Transcript Highlights:

• And we think that, you know, we'll refresh the data when we have it certain, but we're probably about
• To compare that to most, Country at 1% increase, which corresponds with our data.
• And this is data as of January 7, 2025.
• And this is data as of January 7, 2025.
• We want to provide data. We want to make sure it's accurate.

Summary: The Insurance and Banking Subcommittee received a lengthy presentation from Citizens Property Insurance Corporation CEO Tim Serio, with Insurance Commissioner Michael Yaworski also answering questions. Serio reviewed Citizens’ role as Florida’s insurer of last resort, its statutory funding structure, eligibility rules, depopulation program, reinsurance obligations, and the surcharge/emergency assessment mechanisms that can be used if Citizens runs a deficit. He emphasized that recent legislative reforms, combined with lower litigation and improved market conditions, have helped the private market recover and reduced Citizens’ policy count from a peak of about 1.41 million in 2023 to 936,182 at the end of 2024, with a projected drop to about 771,000 by the end of 2025. He also said the reforms reduced Citizens’ rate need and helped avoid an emergency assessment after the 2024 storms. Members asked about Citizens’ rate increases, why Citizens still seeks higher rates despite lower litigation, how the 20% eligibility threshold works, whether Citizens should be wind-only, and whether the state or federal government could help with deficits. Serio explained that Citizens is still charging below actuarially sound rates in most areas, that rate filings reflect reduced litigation and lower reinsurance exposure, and that assessments on all Florida property policyholders are the reason Citizens tries to build surplus and depopulate. He said the depopulation program is working better than in the past, with less than 2% of takeout policies returning to Citizens, and that the Office of Insurance Regulation has been vetting takeout companies more carefully. A substantial portion of the discussion focused on claims handling after Debby, Helene, and Milton, including flood-versus-wind disputes and Citizens’ use of the Division of Administrative Hearings for some claim disputes. Serio said Citizens had received 76,625 claims from the three storms and had paid nearly $823 million in indemnity and expenses as of January 7, 2025. He said many closed-without-payment claims were either below deductible, withdrawn, duplicate, or flood-only, and that Citizens had asked its internal audit function to independently review the claims data and denials. He also described Citizens’ storm outreach, catastrophe response centers, managed-repair program, and claim review process, and said the corporation remains focused on paying valid claims while minimizing the risk of assessments on the broader Florida market.

Transcript Highlights:

• or anonymized data whenever practicable.
• </c><00:07:51.919><c> by</c> disclosure of autism related data by disclosure of autism related data by
• So, we're talking about privacy data.
• </c><00:17:32.559><c> often</c> collect, interpret and use data often collect, interpret and use data
• </c><00:18:28.320><c> and</c> approach to the collection of data and approach to the collection of data

Committee: House Health, Human Services and Elderly Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• Moreover, based on my personal experience analyzing non-publicly available data, we identified data that
• Moreover, based on my personal experience, analyzing non-publicly available data, the identified data
• The data bank over the course of 15 years for sexual misconduct.
• What we hear on our helpline is borne out in the data.
• The research and data have been clear for decades.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Public Health

Summary: The Joint Committee on Public Health held a hybrid hearing on a wide range of bills focused on patient safety, workforce development, health equity, and access to care. A major portion of the hearing centered on H. 2362/S. 1491, which would require health care providers to offer trained chaperones for sensitive exams. Sponsors and supporters said the bill is a common-sense safeguard prompted by cases of physician sexual abuse, and survivors gave emotional testimony describing grooming, isolation, and abuse during exams when no chaperone was present. Support also came from a health services researcher, a physician, and a RAINN representative, all arguing that trained chaperones and clearer documentation would improve transparency and protect patients. Committee members asked about clarifying who may serve as a chaperone and whether the bill would apply to other clinicians such as PTs and OTs. The committee also heard testimony on H. 2401/S. 1485, which would require explicit informed consent for certain educational exams performed on unconscious patients. The bill’s supporters said patients should know in advance if students or physicians will conduct non-medically necessary exams while they are under anesthesia, and that the measure would protect survivors from retraumatization. The hearing then moved to H. 2537, a primary care access bill. Health Care for All, the Massachusetts Medical Society, pediatric and internal medicine physicians, and a patient advocate described long waits, provider shortages, and difficulty finding primary care, especially for low-income people and people of color. They supported the bill’s proposed primary care spending target, payment reforms, Medicaid graduate medical education funding, and a commercial payment floor for health centers. Another set of bills addressed workforce and safety issues. H. 2397/S. 1593 would establish a nursing workforce center; nursing leaders said Massachusetts should make the current workforce council permanent to support data collection, apprenticeships, and long-term planning for the state’s largest health care workforce. H. 2396/S. 1535 would require safe patient handling and mobility programs in health facilities; nurses described serious injuries from lifting patients and said better equipment and programs would reduce staff injuries and improve patient outcomes. H. 2501/S. 1505 on LGBTQ+ health disparities drew support from a medical student and Doctors for America, who urged collection of sexual orientation and gender identity data to improve care and school outcomes. Finally, H. 2448/S. 1522 on patient safety and equitable access to care drew strong support from nursing organizations and individual nurses who described unsafe staffing, burnout, and patient harm, while the Massachusetts Association of Behavioral Health Systems opposed the bill as redundant for psychiatric facilities already regulated by the Department of Mental Health.

Transcript Highlights:

• the Local Control Funding Formula is generally reflecting the May Revision truing up to more recent data
• You know, obviously for 25-26, you know, we're still gathering data at that time.
• The state absolutely does need to be thinking about volatility, and we won't have final revenue data
• Because there is no data control from the state top down, that BCP was denied, and we would encourage
• At the state level, we don't have precise data on how much of an impact it has had.

Transcript Highlights:

• and small business routers to conduct attacks on websites, spy on passwords, and gather sensitive data
• Obviously, we're all especially sensitive right now about all camera data and other sorts of things.
• In fact, the City of Long Beach is going even further on retention policies, on ensuring that the data
• It would set parameters to further protect individual privacy and prevent unlawful or unauthorized data
• These subpoenas demand that big tech companies like Google and Meta turn over extensive private data

Committee: Senate Privacy, Digital Technologies, and Consumer Protection

Transcript Highlights:

• I also have some data that bears that out from the federal service.
• Do we have any data on that, though? I don't have any data, no. Okay.
• Do we have any data on that, though? I don't have a data, no. Okay.
• Do you have any data?
• And do you have data on any trafficking that you have found on those phones?

Committee: House Corrections and Public Institutions

Transcript Highlights:

• Yeah, if I may, I have sales data from last year I can share. Sure.
• And that's a good guess, you said that's industry-shared data between... Industry-shared data, yep.
• I just don't think we're there; we've got that data back from those guys yet.
• Again, we've looked; there is some data.
• You say, you know, we've seen the data.

Committee: Joint Arizona Off-Highway Vehicle Study Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• So in this graphic on the left, you see those last two data points.
• So the primary factors in play, So in this graphic on the left you see those last two data points.
• Both the current law and this proposed bill rely on five years of leased data to establish those values
• That data simply does not exist today for most agricultural properties.
• and resources at the State Land Department. ...to have undefined access to data and resources at the

Committee: Senate Senate Natural Resources Committee of Reference

Summary: The committee first heard an informational presentation on transportation fuel supply in Arizona from Gordon Shemp of Nemecu Analytics. He described Arizona’s dependence on pipeline deliveries, limited terminal inventories, and the resulting vulnerability to outages and price spikes. He also discussed recent refinery closures in California, increased imports from overseas, and a proposed Kinder Morgan project that could add east-to-west capacity into Phoenix. Committee members asked about fuel formulations and how many fuel types move through the system; Shemp said the project would not change destination fuel specifications and that multiple fuel products already move through the pipelines. The committee then took up House Bill 2758, which would allow groundwater transport from the McMullen Valley basin to an initial AMA and related uses, with provisions for eligible entities, transportation fees, and water improvement programs. Supporters, including Stan Barnes, Jim Downing, and Barry Arons, argued the bill follows the 1991 transfer-basin framework, provides needed water augmentation for urban Arizona, and includes local benefits and guardrails. Opponents, including La Paz County Supervisor Holly Irwin, Devonna Sater, and Ed Curry, said the bill would worsen groundwater decline, subsidence, and well failures in Salome and Wenden and favored rural communities being used to solve urban water shortages. The committee approved HB 2758 on a 4-3 vote. The committee also considered HB 2078, which clarifies that certain aggregate mining reclamation notice requirements apply only to new reclamation plans and new aggregate operations, not existing mines. The sponsor said the bill fixes confusion from prior legislation, and the committee passed it 5-0. HB 2031, extending the deadline for applying for a certificate of grandfathered right in the Wilcox AMA from 15 to 27 months, also passed after some members argued the extension was needed for affected applicants while others said it would delay needed protections. HB 2102, allowing county improvement districts in certain basins to use eminent domain for a well and standpipe site and to operate domestic water delivery systems, and HB 2103, allowing gifts and fee revenues to support water hauling and local water improvement programs, both passed 4-3 despite opposition that they were only partial fixes. Later, HB 2117, which increases the annual distribution cap for conservation district education centers and shifts Environmental Special Plate Fund disbursements to the Natural Resource Conservation Board, passed 5-2 after supporters called it a technical cleanup and one member objected to changing the administering entity. HB 2261, revising agricultural property tax valuation terminology and requiring income-based valuation for agricultural real property, passed 4-3 after assessors and county representatives warned it would remove agricultural improvements from the tax rolls and shift costs to homeowners, while farm groups said it would clarify and stabilize agricultural taxation. Finally, HB 2262, transferring the Resource Analysis Division from the State Land Department to the Arizona Geological Survey and changing related geospatial advisory duties, was presented with State Land Department concerns that the bill left several duties and funding questions unclear; the transcript ends before any final action on HB 2262.

Transcript Highlights:

• The model utilizes expenditure data from community-based care organizations and data sources such as
• They look at data. They reach out to the client. They reach out to the client's employer.
• Data and lived experience.
• The data that you mentioned, I would appreciate those continued conversations with you.
• It's your data. I'd be happy to have further conversations.

Committee: Senate Ethics and Elections

Summary: The committee first considered the confirmation of Dr. John Lattell to the Florida Board of Medicine. In questioning, senators focused heavily on his views on abortion, vaccines, ivermectin, hormonal birth control, and the role of CDC/FDA guidance in board discipline cases. Dr. Lattell said the board should apply Florida statutes, described himself as strongly pro-life and skeptical of some federal health guidance, and said he would be sympathetic when judging fellow physicians because of his own experience in practice. Supporters praised his medical background, military service, and family medicine experience, while opponents argued his stated views could affect his ability to fairly discipline other doctors. The committee voted 5-2 to recommend confirmation, with Senators Polsky and Rouson voting no. The committee then took up the confirmation of Taylor Hatch as Secretary of the Florida Department of Children and Families. Hatch outlined her background at DCF and APD and described department priorities including streamlining services, improving child welfare and behavioral health systems, expanding peer support, and reducing SNAP error rates. Members asked detailed questions about Hope Florida, the number and role of Hope Navigators, agency responsiveness on bill analyses, and accountability for community-based care contractors. Hatch said Hope Florida is a partnership-based navigation effort aimed at self-sufficiency, that 143 Hope Navigators are in place, and that the department is working to improve transparency and oversight through contracts, audits, and a proposed funding model. Senators also pressed Hatch on the Hope Florida Foundation’s compliance history and on forensic audits of community-based care agencies, especially Northwest Florida Health Network. Hatch said the foundation is now in compliance and under audit, and that the contractor had completed corrective actions and was operating within current accountability limits. She said DCF had not yet conducted new forensic audits under her tenure but was preparing another round and was considering using contracted-services dollars to support that work. The discussion ended with continued questioning on oversight, staffing, and whether the agency could provide more formal bill analyses going forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• That data will not go away.
• But the courts and the data is showing that it's working.
• So we looked at the critical incident data.
• And the data showed that 82% of the kids in the critical incident data, I don't know.
• And the data showed that 82% of the kids in the critical incident data were zero to three-year-olds.

Bills: HB2511 , HB2660

Committee: House Early Learning & Human Services

Keywords: child welfare, dependency, imminent physical harm, child abuse, neglect, foster care, extended foster care, shelter care, out-of-home placement, Department of Children, Youth, and Families, DCYF, family law, juvenile court, child protection, unsafe home, substance use, caregiver impairment, relative placement, guardianship, adoption

Transcript Highlights:

• What are the data requirements long term? Who keeps that data? Who has access to the data?
• What are the data requirements long term? Who keeps that data? Who has access to the data? ...term.
• Who keeps that data? Who has access to the data?
• I think some of the concerns about this bill are valid around security, data storage, and data usage.
• The encryption, the data storage, and do this seamlessly today.

Committee: Joint Government Operations Interim Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• And real-time data tracking of how groundwater is changing.
• When we started this, we wanted to know if we had the data available to characterize the groundwater.
• to discharge quality, and groundwater monitoring data for those groundwater discharge permits.
• We are working with our contractor to merge different data sets.
• We will update old data sets to provide the best available surface water map for the state.

Committee: House Water & Natural Resources Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• Hopkins, article 5 deals with government data practices. It begins on page 32 of the DE amendment.
• 33 is the new language clarifying that responsible authorities have the ability to suspend ongoing data
• requests if the data requestor does not show up to collect or inspect the requested data that has already
• </c> ongoing data requests if the data ongoing data requests if the data requesttor<00:16:12.800><c>
• the requested data that has already<00:16:16.959><c> been</c><00:16:17.120><c> produced.

Bills: HF2300

Committee: House Judiciary Finance and Civil Law

Transcript Highlights:

• The $50 was due to a national data point around average application fees.
• You would not be able to charge more than $50, which in our data and what we see working with the smaller
• management and data sharing and confidentiality around that data.
• We have that data. It's very possible we have that data. Madam Chair, Mr.
• Speaker, we're looking through the specifics there, but the data that I've seen or meetings I've been

Committee: House House Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:

• We have lots of good data.
• Okay, uh all of the data that we have.
• And the data suggests illegal gambling.
• :41.760><c> it's</c><01:30:42.239><c> really</c> the data is limited, it's really the data is limited
• And again, ability to to access data.

Bills: HB1952 , HB1951 , HB1929 , HB2497 , HB2208 , HB2572 , HB1953 , HB2551 , HB2549 , HB1737 , HB1628 , HB1769 , HB2493 , HB2264 , HB1997 , HB2168 , HB2427 , HB1805 , HB2180 , HB2184 , HB2219 , HB2469 , HB2233 , HB2519 , HB2141 , HB1904 , HB2201 , HB2410 , HB2007 , HB2385 , HB2444 , HB2349 , HB2235 , HB1872 , HB2416 , HB2291 , HB2292 , HB2263 , HB2359 , HB2455 , HB1509 , HB1514 , HB1515 , HB1648 , HB2164 , HB2323 , HB1825 , HB2172 , HB1888 , HB2005 , HB2387 , HB2358 , HB2119 , HB2276 , HB2472 , HB1714 , HB2325 , HB1541 , HB1960 , HB2140 , HB2315 , HB2367 , HB2388 , HB1696 , HB2333 , HB2138 , HB2332 , HB2283 , HB2059 , HB2057 , HB2589 , HB2417 , HB2337 , HB1588 , HB2217 , HB2020 , HB1915 , HB1742 , HB2026 , HB1965 , HB1546 , HB2360 , HB1563 , HB1749 , HB2614 , HB1511 , HB1753 , HB1849 , HB1641 , HB2161 , HB2194 , HB1721 , HB2284 , HB2188 , HB1897 , HB1880 , HB1573 , HB1876 , HB20 , HB2137

Transcript Highlights:

• That AI is getting better and it will get better if they get more data.
• That data.
• health data as well.
• health data as well.
• I also just want to address an open issue around the claims data.

Committee: House Health

Summary: The Assembly Health Committee heard a special order of bills focused largely on utilization management and prior authorization in health care. Chair Bonta opened by explaining the committee’s rules and noting several consent items, then moved into bills aimed at reducing delays and barriers in coverage decisions for mental health, substance use disorder treatment, chronic care, and rehabilitation services. The committee also noted AB 1429 had been pulled from the agenda. AB 384 by Assembly Member Connolly would prohibit prior authorization for inpatient mental health or substance use emergency admissions and for physician care delivered during those inpatient stays. Supporters, including behavioral health groups, hospitals, emergency physicians, and patient advocates, argued that prior authorization delays crisis care and can worsen outcomes. Opponents, including health plans and insurers, warned about fraud, waste, abuse, and ambiguity around residential treatment facilities and review processes. The bill passed the committee on a do pass as amended vote and was sent to Appropriations, though it was placed on call. AB 510 by Assembly Member Addis would require health plans to provide a peer of the same or similar specialty when a treating provider appeals a prior authorization decision. Supporters said this would make appeals fairer and more clinically informed; opponents said the specialty-matching requirement and timelines were unworkable and could strain the system. AB 539 by Assembly Member Schiavo would extend prior authorization approvals to one year or the duration of the prescribed treatment, with supporters citing chronic illness and cancer care delays and opponents arguing the bill was too broad. AB 669 by Assembly Member Haney would bar certain utilization reviews for the first 28 days of in-network substance use disorder treatment and limit prior authorization for related outpatient medications; it drew strong emotional support from a parent who lost her son after treatment was cut short, while insurers and health plans opposed it as too restrictive. AB 512 by Assembly Member Harabedian would shorten prior authorization turnaround times to 24 hours for urgent requests and 48 hours for non-urgent requests, and AB 574 by Assembly Member Mark González would allow up to 12 physical therapy sessions for a new episode of care without prior authorization. Across these bills, supporters emphasized timely access and patient harm from delays, while opponents repeatedly raised concerns about oversight, medical necessity review, and cost. Several measures were voted out on call or held on call for later action.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> the country based on historical data the country based on historical data from<00:32:53.760><c>
• </c> wholesalers while ensuring adequate data wholesalers while ensuring adequate data protection<01:
• </c><01:13:18.679><c> collection</c> aim to strengthen data collection aim to strengthen data collection
• The program still hasn't delivered meaningful data to the public.
• </c> the most recent prescription drug data the most recent prescription drug data available<01:17:25.440

Committee: Senate Commerce and Consumer Protection

Transcript Highlights:

• And I think that, as Chair Fong noted, the data isn't great.
• And I think this audit also shows really valuable data that we can glean from to support.
• But the Office of the President doesn't necessarily take in the data from each...
• No, we have the data. We're presenting the data.
• I think the first is around the need to center data in intersegmental partnerships.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit Committee held an oversight hearing on a state audit of California’s community college transfer process, with members and witnesses broadly agreeing that transfer pathways remain too complex and inconsistent. Opening remarks emphasized that community colleges serve a large, diverse, often first-generation and low-income student population, but only about one in five transfer-intending students move to a UC, CSU, or other university within four years. Members highlighted disparities by race, region, campus, and major, and pointed to the Associate Degree for Transfer, TAG, and Cal-GETC as helpful but incomplete tools because requirements still vary across campuses and systems. State Auditor’s Office staff said the audit found that while UC and CSU overall enroll substantial numbers of transfer students, individual campuses and high-demand programs often do not, especially in STEM fields. They described barriers including missing prerequisite courses, unclear information, limited counseling, and inconsistent articulation between campuses. The audit used a computer science example to show how different UC and CSU campuses require different courses for the same major. The audit issued 22 recommendations, with 10 fully implemented and four partially implemented; remaining work centers on articulation, counseling, data sharing, and better use of ASSIST. UC, CSU, and the Community Colleges each said they support transfer and are taking steps to improve it. UC cited a new public dashboard, data-sharing agreements, new transfer pathways, and an ADT pilot at UCLA, while saying campus capacity and program differences limit systemwide mandates. CSU pointed to its strategic plan goals, the Transfer Success Pathway program, direct admissions outreach, and efforts to expand ADT alignment and credit applicability, while acknowledging that many students never reach the application stage. Community Colleges emphasized that transfer reform is central to equity and baccalaureate access, and called for stronger common course numbering, broader ADT acceptance, and more student-centered articulation. Members pressed the systems on why more uniform requirements and better coordination have not been achieved, and on how to reduce barriers for placebound and working students.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I think that, as Chair Fong noted, the data isn't great.
• And I think this audit also shows really valuable data that we can glean from to support.
• No, we have the data. We're presenting the data.
• The data, including the transfer rate findings in the audit, also showed this troubling reality.
• I think the first is around the need to center data in intersegmental partnerships.

Summary: The committee held an oversight hearing on a state audit examining California’s community college transfer process and whether streamlining it could improve access to bachelor’s degrees. Opening remarks from legislators emphasized that California’s transfer system is central to equity and workforce development, but that only about one in five transfer-intending community college students complete a transfer within four years. Members highlighted disparities by race, region, campus, and major, and pointed to confusion created by differing requirements across the UC, CSU, and community college systems, including limits and inconsistencies in the Associate Degree for Transfer (ADT), TAG, and major-specific prerequisites. State Auditor’s staff said the audit found that while UC and CSU systemwide enroll more transfer students than the Master Plan target, individual campuses and high-demand STEM programs often do not. The audit identified barriers including unclear and varying course requirements, limited counseling and education plans, insufficient counselor staffing at some campuses, and weak equity plans. It also found that many students never even apply because they do not accumulate enough units or cannot navigate the process. The auditor described examples where transfer students with strong preparation were denied at selective campuses and noted that articulation alignment across systems remains limited. Representatives from UC, CSU, and the Community Colleges responded that transfer remains a top priority and described ongoing reforms. UC cited a new public dashboard, data-sharing agreements, new transfer pathways, and an ADT pilot at UCLA, while saying campus-level capacity and program differences limit how much can be standardized from the system office. CSU said it admits more than 90% of eligible transfer applicants, is expanding transfer planning tools and direct outreach, and is implementing SB 640’s Transfer Success Pathway Program. Community Colleges said transfer reform must focus on clearer credit mobility, more consistent articulation, and broader ADT adoption. Members pressed the systems on inconsistent major requirements, the need for better coordination, and whether campuses are fully prioritizing transfer students; no votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• and small business routers to conduct attacks on websites, spy on passwords, and gather sensitive data
• Obviously we're all especially sensitive right now about all camera data and other sorts of things.
• Obviously we're all especially sensitive right now about all camera data and other sorts of things.
• In fact, the City of Long Beach is going even further on retention policies, on ensuring that the data
• Information without ever letting the user know their data was requested.

Summary: The committee heard several privacy, technology, and public safety measures. SB 898 by Senator Weber Pearson would require manufacturers of connected consumer products to disclose the minimum period of software support and notify consumers when support is nearing or has ended. Consumer Reports supported the bill as a consumer protection and cybersecurity measure, while some members raised concerns about enforcement through the unfair competition law and the possibility of private lawsuits. The bill was moved on a 5-1 vote to the Senate Judiciary Committee, with amendments to be taken there. SB 1279 by Senator Gonzalez would authorize Long Beach to place speed safety cameras on Pacific Coast Highway under the same privacy and equity guardrails as the existing pilot program, including no facial recognition, confidentiality of DMV data, warning notices, and reduced fees for low-income recipients. Supporters said the cameras would address severe speeding and fatal crashes on PCH, while opponents raised civil liberties, due process, and concerns about automated enforcement and identifying the actual driver. The committee voted 6-2 to send the bill to Appropriations, and it was placed on call. The committee also advanced SB 1111 by Senator Ashby, the Artificial Intelligence Abuse Protection Act, which would create civil remedies for nonconsensual AI voice, image, and video cloning. Support came from SAG-AFTRA and Common Sense Media, and members discussed concerns about employer liability and the scope of the bill, but no opposition testified. The measure passed 7-1 to Public Safety and was placed on call. SB 1217 by Senator Grove, backed by survivors of trafficking and nonconsensual intimate imagery, would create a DOJ-run clearinghouse to verify removal requests and require platforms to take down intimate images within 48 hours. Survivors described ongoing harm from images still circulating online; members focused on privacy, DOJ capacity, cybersecurity, and the lack of a private right of action. The bill passed 8-0 to Public Safety and was placed on call. Finally, SB 1095 by Senator Perez would require fusion centers and participating agencies to adopt MOUs limiting the sharing of sensitive personal information for immigration enforcement or racial profiling, require annual reporting, and add oversight and audit provisions. Supporters argued fusion centers have operated with too little transparency and have been used to circumvent California privacy and immigration laws; some members raised operational concerns about defining prohibited sharing and how the restrictions would work in practice. The discussion continued, with the author noting committee amendments and existing state law as the basis for the bill's guardrails.