Transcript Highlights:

• organized labor, if it's employees, if it's employers... they supported and gave the president a mandate
• He won all the swing states, and he did have a mandate.
• But in that mandate, what's unique about this time... is the fact that he included the American worker

Keywords: PRO Act, labor laws, worker rights, unionization, right-to-work, public testimony, political polarization

Summary: The meeting centered around an in-depth discussion of the PRO Act, with representatives expressing passionate opinions both for and against the legislation. Representative Chavez de Rimmer emphasized the importance of worker freedom, arguing that the PRO Act would infringe upon individual rights by coercing unionization. This perspective was strongly received by members from right-to-work states, who articulated their concerns about the potential erosion of workers' choices and protections. Speaker after speaker conveyed conflicting views on labor laws, indicating a deeply polarized environment surrounding labor issues at the moment.

Transcript Highlights:

• who<00:21:31.000> would<00:21:31.640> had<00:21:31.799> a<00:21:32.039> mandate
• <00:21:32.640> to sponsor 501c3 who would had a mandate to sponsor 501c3 who would had a mandate

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• implementing policies and programs that deliver access to this essential service, and we have statutory mandates
• We manage six legislative mandated programs to help us strive towards achieving this program.
• Right now, our focus is really on what we can do within the parameters of the statutory. mandates we

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Basically, again, the actual assessment, if that's something that is mandated essentially as part of
• the pilot by ACA directly as well, I'd have to follow up with you to see if that's mandated.
• Whether it's mandated that APD personally does that, I can follow up with you after that.

Summary: The Health and Human Services Committee received an overview of Florida’s intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) managed care pilot, created by legislation in 2023 to test whether a managed care model could integrate Medicaid medical services with iBudget waiver home- and community-based services for adults in pre-enrollment categories. AHCA explained the existing system, the pilot’s scope in Regions D and I, and the rollout timeline, including federal approval, contract execution with Florida Community Care, and the October 2024 go-live. Officials reported that, as of early February, 370 individuals had been sent for onboarding and 168 more were in queue, with about $35.8 million of the appropriation remaining. APD also clarified the difference between the pre-enrollment categories and the waiver waitlist, and noted that crisis cases can be enrolled more quickly depending on eligibility and funding. Florida Community Care described the pilot as a comprehensive managed care model offering medical, long-term care, and iBudget services, plus enhanced benefits such as bed-hold days, caregiver transportation, and help with legal guardianship costs. The plan said it uses one care coordinator, a 1:18 coordinator ratio, a face-to-face assessment within five days of enrollment, and 180 days of continuity of care for existing providers. The company emphasized that it is recruiting providers by offering higher rates than some iBudget rates, lower administrative burden, and network adequacy incentives, while APD said it continues to monitor provider supply and demand and recruit across service types and regions. Members repeatedly questioned whether the pilot’s costs, provider rates, and service levels were truly comparable to the iBudget system, and AHCA and APD said it was too early to draw firm conclusions because claims data are still lagging. Committee members also raised concerns about communication, enrollment delays, provider shortages, and whether the pilot could scale statewide. APD said it has used letters, phone calls, texts, emails, and community meetings to reach eligible individuals, and that some delays stem from required assessments, Medicaid eligibility checks, and level-of-care determinations. Several members asked for more detailed comparisons of costs and provider reimbursement between the pilot and iBudget, and APD said it would provide additional data. Public testimony at the end was strongly critical of managed care, with a participant and his mother describing poor service, transportation failures, and loss of control under prior managed care arrangements, and urging the committee not to expand such a model without safeguards. No votes or formal committee action were taken before adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• conversations from Republican colleagues this morning in terms of, we should be focusing on the mandates
• That's not a conversation we're prepared to have with districts, and so they want to focus on mandates
• because they don't realize that all laws are mandates, and they're not interested in public schools

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: Minnesota Senate Democrats held an education finance press conference focused on concerns that the Trump administration may dismantle the U.S. Department of Education and freeze or reduce federal education funding. Speakers said such actions could jeopardize Title I, special education, English learner, school meal, transportation, and other programs, and noted that federal education aid is often reimbursed after districts have already spent the money. They argued that even a 10% cut would amount to roughly $1 billion and could leave districts unable to cover costs they have already incurred. Several speakers also raised concerns about broader federal actions, including school vouchers, curriculum restrictions, and access to student and Treasury data by Elon Musk and others, warning about privacy and the possible targeting of DEI, ethnic studies, truth-and-history curriculum, and efforts to recruit and retain teachers of color. They said the instability makes it impossible for districts to plan budgets and maintain staffing, and that the harm is already being felt through frozen aid and other disruptions. The speakers criticized Republican colleagues for downplaying the threat and said Republicans were inconsistent because they had recently highlighted teacher shortages and school infrastructure needs while now minimizing potential cuts. No votes or formal committee actions were taken in the press conference; the event was a call for public pressure on Republican lawmakers to oppose the federal changes and protect Minnesota schools and students.

Transcript Highlights:

• It should be a mandate.
• It should be a mandate. If a petition is It should be a mandate.
• So, this is a zoning mandate on top of another zoning mandate that is less than two years old.
• It was an unfunded mandate on the towns.
• It was an unfunded mandate on beginning. It was an unfunded mandate on the<05:07:39.120> towns.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <01:35:04.840> um<01:35:05.719> and<01:35:05.880> also<01:35:06.080> mandating
• <01:35:06.560> that to person um and also mandating that to person um and also mandating that
• The city in October got the mandate from the court and was supposed to start producing them.
• from the court and was got the Mandate from the court and was supposed<04:08:39.319> to<04:08
• of Johnson mandates here's the important<04:38:36.439> aspect<04:38:37.119> nor<04:38:

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee opened its hearing with a procedural discussion about a forthcoming Monday hearing, and the chair confirmed that any amendment deemed non-germane would be made public in advance and included in the calendar. The committee then took up House Bill 6, which would replace the word “citizen” in the Right-to-Know law with “any person,” allow requesters to specify the format of records, and expressly reference preliminary drafts circulated to a quorum or majority of a public body as disclosable material. The sponsor said the bill was intended to clarify existing law, remove uncertainty after a Rochester-related dispute over requester eligibility, and make records easier to obtain electronically unless doing so would be impossible, unusual, unduly burdensome, or harmful to recordkeeping integrity. Testimony was mixed. Cordell Johnston, speaking for himself as a municipal attorney, opposed most of the bill, especially the requirement that records be delivered electronically or by mail, arguing that out-of-state or out-of-country requests can be fishing expeditions that impose significant burdens on towns and clerks. He said local residents already can obtain records at town hall and that many municipalities voluntarily email records as a courtesy, but should not be required to mail large volumes of material. He also said the preliminary-draft language was unnecessary because such drafts are already covered when circulated to a quorum or majority. Representative Alexander raised concerns about the breadth of “any person,” potential abuse by bad actors, and the cost to municipalities, while Representative Peternell asked about whether the bill should account for nonresident property owners and business owners. The sponsor responded that limiting requesters by residency would not meaningfully stop abuse and said he did not know the bill’s fiscal impact, though he suggested it might improve efficiency. Yil Biset of the ACLU of New Hampshire testified in support of HB 6, calling it a modest and reasonable transparency measure. He said the preliminary-draft language was acceptable and consistent with existing exemption language in the public-meeting and documents statutes, and he said he was not aware of foreign-bot document requests occurring in New Hampshire. He also noted that current law already requires electronic disclosure when records exist electronically and can reasonably be provided that way. No vote or final committee action was taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• . >> Is anybody opposed to a mandated disclosure on that? >> Representative KTO.
• I am not opposed to a mandated disclosure.
• You can have a mandated disclosure that says, to the best of my knowledge, blah, blah, blah, and have
• >> Is anybody opposed to a mandated >> Is anybody opposed to a mandated disclosure<00
• I am not opposed to a mandated Chair.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• . >> Community schools are the right terminology because the mandate for public education is academics
• discussed before we launch into community schools because we’re changing the exact nature of the mandate
• for public education the man the mandate for public education is<01:26:01.680> academics.
• forth into the schools and then mandate forth into the schools and then mandate that<01:26:25.720
• changing the exact nature of the mandate changing the exact nature of the mandate for<01:27:18.720

Bills: HB1890, HB1888, HB1676

Keywords: teacher pay, teacher salaries, salary step increase, annual increment, longevity step, public school teachers, public charter school teachers, collective bargaining, Hawaii Department of Education, teacher retention, teacher recruitment, cost of living, educator compensation, public employee bargaining, appropriation, salary schedule, school staffing, teacher shortage, HB1888, Hawaii

Summary: The committees heard three measures, beginning with HB 1890 HD3, which would provide automatic step increases and a COVID-era retention bonus for teachers. Supporters included HSTA, the Democratic Party’s Education Caucus, and a student who said higher pay and predictable salary growth would help retain teachers in Hawaii. The Department of Education supported the intent but asked that the bill be expanded to cover all department employees. The Attorney General’s office said the draft needed clarification to avoid conflict with Chapter 89 and to make clear any funding was subject to legislative appropriation. The Office of the Public Defender and B&F testified in opposition, and committee members questioned whether the step increases were already in the current contract and whether the bill was needed. HSTA said the current contract includes automatic step increases subject to funding, but argued the bill was still needed because funding is not guaranteed and the measure would codify the policy. HSTA also said the COVID bonus would apply only to active teachers who worked during the pandemic and estimated the total cost at roughly $150 million to $200 million over four years. No vote was taken in the portion provided. The committee then took up HB 1888 HD3, which would require DOE and charter schools to report harassment incidents and strengthen penalties for harassment of educational workers from a petty misdemeanor to a misdemeanor. DOE supported the bill and suggested narrowing language about assisting workers with temporary restraining orders, saying that function would be better handled through the Attorney General’s pilot program. The Office of the Public Defender opposed the bill, arguing the harassment language was overly broad, vague, and potentially unconstitutional, and that existing assault and terroristic threatening statutes already protect educational workers. HSTA, the State Commission on the Status of Women, and several individual testifiers supported the measure, describing increased intimidation and harassment of teachers and other school staff, especially since COVID. The Special Education Advisory Council opposed the bill’s language on “disrupting and interfering” with school functions, saying it could chill parents of students with IEPs from advocating for their children. Testimony was split, with the chair noting 20 in support and 16 in opposition in the portion shown. A final witness, Michelle Pestana, testified in opposition based on her family’s experience with special education services, describing alleged seclusion and restraint of her daughter and expressing concern that DOE testimony in prior hearings had targeted special education parents. Her remarks were cut off as time expired. The transcript ends before any committee action or vote on HB 1888 was taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• and this bill would impose possibly an unconstitutional burden on them in the form of an unfunded mandate
• 36.480> unfunded them in the in the form of an unfunded them in the in the form of an unfunded mandate
• So um I this was an unfunded mandate.
• We've just made this a state mandate. I oppose that. Thank you. >> Further comments?
• We've just made this a state mandate. I oppose that. Thank you. >> Further comments?

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Municipal and County Government Committee met in executive session on February 17, 2026, to act on a series of bills. Early in the meeting, members agreed that they could consult the online submission summaries rather than have changing submission counts read aloud. The committee then took up House Bill 1386, which would have allowed citizens in a municipality to vote to require a financial audit of a local school district. Members opposing the bill argued that school districts already have audit authority and reporting requirements under existing law, and that the proposal was unnecessary and potentially burdensome. The committee voted 17-0 to recommend the bill inexpedient to legislate, placing it on the consent calendar. The committee next considered House Bill 1181FN on public hearing notice requirements for zoning board of adjustment appeals. Members who opposed the bill said newspaper publication provides independent third-party verification and archival value, and that removing that requirement would weaken public notice. The committee voted 17-0 ITL and sent the bill to the consent calendar. It also voted 17-0 ITL on House Bill 1327, concerning the definition of commercially zoned land, largely because the sponsor was absent and members said they could not do due diligence without hearing from the sponsor. The committee then acted on House Bill 1473FN, concerning the use of agricultural fairground property, and House Bill 1147, concerning the use of capital reserve funds. In both cases, members cited the sponsor’s absence and the need for more information as reasons to recommend inexpedient to legislate; both votes were 17-0 and both bills were placed on the consent calendar. House Bill 1220, which would have allowed municipal governing bodies to review and approve school budgets, was also recommended ITL by a 17-0 vote after members raised concerns about local control, legal conflicts between separate entities, and technical drafting problems. The committee recommended ought to pass on House Bill 118, which raises the amount of money municipal treasurers may hold before depositing it in the bank, with supporters saying the higher threshold would reduce unnecessary trips to the bank and improve efficiency. It also recommended ought to pass on House Bill 1151, a housekeeping bill correcting statutory references related to conservation commission appropriations, and it approved House Bill 1309 as amended after adopting Amendment 2026-0411H to clarify town meeting warrant language. Finally, the committee considered House Bill 1385, prohibiting negative property tax rates in certain municipalities, and recommended ITL by a 17-0 vote after testimony indicated the practice at issue had already ended and that a blanket prohibition could create problems for municipalities with excess revenues. The committee also began work on House Bill 1369, relating to posting warrants for special town meetings, and discussed an amendment to preserve newspaper notice while also allowing website posting where available.

Transcript Highlights:

• When you make it a shall and then you put in an undefined term like that, you're putting a mandate on
• When you make it a shall and then you put in an undefined term like that, you're putting a mandate on
• This is a state mandate that interferes with local control.
• This is a state mandate that interferes with local control.
• I think the issue is that the state is mandated by the Constitution to fund the public schools.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• There's a will, there's a mandate that you've got to proceed, and you've got to call it all the time
• So that's part of our mandate. And then last session.
• So that's part of our mandate. And then last session, SB 2120, you passed that.
• So that's part of our mandate. And then last session, SB 2120, you passed that.
• We represent death-sentenced persons and mandate post-conviction proceedings on.

Bills: SB 1

Keywords: campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Project, I guess, contingent upon some kind of government assistance or government mandate or, you know
• And so being able to understand things that traditionally ...is part of our mandate.
• I think that the governor can mandate that the state chemist approve, okay?
• Unfunded mandates.
• Unfunded mandates.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Right now, the Minnesota State Patrol is legislatively mandated to inspect all school buses.
• Right now, the Minnesota State Patrol is legislatively mandated to inspect all school buses.
• <00:29:24.400> to Patrol is legislatively mandated to Patrol is legislatively mandated to
• I think only in Minnesota<01:30:58.560> when<01:30:58.720> you<01:30:58.840> mandate
• that you have Minnesota when you mandate that you have to<01:30:59.760> have<01:30:59.960>

Bills: HF4062, HF4063, HF4065, HF3926, HF4216, HF3176, HF3728, HF3988, HF3865

Keywords: vehicle registration, title transfer, rental vehicles, state regulations, motor vehicle laws, school buses, USDOT number, first aid kits, transportation safety, vehicle regulations, transit safety, assault penalties, public transportation, criminal justice, transit workers, transportation, railroad, safety, economic development, public roads

Transcript Highlights:

• The earned safe and sick time law that passed in 2023 mandates that employers provide up to 80 hours
• Workplace mandates,<01:38:03.760> energy<01:38:04.239> prices,<01:38:05.360> compliance
• mandates, energy prices, compliance mandates, energy prices, compliance expenses,<01:38:07.119><
• decisions, tax policies,<01:42:27.840> and<01:42:28.080> business<01:42:28.480> mandates
• policies, and business mandates policies, and business mandates influence<01:42:29.600> not

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• 00:11:59.440> must Additionally, principals depend on central SAU staff to manage legally mandated
• <00:14:45.760> Should mandated specialized tasks. Should mandated specialized tasks.
• And having said that, there are a lot of federal mandates that take a lot of their time.
• It's federally mandated. So maybe we need to look at state scores instead of NAPE. I don't know.
• So maybe we need to look at mandated.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The meeting focused on school governance and a proposed shift in responsibilities related to SAU consolidation, with committee members first discussing how school board members and other local officials would be selected for future testimony. The main presentation came from the New Hampshire Association of School Principals, whose executive director Brady Belair and several principals argued that mandatory statewide administrative consolidation should be approached cautiously and that any consolidation should be voluntary and locally driven. They said anticipated savings may not materialize, citing possible higher personnel, transportation, and technology costs, and warned that forcing changes could create disruption without improving student outcomes. Principals testified that their jobs are already broad and demanding, centered on instructional leadership, student safety, staff supervision, family communication, and day-to-day crisis response. Kathleen Murphy of Amherst described working 60 to 70 hours a week and said principals spend substantial time coaching teachers, handling student issues, and supporting school climate; she said adding more administrative duties would compromise student learning and teacher growth. Adam Osborne of Bow Memorial School similarly described principals as daily problem-solvers who set school-level direction and create conditions for schools to thrive. The witnesses also emphasized that principals, superintendents, school boards, and business administrators have different training and responsibilities, and that specialized tasks such as special education compliance, FERPA/HIPAA issues, and labor matters require appropriate expertise. Committee members questioned the witnesses about overlap between superintendent and principal duties, the completeness of statutory responsibility lists, and whether some functions such as curriculum, discipline, hiring, and evaluation are shared. The principals acknowledged some overlap and collaboration, but said superintendents typically handle broader system-level, legal, and central-office responsibilities while principals focus on building-level leadership and teacher support. One member raised the earlier expectation that districts might move to a principal-plus-business-manager model, but the witnesses said that model did not develop as expected and that district structures vary widely. No votes or formal actions were taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• heavy a burden is put on agencies in terms of training and figuring out how this fits with the other mandates
• heavy a burden is put on agencies in terms of training and figuring out how this fits with the other mandates
• heavy a burden is put on agencies in terms of training and figuring out how this fits with the other mandates
• ><01:42:31.000> with<01:42:31.159> the<01:42:31.280> other<01:42:31.480> mandates
• this fixs fits with the other mandates this fixs fits with the other mandates that<01:42:32.000>

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Districts are mandated to provide the special education services that children require.
• Districts are mandated to provide the special education services that children require.
• Districts are mandated to provide the special education services that children require.
• Districts are mandated to provide the special education services that children require.
• In front of us, districts are mandated to provide the special education services that children require

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The executive session focused primarily on HB 563, which revises the school funding formula, especially the adequate education grant amounts for special education students and the treatment of fiscal capacity disparity aid. Representative Ladd moved OTPA on Amendment 06508, explaining that FY 26 would largely hold the current formula steady, while FY 27 would increase several per-pupil amounts, including base cost, free and reduced-price meals, English language learner aid, and special education differentiated aid. He said the special education change was based on estimated case loads across disability categories and that the amendment also reinstates fiscal capacity disparity aid, using a formula intended to better assist property-poor communities. Several members supported the amendment as a step in the right direction, saying it better recognizes special education costs and separates property wealth from low-income student counts. Others raised concerns about the lack of time and the absence of a printed spreadsheet showing how the fiscal capacity disparity aid would affect each town. In response, sponsors said the spreadsheet existed, that the LBA had copies, and that the amendment would help about 40 target towns, while Manchester would be the main community receiving less under the new formula because of prior shifts in the extraordinary needs grant. Discussion also covered the broader impact of the bill, with members noting that about 200 of the state’s 245 cities and towns would see an increase and 45 a decrease under the proposed FY 27 changes. Supporters argued the bill was a compromise given limited revenues and that it should move forward so it can be considered by the full House and then Finance. No final vote on the amendment or bill was taken in the portion provided, and the chair indicated the committee was still deciding whether it had enough information to proceed.

Transcript Highlights:

• United States Supreme Court has long held that state laws that violate the Commerce Clause, if they mandate
• United States Supreme Court has long held that state laws that violate the Commerce Clause, if they mandate
• United States Supreme Court has long held that state laws that violate the Commerce Clause, if they mandate
• differential treatment of they mandate differential treatment of instate<00:23:18.799> and<00
• <01:38:29.280> even space to fulfill the a 50% mandate even space to fulfill the a 50% mandate

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several bills. HB 655 would limit collection of unpaid motor vehicle taxes, fees, and penalties to the most recent five consecutive years of delinquency. The Department of Transportation opposed the bill, saying it could significantly affect state and county revenues and that the fiscal impact was hard to estimate. The Tax Foundation noted the bill would shorten the existing collection period, while an individual testifier supported it as a narrow measure that would help owners of old or inherited vehicles. In questioning, the department said it could not quantify the cost but suggested it would prefer case-by-case flexibility rather than a fixed five-year limit. HB 697 would authorize Department of Transportation and Department of Law Enforcement personnel to inspect and certify evidence from automated speed enforcement systems and would appropriate funds for the program. The Department of Transportation supported the measure, citing the workload created by the red-light camera pilot and the need to assist police and prosecutors. The Department of the Attorney General supported the concept but recommended technical amendments so the verification language would apply consistently across the chapter and allow the appropriate reviewing entity to act. The committee also heard support from the AAHU Metropolitan Planning Organization and opposition from three individuals. HB 711 would require defendants convicted of causing the death of a parent or legal guardian of a minor child while driving under the influence to provide financial support to the surviving child. The Office of the Public Defender opposed the bill, arguing that criminal restitution must be tied to verified losses and that this type of long-term support is better handled in civil court, where trusts, conservatorships, and insurance claims can be addressed. The Department of Transportation supported the bill as a deterrent to impaired driving, and police, prosecutors, and an injury prevention group also submitted support. Members questioned whether the measure was better suited to civil litigation, and the public defender agreed that the civil system was the proper venue. HB 108 would allow direct shipment of beer and distilled spirits by certain licensees and require county liquor commissions to adopt rules. The Attorney General raised constitutional concerns, saying the bill’s different treatment of out-of-state manufacturers could violate the dormant Commerce Clause and recommended revisions. Brewers and distillers testified in support, saying the bill would put beer and spirits on a similar footing with wine direct shipment, help small producers reach consumers, and support the local economy without increasing underage access. They also said the bill should be amended to address grandfathering language. No final votes or committee actions were taken in the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• It wouldn't mandate them.
• Anything that sort of mandates a level of... Thank you.
• Anything that sort of mandates a level of Thank you. So yes, you're correct.
• And again, this is a framework, not a mandate. It's not a plug-and-play ordinance.
• FERC does not... ...mandate generation. It doesn't permit generation.

Summary: The committee held its first meeting on artificial intelligence and data centers, establishing its purpose as a study and policy-development body rather than one aimed at producing many bills. Majority Leader Hogue urged members to move quickly, focus on federal and other states’ AI laws, consider possible federal preemption, child protections, and the siting and economic impacts of data centers. Committee leadership echoed that the goal is practical, balanced governance that protects North Dakota while allowing innovation to continue. Legislative Council staff provided a background memo and NCSL presented a detailed overview of AI concepts and the current state legislative landscape. The presentations distinguished narrow AI, generative AI, agentic AI, and theoretical AGI/ASI, and summarized major state policy themes: comprehensive AI laws in states such as Utah, Colorado, Texas, California, and Illinois; targeted laws on deepfakes, chatbots, health, education, notifications, and digital likeness; and growing use of appropriations and agency inventories. Members asked about Colorado’s repeal and reenactment, Texas’s sandbox and training provisions, oversight structures, and whether AI regulation is bipartisan; presenters said most issues cut across party lines, with broad agreement on child safety and deepfakes but more division on broader regulatory approaches. The federal update focused on executive orders, preemption, and congressional activity. NCSL described a White House framework favoring a single federal standard, a DOJ litigation task force, Commerce Department review of state laws, and possible funding conditions tied to state AI policy, though no formal state-law challenge had yet occurred. The presentation also covered a recent executive order creating a voluntary federal vetting process for advanced frontier models after safety concerns, and congressional proposals including a failed 10-year state moratorium, Senator Blackburn’s child-safety bills, the Kids Online Safety Act, a House-passed children’s digital safety package, a Senate data center moratorium proposal, and a House ratepayer/data-center bill. The committee took no formal action beyond receiving testimony and asking questions.