bill drew extended debate over affordability, TOPS, student retention, and whether universities should have more autonomy to set prices. Members raised concerns about fee burdens on families and whether the state should first study the issue; supporters argued the bill would increase transparency and let institutions respond to funding needs and market conditions. Senator Mazzell offered an amendment lowering the cap from 15 percent to 10 percent, and the committee adopted the amendment before reporting the bill favorably as amended. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 342, which would shift the burden of proof in special education due process hearings from parents to local education agencies. The author and parents testified that the current system places an unfair burden on families of children with disabilities, who often lack access to records and legal resources, and that schools already control the documentation and should have to show compliance with IEP obligations. Jefferson Parish school officials opposed the bill, arguing it would increase legal costs, require more staff and attorney time, and potentially lead to more hearings; they also questioned the fiscal note. The Legislative Fiscal Office said the fiscal impact was indeterminable, and the committee continued hearing testimony from parents and school representatives as the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have also implemented a request-first policy.
• We've also implemented a request first policy, which means we request the information from the licensee
• We're going to start as a request from Sierra Vista.
• I'm not sure schools are using it appropriately.
• Use of appropriately appropriated bond funds designated for such purposes, and finally the use of proceeds

Summary: The committee first heard a follow-up on the Arizona State Board of Chiropractic Examiners special audit. The Auditor General’s contractor reported that the board has made progress on most of the 28 recommendations from the 2024 audit, with 25 in process and three not yet implemented. Remaining concerns included complaint investigations not being resolved within 180 days, continued open meeting law compliance problems, and failure to consult the Attorney General’s open meeting law experts. The follow-up also identified new issues with posting disciplinary/non-disciplinary actions and maintaining a complete public records request log. Board staff said they had adopted new complaint timelines, subpoena limits, conflict-of-interest procedures, public meeting guidance, training, and a new licensing platform, and they described efforts to professionalize investigations and improve transparency. Members pressed the board on open meeting violations, complaint backlogs, lobbying activity, and the resignation of the board chair, while the executive director said the audit findings were being treated as a roadmap for reform. The committee then received the January 2026 Arizona school district financial risk analysis. The Auditor General’s office said the number of highest-risk districts rose from two to nine, and districts approaching highest risk increased from seven to nine. The report highlighted common risk factors such as declining student counts, budget reserve problems, use of capital funds for operations, and weakening general fund positions. Tucson Unified was used as an example of a highest-risk district, with declining enrollment, reserve declines, and capital funds redirected to operations; Scottsdale Unified was cited as approaching highest risk. The office explained its web-based dashboard, district action plans, and ongoing outreach to affected districts. Sierra Vista Unified School District superintendent Terry Romo then presented the district’s response to its financial risk designation. She said she inherited the problems, quickly developed an action plan, and is working to stabilize enrollment, reduce staffing through attrition, close an elementary school, freeze nonessential spending, tighten purchase controls, and renegotiate or cancel high-cost contracts. She also said the district is redirecting DAA funds, considering sale or lease of property, and improving communication with families through letters, videos, and enrollment outreach. Committee members questioned the district about declining enrollment, school safety, academic performance, and the pace of corrective action, while Romo emphasized that the district is trying to protect both students and finances and avoid returning to the high-risk list.

Transcript Highlights:

• ><c> appropriates</c><00:26:28.880><c> the</c> uh which just appropriates the uh which just appropriates
• The appropriation in SF 1417 reaffirms the long-standing commitment that legislators have made to maintaining
• The appropriation in SF 1417 reaffirms the long-standing commitment that legislators have made to maintaining
• </c> annually review requests that come in. annually review requests that come in.
• in your request. If if it's true that in your request.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's appropriated over three years.
• It's appropriated over three years.
• They would pass that request to us.
• They would pass that request to us.
• They would pass that request to us.

Summary: The subcommittee met to hear budget-related updates from the Judicial Branch and the Office of Emergency Services, with no votes taken. The Judicial Council supported the Governor’s proposed budget, highlighting $70 million for increased trial court operating costs, additional funding for court-appointed counsel, Court of Appeal case processing, and courthouse construction and facilities. Trial court representatives emphasized staffing retention problems, especially in counties like San Bernardino, and said stable funding is needed to avoid delays and maintain access to justice. Members also discussed the branch’s remote proceedings program, which has been used in more than 6 million hearings statewide since 2022 and was described as especially important in rural areas and for vulnerable litigants; several members urged making the authority permanent rather than extending it temporarily. A major portion of the hearing focused on Proposition 36 implementation. Finance said the Governor’s budget maintains the $130 million provided in the 2025 Budget Act for court workload and pretrial services, but adds no new Prop. 36 court funding. Judicial Council staff reported nearly 35,000 felony Prop. 36 filings in 2025, with most cases still pending and only a small share of treatment-mandated cases already dismissed after treatment. Witnesses said courts are using the funds for staffing, coordinators, clerks, and treatment-court operations, but that workload varies widely by county and that data collection is limited because courts report aggregate information rather than case-level outcomes. The LAO raised a technical concern about the Department of Finance’s Prop. 47 savings estimate and recommended revising the methodology at May Revision. The committee also reviewed the Orange Central Justice Center facility modification project, where the Judicial Council explained that hidden construction deficiencies and fire-life-safety issues caused costs to rise substantially after demolition began. The LAO said the project itself was supportable but recommended that the Legislature set an ongoing funding level for court facilities, require a long-term facilities plan, and consider more oversight of facility modification projects. Finance said it continues to fund courthouse projects individually and through the State Public Works Board, while acknowledging project delays and cost increases. Finally, Cal OES and advocates discussed victim services funding. Cal OES said it administers about $315 million annually for victim service programs, including VOCA-funded services, but federal VOCA allocations have fluctuated sharply and the state has used one-time General Fund backfills to maintain services. Trauma recovery center advocates warned that an 85% reduction in funding would sharply reduce services for survivors of violent crime, while human trafficking advocates urged reauthorization of the Human Trafficking Victim Assistance Program before funding reverts to pre-pandemic levels in July 2026. Members asked about federal and state funding stability, referral pathways, and the long-term value of these programs in preventing worse outcomes and reducing public costs.

Transcript Highlights:

• and not just the first request.
• The motion is due pass to Appropriations. Brian? The motion is due pass to Appropriations. Brian?
• We believe it's important to protect CalGEM's ability to appropriately review NOIs and respectfully request
• So thank you, and I respectfully request your aye vote. I also respect the request my vote.
• Motion is due pass to Appropriations. AB 2461, Hart. Motion is due pass to Appropriations.

Summary: The committee heard a long series of bills, beginning with AB 2026 on groundwater recharge. The author and supporters said the bill would streamline permitting for recharge projects, codify long-standing CEQA exemptions for flood diversions to recharge, and add tribal consultation and other guardrails. Water agencies and local districts supported the measure as a way to capture high-flow water and reduce groundwater subsidence, while environmental groups and some irrigation districts opposed it, warning that the bill’s exemptions and broader diversion authority could harm rivers, Delta resources, and public trust values. The bill was discussed but not voted on because the committee lacked a quorum at that point. The committee then took up AB 1577 on data center energy accountability, which would require monthly reporting of energy-use data and permit-related estimates of energy and water demand. The author and the Little Hoover Commission argued the bill would improve transparency, help protect ratepayers, and give regulators better information for grid planning. Data center industry representatives opposed it as duplicative, burdensome, and uniquely targeted, while local governments, environmental groups, and some utilities supported it or supported it if amended. The bill was later reported out with a due pass recommendation once a quorum was established. Members also heard AB 2245 on a producer responsibility program for lubricant products and containers, AB 2170 on CEQA language-access and environmental review protections for overburdened communities, AB 2059 on rural transportation and VMT mitigation, AB 1808 on Western Joshua tree permitting and fee relief, AB 2182 on industrial energy efficiency program changes, and AB 2231 on streamlining two hospital projects. Testimony was mixed on most of these bills: supporters emphasized affordability, local control, environmental justice, or project urgency, while opponents raised concerns about CEQA scope, regulatory duplication, costs, and environmental impacts. Several measures received due pass recommendations and roll-call votes, including AB 2170, AB 2059, AB 1808, AB 2182, and AB 2231, with some members voting no or not voting and some bills left open for absent members.

Transcript Highlights:

• I urge an aye vote at the appropriate time. All right.
• And so that is the goal of this legislation.
• So now would be an appropriate time.
• So with that, we respectfully request an aye vote. Thank you.
• The motion was due pass to Appropriations. Aguirre-Curry, aye.

Summary: The committee heard several transportation and public safety bills, largely focused on traffic violence, e-bike regulation, and DUI enforcement. AB 1588 on sideshows and street takeovers drew support from the author, San Francisco officials, law enforcement, and the League of California Cities, who said the bill would close loopholes, add motorcycles and dirt bikes to the sideshow framework, and align penalties with speed contests. ACLU California Action opposed it, but members generally supported the bill, noting the need for stronger tools against dangerous takeovers. The committee also heard AB 1654 on commercial driver’s licenses and federal verification rules, with the author arguing California must comply with federal law to avoid losing CDL authority; the chair and others objected that the bill could wrongly affect U.S. citizens and codify changing federal rules. The bill was discussed but not advanced in the portion provided. AB 1976 sought to speed delivery of bicycle and pedestrian safety projects by limiting some public meetings, restricting cancellation of contracts without findings, lowering petition thresholds for traffic calming, and updating the Pedestrian Mall Act. Supporters said current procedures delay life-saving projects and give too much power to opponents, while counties and cities opposed the limits on local public input and budget authority. After discussion, the committee voted to send AB 1976 to Local Government, with several members expressing support but also concerns about preserving community participation. The committee also heard AB 2015, which would direct Caltrans to study the effects of navigation apps on local roads and safety. Supporters said apps can divert traffic onto residential streets and undermine local traffic calming, while members suggested the bill should also consider built-in vehicle navigation systems. AB 2168, on the Active Transportation Program, would update the definition of safe routes to transit, prioritize transit-rich and underserved areas, and add stronger spending accountability; it drew support from bicycle and transit advocates and some local agencies, with a few technical concerns left to resolve. Finally, AB 1942 on e-bike registration and license plates for Class 2 and 3 e-bikes drew strong support from law enforcement and medical witnesses citing rising injuries, but broad opposition from bicycle groups, micromobility advocates, and some local governments who said it would burden lawful riders, create DMV problems, and not address illegal e-motos. The committee also heard AB 1685 and AB 1687, both DUI-related bills from the same author: AB 1685 would increase DMV points for gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, and AB 1687 would extend license revocation for a third DUI conviction to eight years with an interlock option after four years. Both bills received strong support from law enforcement and victims’ advocates, with ACLU California Action opposing them as duplicative or overly punitive; both bills were advanced by committee vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, the Senate passed our appropriation, so I'm asking for a good vote that we could pass their appropriation
• That was a marked decrease from the original request.
• These are all general appropriations.
• These are all general appropriations. And then Senate Bill 74 is also a general appropriation.
• Request. You're recognized. Can we pull out Senate Bill 72?

Summary: The House convened with a prayer and pledge, established a quorum, approved leave requests, dispensed with the prior journal, and received a governor’s communication listing several fiscal-session bills that had been signed into law. The chamber also adopted a consent calendar of resolutions and recognized multiple guests, including law enforcement officers, a doctor and nurse, a House staff member celebrating her 80th birthday, and several student athletic teams and Special Olympics participants. During the floor session, members heard a personal privilege statement from Representative Dolly Henley apologizing for any confusion about her request to vote no on House Bill 1098. The House then took up appropriations and related budget measures. Senate Bill 1, the Arkansas Senate appropriation, passed 90-1 with the emergency clause. An amendment to House Bill 1034 concerning the Secretary of State’s appropriation was rejected. The House passed a batch of general appropriation bills, then separately passed House Bill 1020, House Bill 1041, House Bill 1098, Senate Bill 2, Senate Bill 14, Senate Bill 26, Senate Bill 68, Senate Bill 69, and Senate Bill 72. House Bill 1023 and House Bill 1053 failed. Several bills were pulled from batches for separate votes at members’ requests, and the chamber repeatedly noted that some measures contained no appropriation increase while others reflected pay-plan, security, performance-fund, or capital-project adjustments. Senate Bill 69 was described as a supplemental for a University of Arkansas food science building without drawing on general revenue. Most measures passed with strong margins, though House Bill 1023 and House Bill 1053 failed. The House then adopted a motion to adjourn until 3 p.m. Monday, and committee announcements noted House Management would meet 15 minutes after adjournment and that the deadline for submitting resolutions was that day.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> legislative branch. legislative branch. Well,<00:16:24.240><c> Mr.
• Our courts are funded almost entirely through legislative appropriations.
• Our courts are funded almost entirely through legislative appropriations.
• </c> Judicial officials under the legislation and proposed amendments today have to request protection
• </c> believe that's appropriate at this time. believe that's appropriate at this time.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all