Transcript Highlights:

• We're not going to have that testimony in here, but we want to make sure that folks are recognized.
• You are welcome to respond to public testimony if you'd like.
• So what we're going to do is allow seven people to give testimony at one minute each.
• So what we're going to do is allow seven people to give testimony at one minute each.
• Earlier in testimony, I heard the police officer, I'm sorry to catch your name, but I heard.

Bills: SB97, SB55, SB40, SB38, SB120, SB113, SB116, SB117, SB118

Keywords: tax credits, municipality, county property, industrial revenue bonds, economic development, qualified expenditures, solar energy, tax credit, renewable energy, photovoltaic, solar thermal, New Mexico, economic incentive, energy independence, SB40, Driver Privacy and Safety Act, automated license plate reader, ALPR, license plate reader, vehicle surveillance

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for acknowledging my testimony today.
• Thank you for acknowledging my testimony today.
• I listened to a lot of testimony in opposition today.
• Is there a firearms dealer willing to provide some testimony?
• We heard it from testimony today.

Bills: SB4, SB7, SB9, SB17

Keywords: Medicaid, healthcare, medical education, salaries, graduate education, clinician pay, health sciences, education funding, faculty salary, University of New Mexico, healthcare funding, general fund, state budget, New Mexico legislation, gun control, firearm safety, dealer regulation, illegal trade, background checks, 996

Transcript Highlights:

• that the bill by the repeated testimony that we<00:34:41.960> had<00:34:42.200> by<00:
• >> Clarification, I thought we were going to be hearing some testimony from the prime sponsor today.
• some testimony from the prime<01:10:26.160> sponsor<01:10:26.600> today.
• The motion is up to pass. sponsor, have more testimony, and then sponsor, have more testimony, and then
• >> Clarification, I thought we were going to be hearing some testimony from the prime sponsor today.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• After your testimony, you may exit the room or return to your seat.
• I appreciate your testimony as well.
• Thank you very much for your testimony.
• But thank you for your time, thank you for your work, thank you for your testimony.
• And so I'm grateful for everyone's testimony here today.

Summary: The hearing focused first on how wildfires and other disasters affect child care providers, families, and early education infrastructure. State officials from the Department of Social Services and Department of Education described disaster response and preparedness efforts, including shelter coordination, licensing outreach, emergency waivers, distribution of supplies, and the statewide child care disaster plan. Testimony from providers and advocates emphasized major gaps in recovery funding, insurance coverage, rebuilding support, mental health services, and coordination with local rebuild plans. Several witnesses urged more dedicated disaster-recovery funding for child care facilities and suggested statutory changes, including allowing greater flexibility for rebuilding costs and requiring early childhood programs to be included in local disaster planning. The second panel addressed immigration enforcement and its impact on child care. Advocates from the Children's Partnership, Every Child California, and CHIRLA said enforcement activity is causing families to keep children home, disrupting continuity of care, reducing enrollment, and creating fear and trauma for children and providers. They argued that immigrant and mixed-status families need clearer protections, privacy safeguards, legal support, trauma-informed guidance, and safe-haven policies for child care settings. Speakers also stressed that the child care workforce is heavily immigrant and that recent state laws such as AB 49 and AB 495 will require funding, training, and technical assistance to implement effectively. Public commenters, including child care providers, described personal experiences with fire damage, displacement, permit delays, lost income, and the emotional toll of serving families during crises. Others described how immigration enforcement has made parents afraid to attend events, drop off children, or remain connected to providers. Committee members repeatedly noted that child care is often overlooked in emergencies and asked state officials how child care systems are being integrated into disaster planning and how local and state agencies can better coordinate. No formal votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• CAN TALK ABOUT OUR CHILDREN ALL DAY LONG BUT IN RESPECT FOR TIME I HAVE SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED MY TESTIMONY
• I'M GOING TO TRY TO LIMIT EVERYBODY'S TESTIMONY TO ABOUT A MINUTE AND A HALF IF YOU WOULD BECAUSE WE
• BUT I ASKED THAT YOU GUYS SUPPORT THIS BILL, THANK YOU. >> Chair Passidomo: THANK YOU FOR YOUR TESTIMONY
• >> Chair Passidomo: THANK YOU FOR YOUR TESTIMONY, ERIN DIPIETRO FROM FLORIDA FAMILY VOICE IN SUPPORT.
• I AM OPPOSED, THANK YOU. >> Chair Passidomo: THANK YOU FOR YOUR TESTIMONY.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• points it was clear from the testimony points it was clear from the testimony that<00:19:51.960>
• So when I heard the testimony from the Manufactured Housing Institute at a task force hearing, I was
• the testimony from the manufactured<00:21:22.679> housing<00:21:23.080> Institute<00:21
• Um, I believe there's still some more testimony from other folks if you all want to continue, and then
• <00:42:57.200> under references in in prior testimony under references in in prior testimony

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:01 Roll Call 00:16 HB 211 Discussion 02:55 HB 211 Vote 16:30 HB 160 Discussion 18:50 HB 160 Vote 52:06 Adjournment 57:35, 958, all

Summary: The House Standing Committee on Local Government met for its first meeting of the year, established a quorum, and heard two bills. House Bill 211, sponsored by Representative Chris Lewis, would create a definition for cigar bars and allow indoor cigar smoking in qualifying establishments if they meet criteria such as deriving at least 15% of gross income from cigar-related sales, restricting entry to those 21 and older, prohibiting cigarettes and vaping, and requiring a smoke-free area for deliveries. Lewis and Louisville Metro Council member Anthony Pantini described the bill as a small-business and tourism measure modeled on Tennessee law, while the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network and a St. Elizabeth physician opposed it, arguing it would undermine local smoke-free ordinances and expose patrons and workers to harmful secondhand smoke. Several members raised local-control concerns, and Lewis said he was open to local governments making decisions on less restrictive approaches. The committee adopted a committee substitute and then approved HB 211 on a roll call vote, with multiple members voting yes and several no votes, sending the bill forward as amended. The committee then heard House Bill 160 from Representative Susan Whitten, with Logan Haynes of the Kentucky Manufactured Housing Institute. They said Kentucky faces a housing shortage of roughly 200,000 units and that starter homes are increasingly unaffordable, making manufactured housing an important part of the solution. Whitten said the bill would treat manufactured housing more like site-built housing while still allowing local governments to enforce cosmetic standards such as roof pitch, exterior facade, and foundation material, and she emphasized that HOA, deed, and historical preservation restrictions would remain in place. Haynes argued that modern manufactured homes are federally and state inspected, more energy efficient, faster to build, and more affordable than site-built homes, and he said the bill would not open the door to older-style mobile homes or single-wides except in limited narrow-lot situations. Representatives from the Kentucky League of Cities and the Kentucky Association of Counties expressed concerns about the bill’s current language, saying land-use decisions should remain local and warning that the definition of qualified manufactured home and the bill’s treatment of local standards could have unintended consequences. They said they appreciated Whitten’s willingness to work with them and indicated they hoped to continue negotiating amendments as the bill moved forward. No vote on HB 160 was taken during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• All right, we will move into our testimony this morning. First hearing from KCNA, David. Mr.
• Well, thank you very much for your testimony. I'm sure [clears throat] we have several questions.
• Uh, that has been our testimony<00:45:19.400> before. testimony before. testimony before.
• Is it your testimony, sir, thank you.
• We've had previous testimony on this and other committees.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Report of KCNA Board Meeting 00:00:09 KCNA Transition to COT 00:35:55 KCNA Request for Proposals 00:42:00 Kentucky Wired Operations Company 00:42:30, 958, all

Summary: The Information Technology Oversight Committee met, approved the January 12, 2026 minutes, and then heard testimony from KCNA Chair David Couch, KCNA Director Jim Barnhart, and KCNA General Counsel Adam Adkins about the ongoing dispute involving KCNA, Excelacom, and the implementation of House Bill 314. Couch said the board and vendor had recently shown some willingness to work toward a settlement, and he emphasized the importance of KCNA’s broadband service to K-12 schools, noting that litigation had already cost about $1.4 million and could cost another $1.4 million if it continued. He also said the board had identified five immediate goals, including reconnecting 38 K-12 sites, de-escalating disputes, better understanding KCNA finances, protecting the state’s bonding rating, and examining whether duplicate networking hardware could be consolidated. A major portion of the discussion focused on whether House Bill 314 changed KCNA’s authority and how much control the Finance and Administration Cabinet and KCNA’s legal counsel have over operations and contracts. Senator Williams argued that the board now has authority to set policy, implement policy, and approve budgets, and questioned why the cabinet appeared to be exercising operational control. Adkins responded that HB 314 changed the reporting chain from the general government cabinet to the finance cabinet but did not alter the board’s authority, and said budget work on the Ice Miller contract predated HB 314. Couch and other members disputed that interpretation, saying the board had not been properly informed about a recent extension or increase in legal spending and that the board’s directives were not being followed. Representative Hodgson asked why the board could not terminate a contractor if it was not carrying out the board’s wishes, and Adkins replied that Ice Miller was not a party to the board’s contract and that the Finance and Administration Cabinet signs such agreements. The exchange ended with committee members and KCNA representatives agreeing to disagree on the meaning of the statute and the extent of board authority. No formal action was taken beyond approving the minutes and receiving testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'll wait for your testimony. Thank you. Okay, Madam Chair, I'll continue on.
• It's on the back of the written testimony.
• Hummel, I was just interested on your page four testimony.
• Yeah, just sitting listening to some of the testimony.
• I don't have formal testimony.

Summary: The Judiciary Interim Committee met to begin its study of charitable gaming and the ownership of alcoholic beverage establishments by licensed charitable gaming organizations, a study directed by Senate Bill 2334. Legislative Council gave an overview of the constitutional and statutory framework for charitable gaming, site authorizations, rent limits, proceeds, and recent legislative changes. The Attorney General’s Gaming Division then clarified the financial flow of gaming, explaining that in fiscal year 2025 North Dakota had about $2.5 billion in gross gaming proceeds, with roughly 88-90% paid back in prizes and about $256 million available to organizations after taxes; most of that activity came from electronic pull tabs. Members asked for more detail on winnings, replays, rent, and the breakdown of manufacturer/distributor revenues, and the AG’s office agreed to provide supplemental information. The committee also heard from the League of Cities and the Association of Counties about local site authorization. Cities said they have a limited role in approving gaming sites, can adopt policies after public hearing, may charge up to $100, and can set certain conditions, including local nexus requirements, but cannot require donations or force a specific charity or site. The League said it had worked with stakeholders on a model policy to provide more consistency, though members raised concerns that local requirements could become too restrictive for charities serving broader areas. Counties said the issue is mostly a city matter, with little county involvement beyond minimal site fees and general site approval. The North Dakota Gaming Alliance testified in support of the study and provided IRS-related material suggesting charities may use asset diversification, while emphasizing it had not taken a position on whether charities should own bars. Members questioned whether bar ownership is being used for site stability or to channel charitable gaming dollars, and whether city policies might disadvantage charities with broader missions. The committee also discussed the relationship between gaming organizations, manufacturers, and distributors, including restrictions on incentives and interference, and asked for more information on those entities and their ownership. Later in the meeting, the Racing Commission gave its regular update on live racing, pari-mutuel wagering, ADW providers, purse and promotion funds, a new TRPB contract, and concerns about cease-and-desist actions from other states. Finally, the State Hospital superintendent briefly reported on the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s support services, including the SORT team, training, and security assistance for the hospital campus.

Transcript Highlights:

• Oh, was there any public testimony on that? We do have some public testimony.
• <00:29:02.520> on Oh, was there any public testimony on Oh, was there any public testimony
• There We do have some public testimony.
• Chairman. >> Testimony on this topic?
• public testimony? Any other requests? public testimony? Any other requests?

Keywords: 916, all

Summary: The joint Minerals Committee met to select interim topics and announced its meeting dates for April 27-28 in Casper, June 4-5 in Casper, and August 27-28 in Cheyenne. Members heard public testimony on several economic development and minerals-related topics and were asked to identify their top priorities for later ranking and consensus. No formal votes were taken during this portion of the meeting. A major topic was removing obstacles to energy development in Wyoming, including possible regulatory, bonding, and permitting barriers. Testimony from the Mining Association and Energy Capital Economic Development supported revisiting barriers to development, similar to the earlier Regulatory Reduction Task Force. Another related topic was industrial siting exemptions on coal mine property, with testimony arguing that mineral-related projects such as rare earths, uranium conversion, and ferroalloys should not have to go through the full industrial siting process when communities have already dealt with similar development. Members also discussed industrial siting bonding requirements, including whether bonding or advance payments should be used to cover impacts on local services and emergency response, especially for projects like solar farms or battery storage. The committee also discussed coal bed methane industrial sovereign zones, tied to House Bill 120, with testimony seeking to include coal bed methane in value-added manufacturing zones. The sponsor said the goal was to create industrial zones that support economic development while protecting scenic values and limiting industrial sprawl. Another topic was sourcing curling stones in Wyoming, which was presented as a lighthearted but potentially useful way to promote Wyoming stone and broader dimension-stone quarrying; a state geologist testified that Wyoming has granite with similar mineralogy to stone used for curling stones elsewhere. Child care as an economic driver was withdrawn. The committee also heard support for a Business Council restructure review, though several members said the Minerals Committee should do the substantive review because the Business Council falls within its jurisdiction, while still coordinating with Appropriations. Finally, the committee heard a proposal for a domestic preference in residential general service contracts, extending Wyoming preference concepts beyond construction into goods and services, with testimony emphasizing local economic multipliers and possible exceptions for federal funding or other procurement limits.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm going to keep my testimony brief so that you can hear from our other testifiers that are so critical
• Future I'm going to keep my testimony Future I'm going to keep my testimony brief<00:04:01.640><
• One of our testifiers wasn't able to get his testimony in on time.
• <00:43:22.040> here is helpful in in our testimony here is helpful in in our testimony here
• Did you have any testimony to provide today, or are you, Madam Chair, Mr.

Bills: HF1013, HF1598, HF1656, HF2162

Keywords: energy, economic development, funding, renewable resources, Clean Energy Economy Minnesota, air ventilation, geothermal, school financing, Minnesota Climate Innovative Finance Authority, geothermal energy, renewable energy, construction funding, Como Zoo, energy efficiency, HF2162, Minnesota, planning grants, renewable development account, clean energy, Department of Commerce

Transcript Highlights:

• Then we will take public testimony after the presentation.
• Information about how to register for in-person and remote public testimony was on the legislature's
• Then we will take public testimony after the presentation.
• signed up for public testimony.
• And we have two people signed up for public testimony. Can you bring them up?

Summary: The committee meeting began with a brief explanation of the renamed Joint Legislative Audit Review Committee subcommittee, now called the Committee to Hear SAO Performance Audits, and a presentation from the State Auditor’s Office on its current biennium performance audit work plan. The auditor described how topics are selected from a large pool of potential audits and highlighted several ongoing or planned audits, including the Liquor and Cannabis Board, oversight of authorized entities serving students with disabilities, the Quality Home Care Initiative, Medicaid managed care versus fee-for-service costs, the Housing Commission tenant ownership follow-up, DSHS vendor payment patterns, implementation of the Since Time Memorial curriculum, and the Washington State ferry system. Members asked about coordination with JLARC to avoid duplication, and the auditor said the offices exchange work plans, monthly updates, and quarterly coordination meetings. The committee then heard the State Auditor’s performance audit on how charter schools identify and support at-risk students. Auditors reviewed four charter schools—Catalyst Public Schools, Innovation High School, Pinnacles Prep, and Rainier Prep—and focused on English language learners, homeless students, and special education students. The audit found the schools met nearly all legal requirements reviewed, with only one area where two schools partially met a language-access requirement. The schools also used several promising practices, including small-group instruction, culturally responsive environments, and multi-tiered systems of support, though the auditors recommended better documentation of procedures to improve consistency. Families interviewed generally reported positive experiences, while noting resource constraints. Committee members asked about how the four schools were selected, whether the audit compared charter populations to home districts, and how MTSS requirements applied to the schools reviewed. The State Auditor’s Office said the sample was chosen for geographic diversity, student population characteristics, and representation from both authorizers, and that K-2 MTSS requirements were not evaluated because they applied to only one school. Representatives from the Charter School Commission and charter school advocates responded positively, emphasizing technical assistance, collaboration, and sharing best practices across schools. Two public testifiers also supported the report and said it highlighted effective practices that could be expanded across charter and traditional public schools.

Transcript Highlights:

• If you have written testimony, please hand it in and assume we can read it.
• Thank you for your testimony. Members, are there questions of this witness? Adam Bazzaldua.
• Thank you for your testimony, members. Mr. Anchía? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
• Thank you for your testimony. Members, are there questions of the witness? I see none.
• Thank you for your testimony. Members, are there questions for this witness? I see none.

Bills: SB231, SB667, SB689, SB825, SB965, SB992, SB1059, SB1220, SB2368, SB2601

Keywords: temporary emergency electric energy facility, temporary generation, emergency power, backup generation, mobile generator, portable generator, grid resilience, power outage restoration, transmission and distribution utility, TDU, Public Utility Commission of Texas, PUCT, Utilities Code Section 39.918, competitive bidding, lease authorization, emergency procurement, bulk power system, locational marginal pricing, reliability model, black start

Transcript Highlights:

• Today we'll receive testimony from two distinguished Americans who have been nominated by President Trump
• In connection with their testimony, so if you would both please stand and raise your right hands, I'll
• Justice, Baby Dog's testimony will be admitted into the record without objection.
• And that's what I was alluding in my testimony of it is time to build a quantum center. supercomputer
• For their testimony today, we sometimes have a chance for a second round. We don't have that today.

Keywords: nominations, Undersecretary of Energy, Undersecretary of Science, Preston Griffith, Dario Gil, energy policy, scientific innovation

Summary: The meeting was convened to discuss several significant nominations, particularly focusing on Preston Wills Griffith III for Undersecretary of Energy and Dr. Dario Gil for Undersecretary of Science. The committee underscored the importance of these roles in shaping American energy policy and scientific innovation. The discussion highlighted the nominees' backgrounds, with Griffith having extensive experience at the Department of Energy and the White House, and Gil bringing expertise in quantum technology and energy research. Members expressed a strong desire to understand the nominees' perspectives on current challenges facing the energy sector, including regulatory mandates and national security concerns. The meeting concluded with a commitment to ensuring thorough evaluations of the candidates and their proposed approaches to pressing issues.

Transcript Highlights:

• Before we begin, I just wanted to make a statement on providing testimony at this hearing.
• All witnesses will be testifying in person, and all testimony comments are limited to the bill at hand
• Is there any public testimony or members of the public who would like to state their position?
• This is really important testimony, especially for the author.
• So I appreciate the testimony of how to improve it and to work with the author.

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Military and Veterans Affairs met as a subcommittee because a quorum was initially lacking, and heard six bills. AB 81 by Assemblymember Ta would require CalVet to study the mental health needs of women veterans; supporters from county veterans service officers, veterans organizations, and behavioral health groups said women veterans face higher rates of military sexual trauma, PTSD, depression, and suicide, while no opposition appeared. The bill was later passed 7-0 and re-referred to Appropriations. AB 826 by Assemblymember Gonzalez would prohibit unaccredited individuals or businesses from charging veterans fees to file or assist with VA benefits claims, impose a civil penalty, and direct penalty revenue to veterans services and district attorneys. Supporters argued the bill would curb predatory “claim sharks” and protect veterans from exploitation, while opponents from private claims consulting firms and several veterans said the measure could restrict access to legitimate help and should be narrowed to target bad actors instead of banning paid assistance broadly. After extensive testimony and discussion about federal law, accreditation, and possible amendments, the committee passed the bill 8-0 and re-referred it to Judiciary. AB 556 by Assemblymember Patterson would clarify that campus-level mandatory fees are covered under the CalVet fee waiver for dependents of certain veterans and Medal of Honor recipients. Supporters said the bill would fulfill the state’s promise to veterans’ families, while concerns were raised about fiscal impacts on CSU campuses and the need for more precise cost estimates. The bill was passed 6-0 and sent to Appropriations. The committee also adopted its rules 7-0 and approved the consent calendar, which included AB 264, AB 1508, and AB 1509, all re-referred to Appropriations.

Transcript Highlights:

• Members, we're going to resume testimony on House Bill 1482. The chair calls our next witness, Mr.
• Again, my testimony today is not in opposition to this.
• Uh, so thank you so much, uh, for your, for your testimony, uh, as it, uh, actually relates to a couple
• If not, we appreciate your testimony. Thank you for being here at this time.
• I know you just heard his testimony, but maybe you've already been talking about it before, or I hope

Transcript Highlights:

• Members, we're going to resume testimony on House Bill 1482. The chair calls our next witness.
• So thank you so much for your testimony, as it actually relates to a couple of questions I had about
• If not, we appreciate your testimony. Thank you for being here at this time.
• And thank you for your testimony. Members, are there any questions?
• I know you just heard his testimony, but maybe you've already been talking about it before.

Bills: HB1482, HB2017, HB2103, HB2341, HB2756

Keywords: community supervision, repeat offenders, intoxication, Texas Penal Code, criminal justice reform, intoxication manslaughter, criminal penalties, mandatory supervision, parole eligibility, Grayson's Law, mental health, trauma, jailers, law enforcement, occupational health, diligent participation, state jail felony, time credits, rehabilitation programs, de-escalation

Transcript Highlights:

• If you have written testimony, I also wish to speak, please bring your written testimony forward when
• Members, there are resource witnesses, and we have three individuals to provide public testimony.
• Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony. My name is Sarah Cruz.
• asks which of the Health and Human Services witnesses is best suited to answer, noting that DPS testimony
• So is y'all's testimony bifurcated in some way, or do I need to have both of y'all up here?

Bills: SB825

Keywords: illegal immigration, economic impact, environmental impact, financial impact, annual study, Texas, government report

Summary: The Senate Committee on Border Security heard testimony on Senate Bill 825 by Senator Middleton, as substituted, which would require an annual or biennial study of the economic, environmental, and financial impacts of illegal immigration in Texas. Middleton said the bill is intended to provide lawmakers with comprehensive data on costs to law enforcement, health care, education, infrastructure, and taxpayers, and to support possible federal reimbursement claims. Several senators, including Hinojosa and Eckhardt, agreed that a study is needed but raised concerns about bias, the scope of the study, and whether the Comptroller’s Office rather than the governor’s office should conduct it. Middleton argued the governor’s office was the best coordinating entity because it could direct multiple agencies to provide data, while Hinojosa and others emphasized the Comptroller’s expertise and prior 2006 study. Public testimony was generally supportive of the idea of a study but critical of the bill’s framing. Sarah Cruz of the ACLU of Texas said the study should be a full cost-benefit analysis and warned that focusing only on costs could create an anti-immigrant narrative. Danny Woodward of the Texas Civil Rights Project also supported the concept but recommended moving the study to the Comptroller or, alternatively, creating a neutral commission. Jaime Pointe of Every Texan likewise supported updating the 2006 analysis and said state agencies should be able to cooperate with a governor-led study. Resource witnesses from the governor’s office, HHSC, TEA, OCA, TDCJ, and DPS explained that data collection would be uneven across agencies. HHSC and TEA said they often do not collect immigration status and, in TEA’s case, federal law limits schools from requesting such information; OCA and TDCJ said they could provide only partial or indirect data unless new reporting requirements were added. DPS said it already has Operation Lone Star data but would need to collect additional information if tasked with the broader study. The chair asked the governor’s office to provide a follow-up answer on separation-of-powers and related authority questions by the following Tuesday, and the committee recessed subject to the call of the chair without taking a vote on the bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• Ahead and I appreciate the time and commitment of both the committee members and those providing testimony
• If, if there are no further questions, we will proceed to testimony. The chair calls.
• Thank you, Governor. uh, I appreciate your testimony. Thank you.
• So that, that, that's my testimony and welcome any questions. Thank you.
• And I guess if, if you followed the line of, of argument from the previous, uh, testimony.

Bills: HB176, HB180

Keywords: tax, ad valorem, voter-approval, local government finance, property tax, repeal, tax rates, school finance, tax reduction, compressed tax rate, education, funding

Transcript Highlights:

• We will now move into public testimony. testimony. Is there any public testimony?
• Seeing no public testimony, we will now move into debate.

Transcript Highlights:

• we'll now take public testimony we'll now take public testimony on on on what<01:33:27.600> subject
• Um, the testimony and materials manner.
• that they're different. um the testimony that they're different. um the testimony that we<02:02:
• I appreciate all the testimony.
• I think it's nice to be able testimony.

Keywords: 916, all