Transcript Highlights:

• SB 42 would place a ballot measure on the November 2026 ballot to end the state ban on public financing
• We are working to establish these programs in charter cities across the state, but this reform must be
• Unfortunately, the United States Supreme Court basically said that their public financing modality, which
• Public financing programs are a promising tool for empowering voters.
• SB 408, it seems to me that they already have the ERIC program, and a lot of states are, for some reason

Summary: The Assembly Elections Committee met on July 2, 2025, with a quorum present and took up eight agenda items, including four consent bills. The committee first approved the consent calendar, which included SB 280, SB 621, SB 851, and SB 852, all moving forward without objection. The committee then heard several bills from Senator Umberg focused on election administration and campaign finance, along with SB 408 on voter-roll maintenance. SB 249 would require county board of education elections to be consolidated with the statewide general election. Supporters, including the League of Women Voters, argued this would increase turnout and make those elections more representative; opponents, including Orange County education officials, argued it would override local control, increase costs, and add ballot fatigue. The bill passed 5-2 and was re-referred to the Committee on Education. SB 398 would make it a crime to pay or offer contingent payments or other valuable consideration to induce voting or voter registration, closing what supporters described as a loophole involving lotteries and incentives. It passed 5-0 as amended and was re-referred to the Committee on Public Safety. SB 42 would remove the state ban on public financing for campaigns in general law cities and counties, allowing local voters to decide whether to adopt such systems. Supporters from Common Cause, the League of Women Voters, and many local advocates said it would broaden participation and reduce the influence of big money; opponents raised concerns about taxpayer funding, guardrails, and local oversight. The bill passed 5-2 and was re-referred to Appropriations. Finally, SB 408 would require election officials to use U.S. Postal Service change-of-address data to help maintain voter rolls; supporters said it would improve accuracy and trust in elections, while one commenter questioned reliance on postal data. The bill passed unanimously 6-0 and was re-referred to Appropriations. The committee then completed the remaining roll calls and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• policy evaluation and the governance and finance study supporting the State Water Commission and Department
• Our next revised governance and finance report draft is due to the State Board of Commission on May 1st
• You look at these plans, these programs that the state offers, and they're calling for projects when
• You look at these plans, these programs that the state offers, and they're calling for projects when
• And at some point, there is a line in the sand that was drawn on just about any program in the state

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair, today, um, before you, the Senate Finance Committee amendment for House Appropriation and Finance
• We use both general fund and other state funds to deliver substantive investments throughout the state
• We also expanded the state employee group health insurance benefits so that the state covers 80% of state
• for the state.
• the United States.

Transcript Highlights:

• Those forms, for service purposes, there is a program that's actually led by the IRS that the states
• of this program?
• and states.
• Mary Halterman, Department of Finance. I'm the Assistant Program Budget Manager.
• that aren't under attack or other state programs and funding sources that could potentially be available

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So adopt it into the states and adopt it into their programs.
• their K-20. is to make sure that we work with the states to try to get this into their K-12 programs
• So adopt it into the states and adopted into their programs.
• And our office, EDF, the Office of Energy Dominance Financing, formerly known as the Loan Programs Office
• for state benefit. on the site of a nuclear generation facility that was located in the state for state

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The state of New Mexico has the private activity bond volume cap, where we go to the State Board of Finance
• And that's why we're issuing the state government does on their GEO programs. Thank you.
• I will note there are some other states that fund different programs Monitor a program for a program
• The programs include homeless shelter operations and emergency. And state programs. Housing New.
• So I do know that our linkages program has absorbed a handful of families into a state we will.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so we're only uploading what is required by... ...the state-to-state agreement that all states have
• Department of Finance, Neil Kishun, Department of Finance.
• It would go, the funds would be returned to Caltrans for the State Highway Operation and Protection Program
• So it would have gone into the State Highway Operation and Protection Program in the same way.
• and REAP-2 programs.

Summary: The committee first heard a DMV budget presentation on the state-to-state verification system required for Real ID compliance and the Digital Experience Platform (DXP) modernization project. DMV officials said the state-to-state system is a pointer-based exchange used when a person applies for a license in another state, with only limited identifying data shared initially and the full driver history sent only after a qualified request. Members raised concerns about privacy, possible misuse by other states or federal actors, notification to Californians, hacking, and whether California could detect or stop abusive access. DMV said it can monitor requests, see patterns of access, work with AAMVA and legal counsel, and seek to block or challenge misuse; LAO said California is in a difficult position and should consider guardrails rather than opt out. On DXP, DMV said the project is on its revised schedule and budget, occupational licensing is complete, vehicle registration is expected by the end of calendar year 2026, and the full system should be finished by fiscal year 2028-29, with phased rollout and reappropriated funding to keep costs controlled. The committee then heard from the California High-Speed Rail Office of Inspector General on a trailer bill and AB 1608. The Inspector General said current law does not clearly authorize public reports or establish a framework for retaining and disclosing work papers, and the proposed trailer bill would create that framework while also adding authority to hire needed classifications and purchase goods and services. He also said the office needs a clearer statutory definition of “proposed agreements” and notice when the High-Speed Rail Authority is reviewing them, so the office can review contracts and related agreements effectively. LAO raised no concerns with the trailer bill language, and Finance said any amendments would come in the May revision. Members debated the scope of confidentiality in the Inspector General proposal, especially whether reports could be held confidential when they identify weaknesses in fraud controls, security, or other vulnerabilities. The Inspector General said confidentiality would be temporary, tied to articulating the risk, reassessing it every 120 days, and releasing the report once the risk is no longer substantial; he also said the office had already published reports at its discretion and had found at least one procurement violation involving an amendment that added services not in the original contract. Several members pressed for stronger transparency and suggested time limits or broader disclosure, while others argued the bill would improve oversight and make the Inspector General’s authority clearer. No votes were taken during the discussion, and the item was left for further work on the trailer bill and AB 1608 language.

Transcript Highlights:

• , state-based, state-based, state-based, and migrant seasonal Head Start programs, both in center-based
• So we would be essentially focused... ...our general child care and state-based migrant program.
• Chris Ramahodra, Department of Finance. We just want to note that the state is allowed to use.
• While the expansion of the state program for children aged two to three was intended to help families
• Going out to the CHIRP program, have all the funds been utilized, Department of Finance?

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Our critique of the state-based LIHTC program is nothing new for us.
• Our critique of the state-based LIHTC program is nothing new for us.
• That's why these programs exist in 25 states right now.
• year, and more and more states are... ...of the program just last year, and more and more states are
• That project is not financeable without this program.

Bills: HB2388, HB2804, HB2926

Keywords: HB2388, Arizona Commerce Authority, ACA, small modular reactor, SMR, nuclear energy, advanced nuclear, data center, data centers, economic development, study, appropriation, general fund, jobs, wages, tax revenue, broadband, infrastructure, secondary businesses, tertiary businesses

Transcript Highlights:

• Grants Program. Grants Program.
• Housing Program.
• Supportive Housing Finance Agency's Supportive Housing Program.<00:05:10.200> Earlier<00:05:10.480
• appropriations be used for administrative costs for state appropriated programs only.
• . program. program.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The conference committee on House File 1141, the Omnibus Housing Finance and Policy Bill, reviewed the fiscal spreadsheet and policy language for the agreement. Staff explained the major funding items, including appropriations for greater Minnesota workforce housing, manufactured home park infrastructure grants, family homelessness prevention, supportive housing, a tenant hotline, and housing infrastructure bonds, along with a cancellation of unused Tyler settlement funds and a reallocation of Housing Development Fund earnings. Staff said the package was budget neutral over the forecast window. The policy walk-through also covered provisions on livestreaming Housing Finance Agency board meetings, limits on administrative retentions for new grant programs, restrictions and reporting on Housing Development Fund transfers and earnings, clarifying language for local public housing, an exemption related to lived-experience engagement, and access for legislative fiscal staff to agency accounting information. Members then considered several amendments. The A12 amendment, allowing certain local governments to invest long-term funds in housing-related investments, was adopted after a roll call showed support from all three caucuses. The A16 manufactured housing bill of rights amendment, which would have addressed park-owner practices, purchase opportunities, enforcement, and rent increases, was not adopted. The A18 amendment to allow additional flags in HOAs and other areas was also not adopted. The A17 amendment to limit private equity ownership of single-family homes to 100 units was not adopted. The A13 amendment to preempt local rent control was not adopted. Members on both sides said some of the rejected issues warranted further discussion in future sessions, while supporters argued they were needed to address housing affordability and ownership pressures. In closing discussion on the bill as a whole, members from both chambers praised the bipartisan process, the staff work, and the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency’s collaboration. Supporters said the agreement would help build thousands of homes across the state, assist vulnerable Minnesotans, and improve transparency and accountability in housing programs. They also noted the bill’s mix of single-family, multifamily, manufactured housing, homelessness prevention, and policy reforms. The committee expressed intent to move the agreement forward to the House floor and ultimately to the governor.

Transcript Highlights:

• Because I'm not aware of any state Medicaid program in the country that will have something as large
• rebate program.
• So again, this is a state-only program, the full scope expansion for undocumented individuals.
• the state.
• the state.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Health held the first of several hearings on the Governor’s May Revision for health care, with opening remarks focused on the state’s projected $12 billion deficit, looming federal Medicaid changes, and the potential impact on Medi-Cal, public health, reproductive health, and safety-net providers. Several members criticized the proposal as balancing the budget on vulnerable Californians, while others defended the need for cost containment and questioned the administration’s assumptions. The chair set ground rules for respectful, focused questioning and outlined three topics: the Medi-Cal proposals, Proposition 35, and Proposition 56. DHCS Director Michelle Baas presented the May Revision’s Medi-Cal package, saying the department’s budget totals $200.6 billion overall, including $45.2 billion General Fund, and that the proposals are intended to address rising caseloads, pharmacy costs, and managed care spending. She described proposed changes for adults with unsatisfactory immigration status, including a freeze on new full-scope enrollment for those 19 and older, $100 monthly premiums beginning in 2027, elimination of adult dental and long-term care coverage, removal of PPS/RAP payments to FQHCs and rural health clinics for that population, and a pharmacy rebate aggregator. Other proposals included eliminating certain OTC drug classes, removing GLP-1 coverage for weight loss, prior authorization and step therapy changes, reinstating the Medi-Cal asset test, eliminating acupuncture as an optional benefit, allowing utilization management for hospice, raising the managed care minimum medical loss ratio to 90%, reducing PACE capitation rates toward the midpoint of the actuarial range, eliminating the skilled nursing facility workforce and quality incentive program, and suspending the SNF backup power requirement. The LAO said the revised Medi-Cal spending estimate is about $2.5 billion higher than the Governor’s Budget in the budget year, and that the increase appears driven more by higher per-enrollee costs than by caseload alone. The LAO said the budget solutions are concentrated in a few areas, are largely ongoing, and should be considered in light of federal uncertainty, but suggested the Legislature could explore alternatives such as more targeted income thresholds for the undocumented expansion and simpler asset-test rules. Department of Finance officials said the proposals are difficult but necessary to address a third consecutive deficit and rising Medi-Cal costs. Members then pressed the administration on the methodology and impacts of the proposals, especially the enrollment freeze, premiums, asset test, hospice controls, PACE reductions, and the elimination of benefits and provider payments. No votes or formal actions were taken at this hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're a well-established, state-funded higher education grant-making program that is in our eighth year
• Additionally, it is advantageous to maintain a state-level grant program that can align state priorities
• What are the accomplishments of this program that those programs can't?
• Senator Cabaldon: This is one of my favorite programs in state government, because it is small, but it
• Department of Finance. Any comments? Brian Bender, Department of Finance.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• First, you'll see the letter from the Department of Finance and Administration stating the five projects
• So what is the state?
• It helps develop program initiatives or change program initiatives.
• the program.
• out-of-state vendor.

Summary: The review subcommittee met to consider a supplemental agenda, methods of finance, an alternative delivery project, discretionary grants, and a large slate of construction, out-of-state, and in-state contracts. The supplemental item was a $2.6 million out-of-state contract with Tyler Technologies for a mobile app that would let citizens access state services through a single sign-on, initially for DFA vehicle and licensing services, with possible expansion to other agencies. Members also reviewed five methods of finance, including University of Arkansas projects for roof and cooling tower replacements, a new $100 million academic classroom building at U of A Fayetteville, a police department renovation at UA Fort Smith, and a boiler/chiller replacement at Hope-Texarkana. Questions focused on project timing, why some items were being reviewed after work had begun, and the high estimated cost of the Fayetteville classroom building; DFA explained that projects under $250,000 are not reviewed and that the larger project was still in design and would later seek a guaranteed maximum price. The committee also reviewed two DHS discretionary grants: one for targeted youth advocacy in southwest Arkansas and another adding $582,000 for family-centered treatment training and implementation. In the services contract section, members discussed construction-related contracts, including an ASMSA electrical scope increase tied to three-phase power requirements and the U of A Fayetteville architect contract for the classroom building. Out-of-state contracts included major items such as ACT Education’s $17 million amendment to provide required pre-ACT testing for 9th and 10th graders, a $12.5 million DFA contract for rural health transformation grant management, DHS’s $16.5 million EBT services contract with updated chip-card and fraud-prevention features, and ADH’s special procurement for the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System survey. The committee also reviewed U of A system consulting contracts for financial advisory and sponsorship strategy work, with university officials saying the outside expertise was needed for specialized planning and revenue-generation efforts. In-state contracts covered corrections reentry services, nursing board investigations, foster care and child welfare services, DHS office janitorial work, emergency management radio system expansion, veterans’ home nursing staffing, and UAMS grants consulting. A lengthy exchange centered on the Department of Corrections’ reentry housing contract, with members pressing officials about vacant beds and urging fuller use of the program, while corrections staff said placements depend on screening and eligibility. Another discussion addressed the balance between out-of-state and in-state contracting, with a member noting the large dollar volume going to out-of-state vendors and asking whether Arkansas vendors receive any preference; State Procurement said current law does not allow an in-state preference. The committee approved the supplemental agenda, the methods of finance, the alternative delivery project, the discretionary grants, and the contract lists, and then received routine reports and an emergency action report before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• This appropriation investment in this program today could save our state, our counties, and our cities
• This appropriation investment in this program today could save our state, our counties, and our cities
• owned housing program, which we affectionately call the POP program.
• programs.
• program consumer Choice across the state program consumer Choice across the state is<01:08:19.880

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Senate Bill 104, introduced by Senator Pazina, makes an appropriation to the Other State Education Programs
• Senate Bill 468, introduced by the Committee on Finance, makes an appropriation to the State Public Charter
• Senate Bill 475, introduced by the Committee on Finance, makes appropriations to the Division of State
• Senate Bill 104, introduced by Senator Pazina, makes an appropriation to the Other State Education Programs
• Pizzina makes an appropriation to the other state education programs account for the creation and maintenance

Keywords: 909, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We have an opportunity to extend that program to an all-offender program, and in doing so, we actually
• , Safe and Affordable Drinking Water Program, State Responsibility Area fee, and the Affordable Housing
• like the farmer program.
• , specifically the two transit programs and the active transportation program.
• , specifically the two transit programs and the active transportation program.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee hearing focused on the governor’s May Revision, especially the proposed extension of the cap-and-trade program to 2045 as “cap-and-invest,” the related greenhouse gas reduction fund (GGRF) spending framework, and several trailer bill proposals. Department of Finance staff outlined budget solutions including a $1.5 billion annual General Fund-to-GGRF shift for Cal Fire that would grow to $1.9 billion by 2029-30, continued support for high-speed rail, climate bond implementation, and various environmental and water-related statutory changes. The administration also described proposals affecting the Delta Conveyance Project, water quality planning, groundwater bulletin timing, Exide cleanup funding, and other agency-specific items, though the chair repeatedly asked staff to keep the presentation high-level and save details for the next hearing. Members from both parties raised strong concerns about the cap-and-invest proposal, arguing that it could reduce or displace funding for transit, affordable housing, active transportation, wildfire prevention, zero-emission vehicles, and other previously committed programs. Several members questioned whether the administration was effectively shifting essential ongoing services like Cal Fire onto a temporary carbon market fund, how the General Fund backstop would work if auction revenues fall short, and whether the proposal would leave enough money for continuous appropriations and future awards. Members also criticized the inclusion of cap-and-invest reauthorization in the budget process and asked for clearer information on the impact to high-speed rail, transit, and other GGRF priorities. The Delta Conveyance Project and related trailer bill language drew significant opposition from members and public commenters, who argued the proposal would fast-track the project, weaken CEQA-related review, and authorize revenue bond financing without sufficient legislative oversight. Public testimony also included support for maintaining or expanding funding for transit, affordable housing, AB 617 community air protection, offshore wind infrastructure, and ignition interlock programs, while environmental and community groups opposed cuts to wildfire prevention, housing, and school climate-related programs. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational, and the chair said the committee would continue the discussion and receive more detailed responses at the follow-up hearing on Tuesday.

Transcript Highlights:

• For us, at the state level, with a program that goes about 860 miles long when we combine phase 1 and
• One, we are looking at infrastructure private sector financing against a state backstop, which is a state
• Now, private sector financing against funding commitment or collateral that is available at the state
• P3 financing.
• Does it comply with state law?

Summary: The Senate Transportation Committee held an informational hearing on the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s 2026 draft business plan and next steps for the project. Chair Cortese opened by noting major changes since the 2024 plan, including new leadership, a bottoms-up review, scope changes in the Central Valley, loss of federal funds, and renewed interest in private investment and value capture. The Authority’s CEO, Ian Chaudhary, presented the project as moving into a construction and track-laying phase, citing progress on Central Valley structures, right-of-way acquisition, utility relocations, and a new procurement for track and systems. He said the plan reflects a more disciplined, optimized approach, with the Merced-to-Bakersfield segment targeted for revenue service around 2033 and the broader Phase 1 corridor envisioned as commercially viable through ancillary revenues, public-private partnerships, and future private financing. Committee members questioned the Authority about station relocations, single-tracking, tax increment financing, utility relocation authority, transparency, and the feasibility of private financing. Chaudhary said the Merced and Bakersfield station locations were still under discussion with local governments and that no contracts had been finalized. He defended the reduced scope and single-track approach as a just-in-time strategy to avoid overbuilding, while maintaining high-speed standards. He also said the Authority was exploring land value capture, broadband, energy, and other corridor-based revenue sources, but acknowledged that some tools would require legislative action and that private financing options were still being evaluated. Several senators expressed support for the project but raised concerns about permitting delays, local opposition, constitutional and statutory limits, and the need for stronger accountability. The Legislative Analyst’s Office and the High-Speed Rail Inspector General then gave critical assessments of the draft plan. LAO staff said the plan assumes major statutory changes, understates risk, lacks transparency about scope changes, and may not fully fund even the smaller Merced-to-Bakersfield segment once borrowing costs and other uncertainties are considered. Inspector General Ben Belknap said the draft plan does not comply with newer statutory requirements in SB 198 and AB 377, citing three main deficiencies: unauthorized scope changes to the Merced-to-Bakersfield segment, an inadequate funding plan that omits financing costs, and missing procurement milestone dates. He said the Authority’s presentation obscures the true cost and schedule impacts of the project changes, and that incomplete reporting limits legislative oversight. The Authority responded that it would address the OIG’s findings in the final business plan, and committee members indicated they expected a written response on compliance issues.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:05:24.440> finances<00:05:25.440> which Bill 40 relating to State finances which
• Bill 40 relating to State finances which authorizes<00:05:26.319> the<00:05:26.440> Hawaii
• Are there any other similar state programs that require a bill like this every year to sustain financially
• Our next bill is Senate Bill 40, relating to state finances.
• is Senate Bill 40 relating to State is Senate Bill 40 relating to State finances<00:21:12.440>

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Committee on Housing heard testimony on several housing-related measures. Senate Bill 65 would appropriate funds to the Hawaii Public Housing Authority for rehabilitation and repair of public housing units. Testifiers from the Department of Human Services, HPHA, Catholic Charities Hawaii, and Roar Cares supported the bill, emphasizing that repairing vacant units is a fast, cost-effective way to increase available housing for homeless and elderly residents. HPHA later told the committee it had 139 vacant units, with an estimated average repair cost of about $73,000 per unit. In decision-making, the committee recommended passage of SB 65 with amendments, including an appropriation of $10,147,000, and the motion passed. The committee also considered Senate Bill 40, which would allow HHFDC to secure a line of credit or other indebtedness for the bond volume cap recycling program. HHFDC supported the measure and explained that Act 35 had provided a $150 million line of credit for fiscal year 2025 only, so this bill would extend that authority; HHFDC said the bonds involved would be revenue bonds. Roar Cares supported the bill, while the chair asked whether the Legislature would need to pass such a bill annually. In decision-making, the committee recommended passage with amendments to specify revenue bonds and noted the administration should study other ways to secure the line of credit without annual legislation. For Senate Bill 35, which would create a Housing Efficiency and Innovation subaccount within the rental housing revolving fund and allow fund transfers without legislative approval, HHFDC and several others supported the measure, arguing that more flexible fund movement would improve efficiency. The committee adopted a recommendation to pass SB 35 with amendments, including language prioritizing projects on state or county land or projects by entities required to reinvest surplus into housing, and noting nonprofit developers could qualify for prioritization. Senate Bill 42, which would repeal certain 30% AMI set-aside and preference requirements for rental housing revolving fund projects, drew opposition from Catholic Charities Hawaii, which argued the bill would reduce the supply of the most vulnerable housing units, while HHFDC warned it could reduce production of 30% AMI units. The committee deferred SB 42. The final bill discussed was Senate Bill 75, which would establish a working group to revise the state’s qualified allocation plan and related rental housing revolving fund loan terms and report back to the Legislature. HHFDC and others offered comments, while Catholic Charities asked that the bill be deferred, saying HHFDC already had the capacity to work with the community without a new law. Roar Cares supported the concept but urged broader stakeholder inclusion. In decision-making, the chair said the committee report would note concerns about prior QAP revisions and the need for more transparent, ongoing stakeholder participation, and the committee recommended passage of SB 75 without amendments. All recommendations were adopted, and the hearing adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:10:34.600> who are only 22 attorneys in the state who are only 22 attorneys in the state
• that have been paid out by the finance that have been paid out by the finance Administration<00:
• <00:39:14.680> and<00:39:14.839> administration finance and administration finance and
• through these advancements the G program through these advancements the G program is<00:42:40.880
• general assembly because this program general assembly because this program their<00:44:51.359><

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The subcommittee met to discuss the guardian ad litem system, including appointment qualifications, training, payment, and whether any changes are needed. Roll was called, the February 25, 2025 minutes were approved, and the chair emphasized that the meeting was informational only and no vote would be taken. Representatives from the Court of Justice, including Chief Justice Deborah Henry Lambert and several family and district judges, testified about how the system has evolved since concerns raised in 2019 about overappointment and fees. Court witnesses said the judiciary responded to earlier concerns by requiring open appointment lists of trained and qualified attorneys, improving training, and increasing oversight of fee orders. They reported that statewide GAL fees have fallen from a little over $14 million in 2019 to about $12 million, even as caseloads have grown, and said the average payment works out to about $650 per case, with the statutory cap for trial-level GAL fees still set at $500 since 1986. They argued that the current local appointment model works well, especially in rural areas, and warned that moving to a DPA-style regional model would create serious scheduling and conflict problems because of overlapping dockets and related criminal cases. Judges from rural districts described shortages of available attorneys, high burnout, travel burdens, and the difficulty of finding enough counsel in smaller counties. They also said the Court of Justice cannot seek certain federal Title IV-E reimbursements, but urged the legislature to encourage the Finance and Administration Cabinet and the Cabinet for Health and Family Services to pursue that funding through an MOU. One judge noted that some appointed attorneys are effectively underpaid relative to private rates and that better compensation would help attract and retain lawyers. The discussion also covered training standards adopted after the 2019 audit. Witnesses said Rule 37 now requires initial training and four hours of multidisciplinary continuing training every two years, with topics including child development, trauma-informed care, substance use, child welfare, forensics, ethics, and communication with clients. They said the Court of Justice has offered in-person regional trainings and remote options, and that the goal is to keep qualified attorneys on the appointment lists while improving representation for children and parents in dependency, neglect, abuse, and termination-of-parental-rights cases.

Transcript Highlights:

• He's into programming. He knows four languages.
• So again, condolences from all of us in the State Senate.
• The National Teacher of the Year program is the oldest and most prestigious national honors program in
• throughout the United States.
• Send up finance, we're going to go in today at 2 o'clock.

Keywords: 996, all