Transcript Highlights:

• This is reflected in the bond sale each year.
• So you can see there, and we talked about... ...in the bond sale each year.
• that bond sale, right?
• We spend money, and then the portion that is spent, we sell bonds, but guess what?
• You have to pay off the bonds to which it’s obligated.

Committee: House Ways & Means

Transcript Highlights:

• Um there's a number of tax bonds.
• Sections 66 through 68 set out the authority for the Metropolitan Council to issue bonds. Mr.
• of the bonds. the the bonds<00:54:23.040><c> are</c><00:54:23.200><c> backed</c><00:54:23.599><c> by
• We're not able to do the regional transit capital bonds. I'm just kidding. I think I misread that.
• We're not able to do the regional transit capital bonds. I'm just kidding. I think I misread that.

Bills: HF2438

Committee: House Transportation Finance and Policy

Keywords: transportation finance, transportation policy, MnDOT, Minnesota Department of Transportation, Department of Public Safety, Metropolitan Council, highway funding, trunk highway fund, county state-aid highway fund, municipal state-aid street fund, state aid roads, local roads, bridge funding, road construction, transit funding, passenger rail, freight rail, aviation, airport development, safe routes to school

Transcript Highlights:

• we're going to move right ahead to Senate Bill, tab 5, Senate Bill 642, on foreign and alien bail bond
• Basically, there are domestic bail bond insurers, foreign bail bond insurers, and alien bail bond insurers
• Domestic bail bond insurers, foreign bail bond insurers, and alien bail bond insurers.
• We have certain reporting requirements and duties that we put upon domestic bond insurers, and this bill
• very simply is wanting to make sure that we're requiring that upon foreign bail bond insurers, which

Bills: S0266 , S0394 , S0540 , S0632 , S0642 , S0832 , S0834 , S1028

Committee: Senate Banking and Insurance

Summary: The Committee on Banking and Insurance met with a quorum and took up several bills, beginning with SB 834 on insurance requirements for nonprofit religious organizations and health care sharing ministries. The bill repeals a recent restriction on licensed insurance agents marketing or selling faith-based health care sharing programs. Supporters argued the change restores free speech and consumer education while preserving existing fraud and disclosure protections; opponents said allowing agents and brokers could create consumer confusion and has been associated with bad actors. A title amendment was adopted, and after debate the committee reported the bill favorably. The committee also heard and passed SB 642, which extends reporting and duty requirements to foreign and alien bail bond insurers, and SB 394, a technical bill updating reinsurance intermediary manager law to match current DFS practice. SB 266, which lets vulnerable adults rescind public adjuster contracts without penalty, was reported favorably after testimony from supporters in the insurance and elder law communities and a public adjuster who said the intent was good but the bill may need refinement. SB 832, a residential property insurance transparency bill requiring rate breakdown reports and a consumer resource center, also passed after discussion about consumer clarity and whether the required cost categories can be compiled as written. Later, the committee approved SB 540, which creates cybersecurity requirements for mortgage and money service businesses, closes a regulatory gap for certain investment advisers, adjusts OFR examination-payment deadlines, changes de novo charter requirements, allows virtual credit union meetings, and makes other financial regulation updates. Several amendments were adopted, including a substitute amendment removing fintech sandbox provisions. Finally, SB 1028 on Citizens Property Insurance Corporation was reported favorably after debate over a commercial lines clearinghouse intended to reduce Citizens’ exposure and shift more business to the private market; members discussed taxpayer risk, market competition, and consumer protections. The meeting ended with adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• on the bond commission of the House and Senate.
• By members of the House and Senate do serve on the bond commission.
• But I will say, we do have the bond commission, and bond commission has bond counsel.
• The main one I want to talk about is the bonding letter.
• In this situation, it allows for a letter of bondness, the bond capacity, to be issued in exchange for

Bills: HB506 , HB590 , HB647 , HB685 , HB692 , HB839 , HB860 , HB873 , HB887 , HB965 , HB972 , HB982 , HB1072 , HB1157

Committee: House Transportation, Highways & Public Works

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 1157, which would create a Louisiana State Infrastructure Bank to provide a new funding mechanism for transportation projects, including roads, bridges, rail, ports, and airports. The chairman and DOTD Secretary Glenn LaDoux said the bank would help leverage state, federal, local, and private dollars, modelled in part on programs in Florida and other states, and would be used for gap funding and faster project delivery. Members asked extensive questions about board makeup, oversight, seed funding, application priorities, and how the program would differ from capital outlay and other existing funding tools. Support testimony came from Greater New Orleans, Inc. and other groups, and the bill was reported favorably without objection. The committee then approved several mostly technical or local bills, including HB 860 allowing fillable electronic public bid forms; HB 972 naming a portion of Highway 93 in Lafayette Parish the Desert Shield Desert Storm Memorial Highway; HB 965 naming a portion of Highway 163 for Sergeant William Billy Earl Collins Jr.; HB 692 allowing local governments to use group purchasing organizations, as amended; HB 685 allowing cooperative procurement for public motor vehicles and rolling stock under FAST Act procedures, which passed after a roll call vote with one no vote; HB 982 designating portions of highways in Morehouse Parish, as amended; HB 506 creating specialty license plates, as amended; HB 839 lowering the CMAR threshold for hospital service districts from $2 million to $1 million via substitute bill; HB 647 revising the waterway assistance program and application timelines via substitute bill; and HB 887 revising construction management-at-risk procedures, as amended. Most of these measures were reported favorably or favorably as amended, with little or no opposition. The committee also received an update on the Office of Louisiana Highway Construction from Representative Chesson, who said the office will assume control of about 4,000 miles of roadway and 2,000 bridges and has been moving projects quickly using internal procurement procedures. HB 1072, which reforms the office’s powers and emergency authority, was amended to narrow emergency provisions and clarify funding and reporting language, then reported favorably as amended. The final major item was HB 873, which would fund pursuit-intervention technology and training for law enforcement through a $2 fee on driver’s licenses; the bill was presented alongside emotional testimony from the widow and daughter of Sergeant Grant Candies and from a St. John the Baptist Parish captain, who argued the fee would help agencies buy safer equipment and obtain grant support. The transcript ends during questioning on HB 873, before any final committee action on that bill is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• Christine Vogel of Boulder, Colorado, appointed for term ending September 1st, 2027; Clay McLaughlin Bond
• Clay McLaughlin<00:28:50.679><c> Bond</c><00:28:51.080><c> of</c><00:28:51.159><c> Denver,</c><00:28:
• 51.400><c> Colorado</c><00:28:51.800><c> to</c> McLaughlin Bond of Denver, Colorado to McLaughlin Bond
• </c><00:44:48.320><c> agents</c> the regulation of bail bonding agents the regulation of bail bonding
• Allows them, in certain circumstances, when they qualify, they can issue a surety bond and be able to

Transcript Highlights:

• And our first panel is Climate Bond Proposition 4 Expenditure Plan.
• Climate Bond Proposition 4 Expenditure Plan. Good morning, Chair and members.
• And similarly, across all Proposition 4 bond allocations, a portion of statewide bond costs were reserved
• Issue number one: DGS and the climate bond.
• And so council supports allocation of about $50 million from the climate bond to DSGS.

Summary: The hearing was an informational budget session on energy agency proposals, with no votes taken. Early discussion focused on Proposition 4 climate bond implementation, including funding for demand-side grid support, offshore wind development, and transmission financing. The Department of Finance said the budget includes allocations for demand-side grid support and offshore wind, but not yet for the $325 million transmission financing piece pending a required study. The Legislative Analyst’s Office urged the Legislature to consider whether to wait on offshore wind funding, whether to keep shifting funds into demand-side grid support, and how to direct future transmission financing. Members also raised concerns about local technical assistance for offshore wind, Salton Sea priorities, and the need for more information before final decisions. The California Energy Commission and CPUC then reviewed the broader energy package. The CEC highlighted the demand-side grid support program’s growth, distributed energy backup assets, long-duration storage, hydrogen grants, and the SIRP clean energy reliability program. CPUC testimony emphasized affordability, wildfire mitigation costs, rooftop solar cost shifts, and efforts to reduce rates while maintaining reliability and clean energy goals. Members questioned CPUC staffing, delays in proceedings, coordination with the CEC and CAISO, and the impact of rate increases on customers. The agencies also discussed the AB 3264 transmission financing study, with CPUC saying work on the study had already begun and was on track for the July 1 deadline. Several trailer bill and implementation items were also discussed. The committee reviewed a proposal to extend the Deaf and Disabled Telecommunications Program surcharge, with members split over whether it should be handled in budget trailer bill language or policy legislation; the administration said the surcharge supports a critical program serving about three-quarters of a million Californians. The committee also heard a CPUC data-sharing proposal to allow nondisclosure agreements for transmission and reliability data, which members generally supported as a technical fix. DWR explained a proposal to clarify language for the Electricity Supply Strategic Reliability Reserve so it can potentially sell three gas-fired units it owns, and the CEC presented a federal transmission grant proposal tied to grid-enhancing technologies and ratepayer cost recovery. Finally, the committee discussed California Lifeline and possible broadband pilot reforms in light of uncertainty around federal Universal Service Fund support, with CPUC saying it is exploring a statewide standalone broadband option for eligible customers.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have $480-some million in bonding, almost a half a billion.
• We have $480-some million in bonding, almost a half a billion dollars in bonding.
• The bonding is a big deal, and I have kind of covered that.
• Otherwise, every time they add another acre, they'd have to redo their bond.
• But at the end of the day, we do have some bonding.

Summary: The committee met at the Coteau Freedom Mine in Mercer County, approved the June 2 minutes, and heard an overview of the mine from Coteau Properties president Andrew Hawbaker. He described the Freedom Mine’s production history, customer mix, safety record, reclamation practices, workforce, community involvement, and economic impact. Members asked about how long land stays in production before reclamation, how quickly it returns to agriculture, labor shortages, groundwater impacts, and which skilled trades are hardest to fill. Hawbaker said the mine typically disturbs land for three to five years, reclamation returns much of the land to agricultural use, and the biggest hiring challenges are electricians, welders, mechanics, operators, engineers, and accountants. The committee then heard from Public Service Commission Chairman Randy Christman on coal mining reclamation. He reviewed the history of North Dakota and federal reclamation laws, the PSC’s permitting and inspection authority, bonding requirements, contemporaneous reclamation standards, and how the state handles topsoil, subsoil, drainage, and revegetation. He emphasized that North Dakota’s program is well regarded, with frequent inspections and no corrective-action issues in recent federal reviews. Christman also discussed problems caused by federal coal ownership that can delay mine plans, and he answered questions about reclamation timing, wildlife easements, wind and pipeline reclamation, and whether similar bonding concepts could apply to data centers. In the afternoon, the committee received an update from Lignite Energy Council President and CEO Jonathan Fortner on the lignite industry. He highlighted the industry’s long-term role in providing reliable electricity, jobs, and tax revenue, along with North Dakota’s low electricity rates and strong grid reliability. Fortner discussed severance and conversion tax revenues, federal regulatory changes, litigation over EPA rules, carbon capture, critical minerals, and the potential for large-load customers such as data centers to support new coal generation. He said the industry sees a window of opportunity for growth and expressed support for new large-load development, while noting that diversified energy companies are also pursuing natural gas and other resources. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken beyond approving the minutes and adjourning for the tour.

Transcript Highlights:

• t have to bond the entire amount.
• t have to bond the entire amount.
• So if those bonds are callable, after 10 years we have the opportunity to look at those bonds and see
• bonds.
• Those bonds are callable.

Summary: The committee first heard from the Personnel Appeals Board, which explained that it became an independent state agency after Senate Bill 487 and was presenting its first standalone operating budget. The board described its quasi-judicial role in hearing appeals from classified state employees over disciplinary actions such as warnings, suspensions, and terminations, and said it handles about 25 to 35 cases a year, with some cases lasting longer because of their complexity. Members also outlined the need for a chair and vice chair who are attorneys, the board’s current staffing and space needs, and its plan to move away from reliance on Administrative Services for office support and website functions. The board requested about $353,500 for fiscal year 2026, including startup costs, routine operating expenses, and two new part-time positions: a program director and a paralegal. Members said the budget reflects the new independent status, includes funding for only four board members rather than the authorized five, and is designed to avoid full-time staffing costs and benefits. Legislators asked about the cost per case, the board’s relationship to DAS, whether appeals must go through the board before court, and how often cases are appealed further. The board said appeals must first go through it, that court appeals are infrequent but have increased recently, and that the board’s process is intended to resolve disputes more quickly and less expensively than court litigation. Committee members also asked about the board’s caseload, outcomes, and staffing. The board said that in the prior year there were 22 cases, with four decisions overturned in favor of employees, nine dismissals, and nine settlements, and that many disputes are resolved before reaching the board through a multi-step internal process. A member noted the governor and council had recently approved a new board member and were expected to approve a fifth soon. The discussion ended with questions about the board’s website and records access, which members said would need to be moved from Administrative Services as part of the agency’s transition. The committee then moved to the New Hampshire Council on Developmental Disabilities. The executive director explained that the council is 100 percent federally funded under the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act and develops a five-year plan to address the needs of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. She said the council works with state agencies and advocacy organizations on quality-of-life issues, accessibility, voter rights training, and plain-language or easy-to-read materials, and that 60 percent of its membership must be individuals with disabilities or family members/guardians. She also described the council’s funding structure, including reimbursement to the state for operating costs, and noted that it currently has three full-time and three part-time positions, with no new positions requested but one full-time position being eliminated and replaced after a pandemic-era staffing change did not work out as planned.

Transcript Highlights:

• The bond and fine deposits were approximately $180,000 in 2022 and $409,000 in 2023.
• see where the calculation changes are coming from and to review all the old cases in the criminal bonds
• to this error and there won't be any further findings. ...to be instituting a monthly audit on the bonds
• We have one report that's being certified to the bond board and referred to the prosecuting attorney
• This finding has been referred to the prosecuting attorney and certified as the bond board.

Committee: All LEGISLATIVE JOINT AUDITING-COUNTIES AND MUNICIPALITIES

Summary: The committee first heard updates on delinquent private water and sewer reports. For reports due as of December 31, 2012, staff said five additional 2024 reports had been received since the December meeting, bringing the total of released escrow funds to 17 and leaving 26 still escrowed. For reports delinquent as of December 31, 2023, two more reports were received, bringing 59 of the original 64 into compliance and leaving five outstanding. Both update reports were filed without objection. The committee then discussed Act 709 of 2021 and the town of Daisy’s repayment of street turnback funds. Staff said Daisy had made improper payments to a nonprofit, used restricted street funds for fire truck and fire department building costs, and had not adopted the required repayment ordinance or obtained approval for a reduced repayment percentage. Mayor Lisa Cogburn said the city council had not approved repayment because members disputed the amount, though she said the city had funds to pay. After questions from members and staff explaining the audit calculations, the committee adopted a motion requiring Daisy to repay 10% of unrestricted general fund revenues under the statute and to withhold turnback funds if the city fails to comply. The report was then filed. The committee reviewed numerous deferred and current audit findings from cities, counties, and water systems. Several local officials appeared and described corrective steps, including Harrison district court, Carroll County airport, Izard County treasurer, Alexander district court, Town of 56 officials, Bull Shoals, Lone Oak County, Beaver, Central City, Gravette, Ralston Water Department, Thornton Waterworks, Ozan, and Lee County. Findings included missing or inaccurate reconciliations, unsupported credit card charges, payroll and compensation issues, improper use of public funds, missing receipts, and budget overruns. Some matters were referred to the prosecuting attorney and Attorney General, including Bull Shoals and Lone Oak County, while others were filed or deferred as appropriate. The committee also deferred two private water and sewer reports for lack of proper responses, filed 19 reports with resolved findings, and filed 53 reports with no findings. Before adjourning, the committee set its next meeting for February 12, 2026.

Transcript Highlights:

• year or do you a policy or a bonding year or do you think<00:04:31.280><c> that</c><00:04:31.759><c>
• She wants a bonding bill just as much as all of us do.
• And I have her assurances that there is money in the bonding bill for that project.
• Again, the budget is the most important thing, but certainly since we didn't get a bonding bill done
• last year, it is critical that we get a bonding bill done this session as well.

Transcript Highlights:

• is a bill that would expand the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank by allowing bond
• at the end of page 1 and page 2, is negligible, as the cost of this is borne by the issuance of the bonds
• It's all self-contained within the issuance of the bonds, as I stated.
• Furthermore, the bonds issued under AB 226 will be paid by the insurers of the Fair Plan policyholders
• minor and absorbable on the Department of Insurance and would allow the California Fair Plan to access bonds

Summary: The Assembly Appropriations Committee met on March 19, 2025, adopted its committee rules unanimously, and then heard a series of housing, insurance, and disaster-recovery bills. Early bills focused on wildfire relief and insurance issues, including AB 238 on mortgage forbearance for Los Angeles County wildfire survivors, AB 493 on insurance payout interest for homeowners, AB 597 on consumer protections after disasters, and AB 226 on strengthening the California FAIR Plan’s liquidity tools. Supporters generally framed these measures as necessary protections for disaster survivors and market stability, while opponents and concerned witnesses raised issues such as investor guidelines, compliance conflicts, and market disruption. Several members also noted equity concerns and the need to balance relief with consistency across the state. The committee also heard a cluster of housing-production bills. AB 306 proposed a six-year pause on new state building code updates affecting residential construction and limits on local code modifications, drawing strong support from housing and building industry groups who argued it would reduce costs and improve predictability. It also drew opposition from code, environmental, and clean-energy advocates, who warned about safety, local control, and the loss of important code updates. AB 253 would allow licensed third-party professionals to perform plan checks if local review takes 30 days or more, and AB 301 would impose state-agency permitting timelines similar to those already applied to local governments; both were presented as ways to reduce delays and speed housing development. AB 462 would exempt ADU construction from coastal development permit requirements in Los Angeles County, especially to aid fire recovery and expand housing supply. After hearing testimony and brief member discussion on each measure, the committee placed the bills on suspense or advanced them as appropriate. In the suspense hearing at the end of the meeting, the committee took up the suspense-file bills and reported AB 226, AB 238, AB 301, and AB 306 out with due pass recommendations on roll call votes. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• It would allocate $50 million in bond money for the Healthy Homes Program.
• Now I know that in the context of this environmental bond bill, that's a pretty substantial amount of
• There are many, many positive aspects to the Ready Act, informally known as the Environmental Bond Bill
• There are many positive aspects to the Ready Act, informally known as the Environmental Bond Bill.
• bill of almost for... ...funding in this enormous bond bill of almost $4 billion.

Transcript Highlights:

• funded and issuing the bonds?
• What type of things would not be eligible from a school district through these bonds? Mr.
• But it sounds to me that your proposal is to do all of that through bonding. Mr.
• I don’t think financing bonds for that is appropriate, and that’s just my opinion.
• I wasn’t looking... public very frustrated with about half the bonds approved and half the bonds not

Summary: The joint House-Senate appropriations committee met to review the governor’s fiscal 2027 budget presentation from Ben Henderson, director of the Office of Strategic Planning and Budgeting. Early discussion focused on the state economy and revenue outlook, with Henderson describing strong GDP growth and low unemployment but also fragility for working families. Members questioned the executive’s revenue assumptions, which were said to be about $100 million per year higher than the JLBC baseline, and the committee chair asked for a written comparison of the revenue differences. Henderson also said the governor’s budget is structurally balanced and includes both ongoing spending and proposed revenue changes. A major portion of the hearing centered on data centers, AI investment, and water policy. Henderson argued Arizona’s data center tax incentive should be eliminated because it had already succeeded in attracting investment, while lawmakers questioned whether repealing the incentive and imposing a new water-related fee would discourage future growth. The executive said the water proposal would create a Colorado River Protection Fund and give the Department of Water Resources fee-setting authority, with the aim of encouraging more modern air-cooled facilities. Members also raised concerns about whether the data center changes would require a supermajority vote and whether the fee was effectively a new tax. The committee then reviewed major “critical spending” items, including correctional officer pay, prison health care compliance, probation funding, body-worn cameras, law enforcement staffing, fentanyl enforcement, cyber readiness, and border-related costs. Henderson said the budget includes $24.4 million ongoing for correctional officer pay and $118.3 million one-time for prison health care staffing, plus other public safety and homeland security items. He also defended the governor’s assumption of $759.7 million in federal reimbursement for border expenses, saying the governor had met with federal officials and that the state would seek the full amount. Members expressed skepticism about relying on that reimbursement and asked what would be cut if it does not materialize. Education and health and human services were also discussed. The governor’s budget includes K-12 funding, Prop. 123-related school facility bonding, and a proposal to shift some school facilities funding to bond financing, which several members criticized as inappropriate for short-term maintenance needs. The committee also reviewed AHCCCS/Medicaid costs, Division of Developmental Disabilities funding, and the expected impacts of federal HR1 changes on eligibility, provider funding, and rural hospitals. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the chair repeatedly limited debate and directed members to keep questions brief while the presentation continued.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're gonna talk a little bit about bonding.
• How much do you think that bonding capacity is?
• Our entire bonding capacity is $3.7 million. That's the most that we can, we can bond.
• Yes, we, we are currently bonded at that capacity with existing bonds.
• For your meals and also on the bonding.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have $480-some million in bonding, almost a half a billion dollars.
• The bonding is a big deal, and I have kind of covered that.
• So I'm kind of making up a scenario why sometimes bond release happens slowly.
• Otherwise, every time they add another acre, they'd have to redo their bond.
• But at the end of the day we do have some bonding.

Committee: Joint Energy Development and Transmission Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• Bonds were the other because you could have a community...
• The bonding, those are decisions made by the boards.
• The bonding, those are decisions made by the boards.
• The bonding, those are decisions made by the boards.
• The bonding, those are decisions made by the boards.

Committee: Senate Education Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, members, uh, the next couple bills, but this one included, is a vehicle bill for the bonding bill
• >> just again, uh this will be a vehicle bill for uh the cash portion of the bonding bill.
• </c> bonding bill. bonding bill. Thank<00:05:10.680><c> you.
• For the general obligation portion of the bonding bill in the amount of 1.2 billion. Thank you.
• I just want to thank her for the hard work and dedication on the bonding bill and the negotiations with

Committee: House Ways and Means

Transcript Highlights:

• So first you actually have to show that you bought these bonds from a sovereign nation with the intent
• ... ...that you bought these bonds from a sovereign nation with the intent that the only way you get
• And I mean to actually hold up their assets if they don't pay you back an underwater bond.
• And it can only be used if a federal judge decides whether the investor has bought the bond with the
• intent of... ...decides whether the investor has bought the bond with the intent, on purpose, to sue,

Committee: Senate Judiciary

Summary: The Judiciary Committee met for its fourth meeting of the year and considered a series of bills, mostly on civil practice, real property, and court administration. SB 26A on extreme risk protection orders drew some concern about possible unintended consequences and broad exclusions for minors, but it was moved and reported to Codes. SB 1116, designating April 20 as New York State Constitution Day, was moved quickly and reported to the floor. The committee spent the most time on SB 1477, which would limit certain debt-collection practices involving sovereign debt and so-called vulture investors. Senator Krueger explained that the bill is narrowly targeted at investors who buy distressed sovereign bonds with the intent to sue in New York courts, while Senator Palumbo raised concerns about breadth and possible effects on legitimate lending and contract rights. After extended discussion and assurances that the bill would not affect ordinary investors or credit-card debt, it was moved and reported to Finance. Members also discussed SB 7541 on transparency for co-ops and condos; some members warned of unintended consequences and opposition from the co-op/condo community, while others argued it would improve disclosure. The bill was ultimately reported to the floor. Several other bills were approved with little or no opposition: SB 2546 on abandoned multiple dwellings, SB 8294 requiring more detailed judicial determinations on motions, SB 8372 on expenses in matrimonial actions, SB 8870 extending supervision requirements for a real estate license application, and SB 9482 creating a New York City Civil Court subpart for eviction matters involving affordable housing providers and small landlords. SB 9482 drew supportive comments, with a note that funding and staffing would be needed in the budget for it to function effectively. All bills considered were moved out of committee and reported to the appropriate next committee or to the floor.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, um, this is work we have been, uh, wanting to add all of the, the previous bonds that each of these
• pulled directly from there and just, uh, consolidated into the projects to show all of the different bonds
• the uh project status report that the fourth column is the one that identifies all of the different bond
• in each of the projects from different bond.
• So when design is awarded now about 2 years down the road, we add the construction to that future bond

Transcript Highlights:

• So, we're borrowing money to be bonded.
• Fish and Game fund to bond it.
• So that's just a delete. it's bonded at general funds is that it's bonded at general funds is that they
• If in the fishing game fund to bond it.
• So the amounts adjust bonds authorized.

Committee: Senate Capital Budget