Transcript Highlights:

• Remember, manslaughter requires culpable negligence, so it has to be reckless disregard of human life
• It requires culpable negligence. It requires reckless disregard of human life.
• If they are drunk or if they are texting and they're not supposed to be, and it's 100% negligence, but
• Senator Leak: It would depend on whether the jury found that what they were doing was culpable negligence
• of the road, the sentence is different if it's a police officer who is killed by their reckless negligence

Summary: The Senate opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and several introductions recognizing guests and visiting groups, including the Challenger Learning Center, the Florida Dental Hygienists Association, Zeta Phi Beta, Pine Forest High School students, and others. Senators also noted President Albritton’s recovery and upcoming caucus and appointment announcements. The chamber then moved to the special order calendar. The main floor debate centered on Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 156, which increases penalties for crimes against law enforcement officers and other personnel, including making manslaughter of an officer punishable by mandatory life imprisonment without release and clarifying resistance to officers. Senator Leek described the bill as a compromise intended to honor Officer Jason Rainer, while Senators Rouson and Bracy Davis offered and then withdrew amendments. Senators Pizzo, Berman, Smith, Polsky, and others questioned the bill’s impact on self-defense, officer conduct, jury instructions, prosecutorial discretion, and the removal of language regarding unlawful force by officers. Supporters argued the bill corrects confusion and strengthens protections for officers; opponents said it removes civilian protections and imposes disproportionate mandatory sentencing. The bill passed 31-4. The Senate then passed SB 168 on public nuisances, expanding nuisance law to include gambling establishments and increasing penalties; SB 288 on rural electric cooperatives; SB 292 and SB 298 creating public records protections for appellate clerks and dating-violence victims; SB 296 establishing the HAVEN alert platform study and expanding address confidentiality protections for domestic violence victims; SB 364 modernizing CPA licensure; SB 386 creating protections for farm equipment purchasers; and several Open Government Sunset Review bills preserving or extending public records and meeting exemptions, including SB 7000, SB 7202, SB 706, SB 708, SB 7012, SB 7014, and SB 7016. Most passed with little or no opposition, though some of the public-records measures drew a few nays. At the end, the Senate waived rules to immediately certify passed bills to the House and adjourned until the next scheduled meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Finally, right now in current law, if there is gross negligence or willful misconduct on the part of
• to negligence.
• <03:36:04.880> or if there is um gross negligence or if there is um gross negligence or willful
• <03:36:18.000> to<03:36:18.239> negligence.
• gross negligence to negligence. gross negligence to negligence.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Summary: The committee of conference spent most of its time on Senate Bill 96, which deals with educator conduct and when information may be withheld from parents. The main dispute was over the House-amended language on violations and the “compelling state interest” standard. The Senate sponsor objected to extending penalties to third-party medical or mental health contractors and to language suggesting psychological or emotional injury to a child would not constitute a compelling state interest. The House side argued its draft was intended to keep the bill focused on credentialed educators and administrators, to include parents or guardians, and to avoid creating competing standards by relying on existing abuse definitions in statute. The House also added a requirement that any withholding of information be documented and reported to the school board in nonpublic session, and both sides discussed whether educators, administrators, nurses, and guidance counselors would be covered under the statutory definition of educator. The discussion also covered enforcement and penalties. The House draft proposed that an educator found to have willfully violated the law could have a credential suspended for a first offense and would face a minimum one-year suspension for multiple offenses, while the Senate raised concerns that this was too rigid and did not allow enough discretion or address revocation. The House later explained that the department would still have discretion on first offenses and that the one-year rule applied only to multiple offenses. Another point of disagreement was a three-year statute of limitations for investigations, which the House said was meant to prevent “witch hunts,” while the Senate noted New Hampshire’s constitutional prohibition on retroactive laws. After caucusing, the Senate rejected the House amendment, and the House then voted non-concur; the committee of conference adjourned without agreement. The transcript then moved to Senate Bill 87, concerning one-day liquor license requirements and allowing salons and barber shops to obtain on-premise licenses. The members discussed a House amendment that would allow two drinks instead of one, with supporters saying the change reflected the longer time customers may spend in salons and that alcohol service would still be covered by existing training requirements, including the EDGE course. Opponents worried that allowing multiple drinks would create over-serving and enforcement problems and could complicate business practices. After discussion, the Senate member agreed to go along with the House position, and the bill was reported ready for final sign-off.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, we've heard testimony in this committee that it's negligible.
• Um, it's, and pardon it's negligible.
• He said again that the amount is negligible and is like the difference between buying a cheaper pair
• So, it's<00:12:49.680> not<00:12:49.920> negligible.
• It's taking about it's not negligible.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up House File 3874, the Judiciary budget bill, and first moved it to the Ways and Means Committee. The bill was described as funding the judicial branch’s budget request, including courthouse and judge security measures, home safety for judges and staff, a $1 million courthouse safety grant program, and funding related to paid family and medical leave costs that the courts must absorb. A court administrator explained that some base adjustments were budget-neutral internal shifts within the court system, moving money from district courts to other courts to better meet overall needs. Members then debated several amendments. The A7 amendment, which reduced some of the requested security funding for administrators and aligned it more closely with legislative security levels while retaining flexible Supreme Court security personnel, was adopted. The A1 amendment, which would have deleted the additional operating adjustment for paid family and medical leave, failed on a 7-7 tie after debate over whether the courts should bear the employer share of that cost and whether the program itself was an unfunded mandate. The A2 amendment, also related to paid family and medical leave funding, likewise failed on a 7-7 tie after similar discussion about the judiciary’s ongoing employment costs and the branch’s inability to raise its own revenue. The committee then adopted the A4 amendment, which increased the courthouse safety grant program from $1 million to $4 million. Supporters said there was unmet demand for courthouse security grants and that the money would help with hardware such as screening equipment, while the court administrator said the branch would not spend more than it could use and that the grants would be reviewed by a committee including law enforcement and county representatives. The administrator noted the funding would be one-time money and would not cover staffing costs. The committee also discussed the judiciary’s ongoing need for funding, with members arguing both that the courts should be treated like other employers and that the judicial branch, as an independent branch of government, must be funded by the legislature. The final A5 amendment was then introduced, with staff noting it would delete a section already covered by the adopted A7 amendment and reduce an appropriation on page four, line 14.

Transcript Highlights:

• , but as I recall from the discussion we had during the public hearing, the FN was judged to be negligible
• getting into gas and nuclear investments on the rate paradigm, and that increased to a 10% share of load
• getting into gas and nuclear investments on the rate paradigm, and that increased to a 10% share of load
• But overall in the system, reducing load, then that would be reconciled, uh, essentially through our
• load settlement process." >> Follow-up. >> Okay, follow up.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Also, 131 goes further by lowering the legal standard for negligence and expanding liability for our
• <00:28:10.640> and legal standard for negligence and legal standard for negligence and expanding
• Yes, I just wanted to address something that my colleague brought up as far as the definition of negligence
• Um, it goes from gross negligence to negligence, and that definition is the failure to behave with the
• Um, it goes from gross negligence to negligence, and that definition is the failure to behave with the

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill came about after a nurse in Tennessee was convicted of criminally negligent homicide after
• homicide for a medication negligent homicide for a medication error<01:02:09.240> that<01:02:
• <01:02:46.960> recklessness<01:02:47.640> or<01:02:47.880> misconduct negligence
• recklessness or misconduct negligence recklessness or misconduct nor<01:02:48.960> does<01:02
• suffer harm due to Reckless or negligent suffer harm due to Reckless or negligent care<01:05:15.559

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• There are negligible fiscal impacts to the bill.
• As the committee analysis notes, there are negligible, excuse me, negligible—what?
• It has negligible state costs and no opposition, and we urge an aye vote. Thank you. Thank you.
• costs of $11,000 in fiscal year 2026-27 and $23,000 in fiscal year 2027-28, and DHCS anticipates negligible

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• where Californians must rely on Medi-Cal and the public safety net entirely because of the complete negligence
• where Californians must rely on Medi-Cal and the public safety net entirely because of the complete negligence
• an additional 12 onboarding in the next three to four months, have their student enrollment data loaded

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• comply with the forms that are prescribed, then they get a legal presumption that they were not negligent
• There is really one way to describe HB 32, and that is grossly negligent.
• Uh, you know, I also have a full course load.

Bills: HB15, HB171, HB204

Keywords: flood risk, campground, safety regulations, civil penalty, guest safety, Harris County, flood control, governance, expansion, public health, local governance, environmental management

Transcript Highlights:

• missing now for 596 days due to<01:18:18.159> the<01:18:18.719> gross<01:18:19.040> negligence
• to the gross negligence of a dog kennel. to the gross negligence of a dog kennel.
• Um, not a loaded question at all, but absolutely.
• Um, not a loaded question at all, but absolutely.
• Um, not a loaded question at all, but Um, not a loaded question at all, but absolutely<01:56:18.000><

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 302, which would update New Hampshire’s solid waste facility background-check law so the state can continue to access federal FBI criminal databases for checks on key owners and officers. Senator Howard Pearl and DES Waste Management Director Mike Whimsatt said the bill is the third attempt to correct prior drafting problems that prevented the FBI from accepting the language. They explained that the existing statute has long required background checks for hazardous and solid waste facility applicants because of concerns about organized crime, but the current wording is too ambiguous for federal use. The bill also includes technical corrections, clarifies which company officers must be checked, specifies which DES officials receive the results, and removes the Department of Justice as an unnecessary middleman. Committee members asked about the purpose of the bill, whether family members are covered, who pays the cost, and whether permits have ever been denied; Whimsatt said the applicant still pays, the checks focus on key officers, and at least one permit had been denied in the past due to a felony conviction. The hearing then closed, with one person listed in favor on the blue sheet and no opposition noted online. The committee then opened Senate Bill 229, which would allow retailers to sell uninspected bison, red deer, and elk meat and remove the sunset on the existing program. Senator Pearl said the bill would expand market opportunities for farmers while keeping labeling and traceability requirements in place, including identifying the meat as uninspected and maintaining records of the source farms. Representative Bixby, who had worked on earlier legislation, explained the current framework in detail: the animals are raised on closed farms, must be fenced, cannot be newly imported, and are subject to annual veterinary herd inspections and recordkeeping. He said the prior bison inspection regime was too burdensome for farmers to maintain, and the current law was intended as a workable compromise. Questions from members focused on how many farms participate, how many animals have been sold, and whether the program posed disease risks; the witness said he did not know the exact numbers, and Bixby said the existing import and fencing rules help prevent chronic wasting disease from entering the state. No vote was taken during the hearing, and the bill was left before the committee for further consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• It does add negligence as a standard for that misrepresentation, as a means of providing some degree
• When you broaden it to negligent misrepresentation, now we're arguing about the numbers over time, and
• It does add negligence as a standard for that misrepresentation, as a means of providing some degree
• fraud is a concern we want those in the financial sector to be very honest when you broaden it to negligent

Keywords: 993, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Banking Committee met with Chair James Sanders Jr. and reviewed a full agenda of banking-related bills. Early action included approval of a bill requiring licensed check cashers to file suspicious activity reports, and a bill on civil penalties for fraud or misrepresentation in financial products or services, though several members objected to removing the intentionality standard and warned it could broaden enforcement too far and discourage lending in New York. The committee also advanced a bill prohibiting fees for periodic paper statements, a bill on asset-based lending transactions, and a bill requiring reporting of suspected financial exploitation. Members spent substantial time on a bill regulating automated lending decision tools. The sponsor and chair said the measure would allow AI use but require a human review or appeal if a borrower is denied, while some senators raised concerns about competitiveness for state-chartered banks and possible overlap with existing human oversight. The bill was reported out and referred to the Internet and Technology Committee for further review. The committee also approved a DFS study bill on the financial stability and licensing of the check-cashing industry, with a suggestion that the study also examine risks of expanding the industry. A major discussion centered on the “Deep Protection Act,” aimed at preventing foreclosures tied to deed theft. The sponsor described cases involving elderly homeowners and fraudulent transfers, while opponents argued the bill was vague, could create unintended consequences or private litigation, and might affect only a small share of mortgages because it applies to state-chartered institutions. The sponsor said the bill would be amended and noted interest in related county clerk reforms. The committee ultimately sent the bill to Judiciary. The final bills addressed mortgage payment schedule fees and unsolicited mail loan checks; both were approved. The meeting ended after the chair emphasized open debate and committee review as part of improving legislation.

Transcript Highlights:

• these protections, you know, the civil actions will have to prove that we were noncompliant and negligent
• Carlos Lucero continued: “The civil actions will have to prove that we were noncompliant and negligent
• Carlos Lucero continued: “The civil actions will have to prove that we were noncompliant and negligent
• Or would this say, with rebuttable presumption, that there is no negligence if they are in compliance
• That there is no negligence if they are in compliance with the plan.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair, is negligent.
• or employee is found grossly negligent or involved<01:19:51.120> in<01:19:51.280> the<
• act or failure to act abetted negligent act or failure to act abetted the<01:30:21.920> fraud
• act who's uh uh that or or negligent act who's uh uh that or or failure<01:30:37.520> to<01:30
• because they forgot to read an negligent because they forgot to read an email<01:32:19.280> or

Bills: HF3676, HF3683, HF3395

Keywords: Safe at Home, address confidentiality, domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking, harassment, victim privacy, survivor protection, confidential address, protected address, secret address, identity protection, residential confidentiality, program participant, nondiscrimination, court disclosure, protective order, service of process, driver's license, state ID

Summary: The committee first approved minutes from February 19 and February 26, while skipping the February 24 minutes because of a drafting error that would be corrected later. It then took up House File 3676, a Safe at Home program bill described by Rep. Nash as arising from a constituent’s dangerous identity exposure and intended to tighten protections for participants, including allowing emancipated minors to enroll. Testimony from the Secretary of State’s office explained that the bill would clarify who may apply for a minor, require proof of guardianship, strengthen court findings before a participant’s physical address can be disclosed, increase penalties for harmful disclosure, prohibit discrimination based on participation, require state agencies to designate a Safe at Home contact person, allow use of the Safe at Home card as proof of residence for certain ID purposes, and require judge training. Members raised concerns about federal compatibility, constitutionality of court-related provisions, and the need for a fiscal note on the felony penalty. Several sections were noted as being removed or modified in a later engrossment, and the committee voted to re-refer HF 3676 to the Transportation Finance and Policy Committee. The committee then heard House File 3683, which would direct the state budget forecast to include the estimated cost of fraud. Rep. Nash argued that fraud is a significant but unquantified drain on state resources and said the bill would adapt existing forecast language used for inflation to track fraud costs. Minnesota Management and Budget Deputy Commissioner Anna Mingi testified that fraud is unacceptable and that the agency works to prevent and detect it, but said the twice-yearly forecast is not the right tool for this kind of retrospective analysis. She explained that if fraud is identified, the forecast would reflect reduced spending through program integrity actions rather than a separate fraud-cost line item. The bill was moved and referred to the general register after a roll call was requested.

Transcript Highlights:

• standard in uh page one line negligent standard in uh page one line 10<01:23:43.520> recklessly
• or companies act recklessly or negligently and damages happen?
• I can let the Attorney General's office argue the difference between recklessly and negligently; that
• or negligent uh in maintaining<01:25:13.600> or<01:25:14.239> you<01:25:14.400> know
• negligently uh that is not our our issue negligently uh that is not our our issue is<01:25:32.840>

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: At the joint hearing on SB 951 SD2, the committees heard testimony on a child protection measure requiring mandatory child abuse and neglect reports to include military status and to improve communication between DHS and the Department of Defense. The U.S. Department of Defense testified in support and described its coordinated community response process for abuse reports, saying the bill would help ensure child safety and better coordination with DHS. DHS was initially absent, later appeared, and said it supported the measure but was still working with DOD on implementation details and staff training. Members asked about how DHS becomes involved and whether there were gaps in the current process. The chair recommended passage with technical amendments, including changing the effective date to 7/1/25 and conforming related language, and both committees adopted the recommendation by vote. The Public Safety committee then heard SB 1377 SD2, which would create a Veterans Cemeteries Board within the Office of Veterans Services in the Department of Defense to provide guidance, education, and technical assistance to state veteran cemeteries. DOD supported the bill and explained that county-run cemeteries must meet National Cemetery Administration standards to remain eligible for federal reimbursements and grants; witnesses described past compliance problems at several cemeteries, including one still not compliant in Hilo, and said the board would help counties prepare for future site visits and improve oversight without taking over operations. Members asked about costs, reimbursement amounts, and whether the state would assume cemetery operations; DOD said the current reimbursement process runs through the state to the counties and that direct takeover would be costly. The committee adopted the chair’s recommendation to pass the bill with amendments. The committee also heard SB 1382, which would make intentionally or knowingly causing bodily injury to a National Guard member performing duty a class C felony. The Hawaii National Guard and HPD supported the bill, citing incidents during the Maui response where Guard members encountered noncompliant and sometimes physically confrontational individuals while assisting police and protecting impacted areas. Testimony emphasized that Guard members are often unarmed and should receive protections similar to first responders. One witness opposed the bill, but the committee moved forward and adopted the chair’s recommendation to pass with amendments. Finally, the committee took up SB 1379 SD2 on emergency preparedness and Community Readiness Centers. Hawaii Emergency Management supported the bill, and supporters said it would create a statewide framework for resilience hubs that can provide supplies, action plans, and refuge during disasters. Testimony highlighted recent hurricanes, wildfires, and other hazards, and argued the measure would complement existing county efforts rather than replace them. County of Hawaii testimony opposed the bill, raising concerns about overlap and cost, while members asked about estimated expenses and implementation. The discussion ended with questions about planning and whether the bill would enhance existing programs; no final vote was captured in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• indemnify, defend, or hold harmless another party for claims resulting from the indemnitor's own negligence
• says, well, we're not going to pay for your indemnity because the plaintiff has just said you're negligent
• soon as a plaintiff says... ...pay for your indemnity because the plaintiff has just said you're negligent
• As soon as a plaintiff says I'm negligent, I don't get any coverage until I go through the trial and
• I feel like I'm paying for that VM contractor's negligence if I'm settling out because I don't want to

Bills: HB431, HB1522, HB1922, HB2467, HB2468, HB3228, HB3229, HB3306, HB3803, HB3804, HB3805, HB3806, HB4219, HB4238, HB4344, HB4386, HB4739

Keywords: HB 431, Texas Property Code, Property Code Chapter 202, solar roof tiles, solar shingles, solar energy device, homeowners association, HOA, property owners' association, POA, renewable energy, residential solar, distributed solar, roof-mounted solar, homeowner rights, architectural control, open meetings, public notice, transparency, government efficiency

Summary: The Senate Committee on Business and Commerce met with a quorum and first took up pending business, reporting several House bills favorably to the full Senate, including HB 11, HB 132, HB 1041, HB 1606, HB 2286, and HB 5061, with some also recommended for the local and uncontested or contested calendars. The committee then heard and left pending HB 3306, which would extend construction-contract indemnity exceptions to electric infrastructure work, including construction, maintenance, and vegetation management for utilities. Supporters said it would align utility infrastructure work with public works and reduce litigation and ratepayer costs, while opponents argued it would shift liability onto subcontractors and create broad-form indemnity concerns. Members also heard HB 4739, a Comptroller-requested cleanup bill repealing an outdated Finance Code provision tied to delinquency charges on retail charge accounts, and left it pending without testimony. The committee then considered several Department of Banking cleanup bills, including HB 3803, HB 3804, and HB 3806, all left pending after brief explanations and no public opposition. HB 4219, dealing with public information requests, drew support from a journalist and a policy analyst who said it would improve transparency by requiring timely responses, notice when records do not exist, and training or fee consequences for noncompliance; it was left pending. The committee also heard HB 4238, a committee substitute addressing coerced debt and identity theft, which would bar collection of certain debts from victims who obtain a qualifying court order. A law professor and a family violence advocate supported the bill as narrow, protective relief for domestic violence and elder abuse survivors, and it was left pending. Other bills heard and left pending included HB 1522 on local government budget meeting posting and taxpayer impact disclosures, HB 4344 authorizing background checks for PUC employees and contractors, HB 3805 updating money services business regulation, HB 431 extending solar-panel HOA protections to solar tiles, HB 3228 and HB 3229 on wind and solar recycling financial assurance, and HB 1922 clarifying the accrual date for construction defect claims under right-to-repair law. The committee recessed subject to the call of the chair.

Transcript Highlights:

• going to the grocery store, or we’re heading out on vacation, and because someone else is being negligent
• , grossly negligent... ...and because someone else is being negligent, grossly negligent, their lives

Keywords: 959, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Children and Families held a public hearing on Senate Bill 1135, known as Bentley and Mason’s Law, with nine members present. Senator Henderson presented the bill as a child-support-style restitution measure for children who lose a parent or parents because of a drunk or drug-impaired driver. He said the amount would be determined through the clerk and court process based on the offender’s finances and the children’s prior standard of living, and noted the bill includes a delay in payments if the offender is incarcerated. He also explained that if a family pursues a civil recovery from insurance, they would not also receive the maintenance order, to avoid double recovery. Committee members asked about how the payments would be calculated, whether health care or other needs could be included, whether the bill would affect FAFSA or survivor benefits, and whether there would be penalties for nonpayment. Several members praised the concept but raised concerns about enforceability, possible bankruptcy discharge, and the civil-suit limitation. Senator Henderson said he was open to further discussion on strengthening the bill, but noted some provisions were compromises made to keep the bill moving. Public testimony was strongly in favor. Brooke Stewart described how her husband was killed by a drunk driver in Tennessee and said a court award under Bentley’s Law would help support her daughters’ future needs, including college. Heather Elder of Mothers Against Drunk Driving supported the bill, said similar laws have passed in other states and territories, and urged the committee not to amend or delay it further. She also described the original Missouri family behind the bill and said the measure would provide accountability and relief for children left behind by impaired-driving deaths. No one testified in opposition, and the committee adjourned after closing the hearing on SB 1135.

Transcript Highlights:

• sold anymore because the cars are using the gasoline, is also better now, so the effect of it is negligible
• sold anymore because the cars are using the gasoline, is also better now, so the effect of it is negligible
• effect<00:02:44.959> of<00:02:45.120> it<00:02:45.400> is<00:02:46.280> negligible
• 00:02:47.280> and<00:02:47.519> even<00:02:47.760> the The effect of it is negligible

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00 Attendance Roll Call 00:56 SJR 28 Discussion 01:44 SJR 28 Roll Call Vote 03:32 SB 179 Discussion 04:08 SB 179 Roll Call Vote 07:33, 958, all

Summary: The committee opened with a prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, roll call, and approval of the minutes. After no special guests were recognized, members took up a joint resolution carried by Senator Nemes for Senator Adams concerning reformulated gasoline requirements in Jefferson County and parts of Oldham and Bullitt counties. The resolution would direct the Energy and Environmental Cabinet to revise the state air quality implementation plan to remove the reformulated gas mandate. Senator Nemes argued the requirement is outdated and has little practical effect given modern vehicles and fuel standards, and members voted to pass the resolution unanimously. The committee then heard Senate Bill 179 from Senator Danny Carroll, which would create a nuclear energy development grant program within the Nuclear Energy Development Authority. Carroll explained that the bill would set aside $10 million from the previously appropriated $40 million investment for grants supporting nuclear energy development in Kentucky, with grants capped at $2 million and administered entirely by NEITA rather than through Economic Development. He and several members emphasized the need for Kentucky to invest in nuclear energy to keep pace with states like Tennessee, which was cited as having invested heavily and attracting business activity around small modular reactors. Members expressed strong support for the bill, with Senator West and others praising the initiative and calling it important for Kentucky’s energy future. The committee voted the bill out favorably with an expression that it shall pass. Before adjournment, the chair encouraged members to review the other energy bills that had been heard recently and stressed the importance of moving quickly on energy policy measures. A motion was then requested to close the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• it, there was an estimate of the impact on the fund, and the estimate was that it would have a negligible
• Do you still agree that these changes had a negligible impact on the fund or will have a negligible impact
• Okay, but six to nine million is negligible in the scheme of the $17 billion fund.
• Although I do remember that several legislators testified it was negligible.
• So in this situation, it has a negative impact on the fund, negligible perhaps.

Transcript Highlights:

• Of constitutional grounds for the Arizona Constitution on 186 because common law did include negligence
• and negligence is one of the items that is included in the bill.
• I believe if you look at line 2, no line through line 17, the school negligently so that clearly falls
• and negligence is one of the items that is included in the bill I believe if you look at line 2 no line
• through line 17 the school negligently so that clearly falls under it and the problem that we have is

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm really impressed that the effect of spreading it to the burden otherwise of this property is negligible
• at most $5,000 of value is actually moved to other properties, which is almost the same as being negligible
• I'm really impressed that the effect of spreading it to the burden otherwise of this property is negligible
• at most $5,000 of value is actually moved to other properties, which is almost the same as being negligible
• or or zero so um happy being negligible or or zero so um happy to<01:10:30.400> um<01:10:31.360

Keywords: 1187, senate, all