Transcript Highlights:

• I think, I think that speaks volumes of, of the work that the department can do.
• I think Mr. Chair, it's a good question. Um, I think we're making the, I think yes.
• Uh, I think additional.
• I like the thinking. Um, we will continue to think about that.
• So, I think I have a good relationship, and I think that is favorable to New Mexico.

Transcript Highlights:

• My husband did make it, I think. My husband did make it, I think. He's here.
• And so I think the biggest change, the biggest pivot that we've done is I think we as a staff are much
• I think, and Commissioner Yaltman mentioned this, the system resiliency plans, I think, are a big step
• is something I think is necessary because I think, you know, each TDU has unique challenges they're
• And I think, you know...

Summary: The Senate Committee on Nominations held its final nomination hearing of the session and considered three nominees: J.B. Goodwin for the Texas Real Estate Commission, Courtney Yaltman for the Public Utility Commission of Texas, and Thomas Gleason as PUC chairman. Goodwin described his long career in real estate and charitable work, and senators questioned him extensively about the Real Estate Commission’s self-directed, semi-independent status, housing affordability, institutional homebuyers, property insurance costs, disclosure issues, and the Burnett v. National Association of Realtors case. Yaltman and Gleason were questioned about PUC oversight of ERCOT, post-Winter Storm Uri reforms, utility resilience and vegetation management after Hurricane Beryl, water and telecommunications oversight, staffing and transparency, and rising infrastructure and utility costs. Much of the discussion focused on housing and utility affordability, with several senators urging the nominees to keep consumer protection and public trust at the forefront. Goodwin said housing affordability and large-scale investment purchases were not within the Real Estate Commission’s direct purview, though he supported further study. Yaltman and Gleason said the PUC had increased oversight of ERCOT, improved communication and accountability with utilities, and was working on resiliency plans, rate-setting issues, and infrastructure planning while trying to avoid overburdening ratepayers. The committee first voted to favorably report nominees left pending from the May 5 agenda by a 6-0 roll call vote. After public testimony was opened and closed, the committee then voted on the nominees heard that day and favorably recommended all three to the full Senate for confirmation by a 7-0 vote. The committee then recessed subject to the call of the chair.

Transcript Highlights:

• from spending money elections so I think from spending money elections so I think the<00:10:45.839
• I think it goes nicely with your bill, but I think we'll keep working on it. $55,000 um that that uh
• goes nicely with your bill but I think goes nicely with your bill but I think we'll<00:26:04.120
• <00:51:57.880> move<00:51:58.119> the think think we need to move the think think we need
• there's I I think I think that somebody there's I I think I think that somebody on<00:52:06.799>

Bills: HF72, HF66, HF69, HF73

Keywords: campaign finance, state funding, political activity, nonprofits, government transparency, HF66, Minnesota second-degree murder, unintentional murder, protective order, order for protection, harassment restraining order, domestic violence, victim protection, cross-jurisdictional orders, out-of-state restraining order, tribal court order, Canadian protective order, public safety, criminal law, homicide

Transcript Highlights:

• But as we think about the, I think, what are some really exciting changes that could be made, I think
• I think...
• I think a key issue with taking the Rainy Day Fund measure to voters is thinking about, and I think this
• I think that that's something to think about.
• I think that that's something to think about.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Accountability and Oversight held a hearing on proposals to reform California’s Budget Stabilization Account, or rainy day fund, ahead of the May Revision. Members and witnesses reviewed how Proposition 2 (2014) changed reserve rules, including mandatory deposits, a 10% cap on the fund, and limits tied to the Governor’s declaration of a budget emergency. LAO staff explained that California’s revenues are highly volatile, that current reserve rules are complicated by interactions with Proposition 98 and the Gann limit, and that under current law reserves would cover only about one-third of funding shortfalls in a benchmark scenario over 50 years. The LAO presented its report recommending a larger reserve target, including raising the cap to 50% by 2055 and pairing that with either broader, more flexible deposit rules or a simpler approach that deposits all excess capital gains. The Department of Finance described the Governor’s proposal to raise the cap from 10% to 20% and exempt BSA deposits from the state appropriations limit, while Assembly Member Valencia presented ACA 1, which would make similar changes and was described as an evolving proposal. Testimony generally supported saving more during boom years, but differed on how much to hardwire into the Constitution versus leave flexible, and on whether to broaden the deposit formulas beyond capital gains. Public witnesses and committee members raised additional issues, including whether reserve reforms should also address debt repayment, the treatment of unemployment insurance fund debt, and whether the Gann limit should be adjusted to better allow reserve growth. Supporters argued that stronger reserves would protect Californians from cuts during downturns and help the state weather volatility and federal funding threats. Some advocates warned that reforms should not come at the expense of current public needs, while taxpayer representatives cautioned against turning the BSA into a pass-through account that weakens constitutional spending limits. The hearing ended without a vote, with the committee chair noting the complexity of the issue and adjourning after public comment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, so I don't think so.
• think think I<00:17:32.880> do<00:17:33.040> think<00:17:33.240> you<00:17:33.320
• So I think that's good.
• think that's good. think that's good.
• I don't think do that.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The committee of conference first took up House Bill 158 on public inspection of absentee ballot lists. The Senate explained that its amendment replaced the original bill with a requirement that the Secretary of State review absentee ballot data after each general election and report findings to the committees of jurisdiction, focusing on unusual patterns such as multiple ballots sent to the same address. After a brief caucus, the House agreed to the Senate position, and members voted individually to concur. The committee then discussed House Bill 281, which concerns making the electronic voter checklist available in a sortable format. The main dispute was whether the public list should include the mailing address where an absentee ballot was sent if it differs from the voter’s registered address. The Senate argued that including mailing addresses could expose where voters actually live or are away from home and could create safety concerns, while the House argued the information could help candidates reach voters and was not primarily a fraud measure. The parties also discussed a related nursing home verification provision and record-retention/public-records questions. After caucusing, the House agreed to the Senate’s position with the added nursing home signing language, and the committee closed the bill on consent. House Bill 340, concerning electioneering by public employees, was then taken up with a Senate amendment that narrowed the definition of electioneering by tying it to existing statutory language, added a prohibition on expressly or primarily political surveys, and created a civil penalty option alongside the misdemeanor penalty. Senators and representatives debated whether the penalties should be mandatory or discretionary and how the language would apply to certain categories of public employees. After further clarification and caucus, the House accepted the Senate’s amended replace-all language, and the committee closed HB 340. Finally, the committee opened House Bill 1062, authorizing the Secretary of State to conduct random audits of citizenship qualifications of registered voters. The Senate explained that its changes removed the need for a permanent audit power by allowing records to be checked against databases and by requiring identification for registration going forward, which is why it added a sunset clause. The House member objected to the sunset and wanted the authority to continue indefinitely, and discussion continued as the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• But we think it's impractical.
• I think for 60 years, we've had this in law, and as a result, I think there are other parts of our laws
• If you think about most of how our commodities are produced, if you think airplanes, you think toys,
• We think they're overestimating.
• And I think that's kind of wrong.

Summary: The committee heard a long housing agenda with several bills presented before quorum was established. AB 1725, as amended, would require disclosure of nearby oil wells and methane monitoring issues in a specific district; the author and community witnesses described serious health and safety risks in Vista Hermosa Heights, while the California Apartment Association, California Building Industry Association, and California Chamber of Commerce opposed, arguing the bill targeted the wrong industry and that the state should instead fix abandoned wells directly. AB 2110, a local finance tool to create tax increment districts for workforce housing for education, health care, manufacturing, and public safety workers, drew no witnesses in support or opposition and was presented as a way to help workers live closer to jobs. AB 1732 would expand CEQA streamlining for public university and college housing projects; UC and several housing and labor groups supported it, while housing advocates raised concerns about amendments affecting existing 100% affordable housing exemptions. AB 1771, amended into a study bill, would direct HCD to report on the long-standing resident manager requirement for apartment buildings with 16 or more units; the rental housing industry supported studying the issue, while the chair emphasized the need to consider tenant protections and the impact on current resident managers before changing the law. The committee also heard AB 2185, which would direct state affordable housing programs to update guidelines to better support factory-built housing; it drew broad support from housing, labor, technology, and local government groups, with no opposition. AB 2748 would delay new EV-readiness requirements for 100% affordable housing developments, keeping the prior 40% standard through 2035; supporters said the higher standard would add significant costs and threaten project feasibility, while clean air and transportation advocates argued the code changes are modest, important for equity, and should not be rolled back. Members split along those lines, with some emphasizing housing production and others urging more public subsidy for EV infrastructure rather than delaying the code. SB 417, a proposed $10 billion affordable housing bond for the November ballot, received extensive support from housing organizations, local governments, labor, and business groups, but Habitat for Humanity and the Los Angeles mayor’s office asked for specific allocations for CalHome and interim housing; the bill was ultimately moved to Appropriations on an 8-0 vote, with members noting ongoing negotiations over funding priorities. Finally, AB 1740 would create an urban multimodal community designation for Santa Monica, allowing local approval of certain low-impact coastal-zone activities—such as some housing, bike and bus lanes, outdoor dining, and building changes—without Coastal Commission review. The author and Santa Monica officials said the bill would reduce delays and uncertainty for infill housing and local economic recovery while preserving protections for sensitive coastal resources; supporters included housing, business, and city groups. The Coastal Commission and environmental organizations opposed, saying the bill would carve out broad exemptions, weaken public access and appeal rights, and bypass the local coastal program process that Santa Monica has not completed. Committee members debated the Commission’s role, with some criticizing it for opposing legislation and others arguing the bill was a common-sense way to modernize coastal permitting. A motion and second were made on AB 1740, and the bill was left pending with the committee’s action to be taken when appropriate.

Transcript Highlights:

• But I think as we're thinking about this, we should think about the track the people... ...we should
• And I think that's a statistic we need to think about here, because it's not as if...
• that I think that I think that I think that, ...accountability to the elected official in that community
• I think that is it.
• I do not think that is good.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee held its fourth public hearing of the 2025-2026 session on bills dealing with involuntary commitment and access to addiction treatment, especially proposals to move Section 35 civil commitments away from jails and prisons and into facilities licensed or approved by DPH or DMH. Chairs Velis and Domb framed the hearing as a discussion of how to support people in crisis with compassion, while also warning against using involuntary commitment as a way to remove unhoused people from public view. The hearing also touched on related concerns about discharge practices, treatment capacity, and the need for a broader continuum of care. Testimony split largely along two themes. Addiction researcher Keith Humphreys argued that many people enter treatment under pressure, that involuntary treatment can be ethically justified in the face of overdose risk, but that it should not be mandated unless high-quality services exist first; he emphasized the need for inpatient care when someone is a grave danger, followed by case management and outpatient support. MAMH’s Kate Alicante supported the bill, saying Massachusetts is the only state that commits people with substance use conditions to jails or prisons and that carceral settings add trauma and stigma; she pointed to prior legislative steps, including the Section 35 commission and the planned closure of DOC’s MESAC facility, as evidence that the Commonwealth is moving toward health-based settings. A major portion of the hearing focused on Stony Brook, a sheriff-run stabilization and treatment center in Hampden County. Boston City Councilor John Fitzgerald, several committee members, and multiple people in recovery described the facility as humane, well-run, and effective, with longer stays, medical monitoring, medication-assisted treatment, counseling, and warm handoffs to aftercare. Several witnesses said Stony Brook saved their lives or helped family members recover, and they argued that the sheriff’s office model should be expanded rather than eliminated. Others, including family members and advocates, countered that even a well-run correctional setting remains stigmatizing and that people should not be treated in facilities run by sheriffs or corrections when they have committed no crime. No vote was taken. The hearing concluded with continued testimony, including Senator Friedman’s support for Section 35 as a civil commitment tool but not in a criminal justice setting, and her separate support for a bill to speed inpatient mental health treatment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Sometimes we think we know what the other person is thinking and we don't.
• I think lines 424.
• And I think about when J.
• Sidney thinks, I think it was. She was in the last one too. Yes, also waving against.
• I can't help but think that.

Summary: The committee first considered CS/SB 536, which updates Florida’s criminal gang statutes to reflect modern gang recruitment and communication methods, including social media and encrypted messaging. Senator Martin said the bill does not criminalize gang membership, but clarifies definitions used for gang-related enhancements and law enforcement investigations. Members raised concerns about the meaning of “observed in the company” of gang members and possible impacts on businesses and bikers; Martin said the language was not intended to reach ordinary business customers and that the bill still requires other criteria. The committee adopted the amendment and reported the bill favorably after debate, with some members supporting it and others warning it was still too broad. The committee also approved CS/SB 762, allowing cross-jurisdictional assignment of conflict capital cases with cost and reporting requirements, after an amendment emphasizing judicial economy and geographic proximity; the bill was described as a cost-saving measure and was reported favorably. CS/SB 1742, creating a new offense for indecent exposure or sexual acts directed at minors under 16, was amended to align with the House version and to cover observing a child for sexual gratification, then reported favorably. CS/SB 1750, increasing penalties and mandatory minimums for serious sex crimes and child sexual abuse material offenses, was amended to restore some current-law provisions and limit reclassification to offenders who were 18 or older at the time of the offense, then reported favorably. The committee also approved CS/SB 1582 on statewide data sharing for secondhand dealer and pawnbroker transactions, along with its companion public-records bill SB 1792, both described as theft-prevention and law-enforcement tools with confidentiality protections and stakeholder support. CS/SB 500, providing FDLE protective security for major-party nominees for statewide constitutional offices, was also reported favorably after a technical amendment. The longest and most contentious discussion was on CS/SB 1632, which would create a process for Florida to designate foreign and domestic terrorist organizations, restrict courts from enforcing foreign or religious law when it conflicts with state or federal law, and bar public funds from supporting designated organizations. Senator Graal said the bill targets conduct, not belief, and creates due-process protections through written findings, public notice, cabinet action, and judicial review. Senator Smith and Senator Polsky repeatedly questioned whether the bill’s use of terms like “promotion” could chill protected speech, academic debate, protest activity, or legal representation, and whether the designation process could be used politically or against religious and advocacy groups. Graal said promotion was meant to cover support for illegal acts, not mere disagreement or academic speech, and said she was open to clarifying language. Numerous speakers opposed the bill, arguing it was vague, unconstitutional, and likely to be used against Muslim communities, students, nonprofits, and dissenting political speech; a few supporters argued it was needed for public safety and to prevent state support for terrorism. The committee did not take a final vote on CS/SB 1632 in the portion provided, and the transcript ends during public testimony on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• And do you think this...
• And do you think this?
• And I think, Mr.
• So I do think I bring a sense of obligation to this, that I think we owe it to... ...I think we owe it
• I think it is important.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee opened with roll call and a review of special-session procedure: bills would be heard in filing order, with related school-lunch bills grouped together, and any bill advancing would require a motion, second, and majority vote to be introduced. Members also discussed that the committee was functioning much like a delayed-bills committee, with final referral to either Appropriations or Policy depending on the bill’s fiscal impact. The first major proposal was Senator Schibley’s bill to create a narrow, statewide Bank of North Dakota bridge-loan program for struggling nonprofit medical facilities, prompted by Jacobson Memorial Hospital’s financial crisis. He argued the hospital and surrounding EMS services could close without short-term help, while committee members questioned the added language, the population cap, the $10 million fund with $5 million per applicant limit, and whether the program could open the door to future requests. Representative Headland then presented two cleanup bills from the prior property-tax session: one to fix notice and tax-certification issues for local taxing districts, and another to correct how the primary residence credit is applied so taxpayers receive the full benefit rather than counties retaining part of the reimbursement. Members asked about township hearing timing, the estimated $10–15 million annual impact, and whether the credit issue could be fixed retroactively; Headland said the bill was intended to correct the problem going forward. Three school-lunch bills drew extensive discussion. Representative Vetter proposed a small administrative appropriation to add an FTE to help eligible families enroll in the existing free/reduced lunch program, saying the goal was to ensure needy children are signed up and that the state should not subsidize meals for wealthy families. Representative Nathe offered a broader bill mirroring the pending initiated measure but placing the program in statute instead of the Constitution, moving implementation up a year, and funding it with a one-time $65 million from the strategic investment fund; he said this would preserve legislative flexibility and avoid constitutional entrenchment. Representative Dressler proposed raising the state-funded eligibility threshold from 225% to 300% of poverty, arguing it would expand access while still preserving federal reimbursements and encouraging better enrollment systems. Members debated costs, future budget pressure, whether the bills set a precedent for responding to ballot measures, and whether the program should include breakfast and other operational details. Other proposals included Senator Powers’ bill to create a hyperbaric oxygen board and support rural access to hyperbaric chambers for wounds, concussions, PTSD, and other conditions; Representative Tolman’s reporting-requirements bill to force new or expanded programs to justify purpose, alternatives, evaluation methods, and full implementation costs; Representative Frelich’s bill addressing the ongoing redistricting litigation and what happens if the Supreme Court or lower courts alter the current map; and a bill requested by the Public Service Commission and ITD for FERC litigation support and ADA website/document compliance. The committee also heard a rural-health eligibility bill from Representative Twait aimed at steering federal rural health dollars toward rural providers, with questions focused on whether the mileage limits would exclude some communities. One Holocaust education item was deferred until the sponsor could be located.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think these are good.
• Cuz I think a lot of what we're seeing, and I think it's good.
• I think...
• I think that's why we're here. So, I think together we would agree to that.
• I think...

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• No, I think that’s right.
• All of ours, I think.
• I think you’ve heard that before. I think the option is important.
• I think you've heard that before. I think the option is important.
• I think it was to $15,000.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing focused on Governor Healey and Lt. Gov. Driscoll’s Municipal Empowerment Act, with administration officials and municipal leaders broadly supporting the bill as a package of tools to help cities and towns manage rising costs, staffing shortages, and service demands. The administration highlighted procurement reforms, including raising Chapter 30B advertising thresholds, clarifying cooperative purchasing, and removing the Commbuys notice requirement; permanent authority to amortize emergency-related deficits over three years; expanded authority and enforcement for removing double poles; continued flexibility for hybrid and remote public meetings; regionalization options such as regional boards of assessors and intermunicipal agreements; cybersecurity reporting to EOTSS; and several local revenue options and other municipal finance changes. They said the bill was shaped by listening sessions with municipal officials and was intended to increase flexibility, efficiency, and stability without imposing broad mandates. Committee members asked about regionalization, cybersecurity costs, Commbuys, hybrid meetings, and double poles. Administration witnesses said cybersecurity reporting would help the state target resources and that existing Community Compact and capital grant programs, including IT and municipal fiber funding, could support local needs; they said EOTSS would absorb reporting within existing resources. On procurement, they said the Commbuys notice change would be optional and that other public notice methods would remain available. On hybrid meetings, they emphasized flexibility for different types of boards and the burdens a one-size-fits-all mandate could create for small towns and volunteer boards. On double poles, they said the bill’s main change from last session was to give utilities more time and improve the removal process while keeping enforcement mechanisms aimed at speeding removal rather than raising revenue. The Massachusetts Municipal Association, MAPC, the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission, and multiple mayors and town managers testified in support. They described the bill as a practical modernization measure that would help local governments operate more efficiently and respond to fiscal pressure. Witnesses from Northampton, Lynn, Gardner, Cambridge, Franklin, North Andover, Manchester-by-the-Sea, and Ashland praised the hybrid meeting provisions, procurement changes, regional service-sharing, and emergency deficit amortization. Several also urged adoption of local revenue tools, including meals and lodging tax options and other local fees, as ways to preserve services and staffing. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I think that has the cost.
• respond, Senator Richardson, to I think the question from the opposition, I think we can think of this
• Richardson to, I think the question from the opposition, I think we can think of this performance metrics
• So we think that's a challenge.
• I think it’s one, you know, I think it would be worth spending some time on this.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Yeah, I think they're voluntary, and I think they renew every two years.
• So I think that’s already in there, and I think that’s also covered by the civil code.
• I think he was on closing.
• That last year, I think.
• So I just want you to be thinking, want you to be thinking about that.

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 1209, which would pause new cooperative endeavor agreements for surface water withdrawals after December 31, 2026, while allowing existing agreements to continue and renew through 2036. The author said the bill is intended to force a broader, data-driven review of Louisiana’s surface water management and to improve funding for aquatic plant control, especially giant salvinia. An amendment was adopted to broaden the description of how the aquatic plant control fund may be used and to require annual reporting on agreements, withdrawals, revenues, deposits, spending, and non-monetary consideration. Department officials said the current program is voluntary, underfunded for monitoring, and that the bill could create a gap for new users if no replacement mechanism is enacted. The bill was reported favorable as amended after testimony from supporters including the Louisiana Wildlife Federation and opposition concerns from industry representatives were noted but not formally presented. House Bill 599 was then heard, which would prohibit the sale of Louisiana running surface water outside the state. The author argued that out-of-state sales, especially involving Toledo Bend and Texas, would be short-sighted and could harm Louisiana’s long-term water interests. Supporters said Louisiana lacks a water budget and should preserve water for in-state needs, while the Department of Conservation and Energy noted that the state currently has no mandatory process for such agreements and that the bill would not affect Sabine River Authority authority. The committee reported the bill favorable. Finally, House Bill 1206, dealing with permitting and reporting of water usage at data centers, was discussed. The substitute bill and amendment would give the department authority to monitor and regulate groundwater and surface water withdrawals, require public hearings, and improve transparency through reporting and a universal project identifier. The author and supporters said the bill was prompted by concerns in communities affected by large data center projects and the lack of public hearings on water use. Department officials agreed that more comprehensive data and a clearer framework are needed, but the author voluntarily deferred the bill to continue working with the department on a broader measure for next session. The committee also heard House Bill 1171 on allowing airboats in the Mar-Paw Swamp Wildlife Management Area, but after extensive debate over noise, habitat impacts, and existing restrictions, the discussion was ongoing in the portion provided and no final action on that bill was shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• Who else does this nominee think should be self-sufficient? I wonder if he thinks Elon Musk.
• Who does he think he is? he thinks should be self-sufficient?
• And I think if that is confirmed by this committee, then I think it will at least begin to battle some
• So I think. I think there's a lot of opportunity for us to do this.
• I don't think you need to use paperwork to prove a work requirement and I don't think that should be

Keywords: Michael Falkender, Deputy Secretary of the Treasury, IRS, taxpayer privacy, nomination process, committee hearing

Summary: The committee convened to discuss critical issues surrounding the nomination of Michael Falkender for the position of Deputy Secretary of the Treasury. This meeting included a series of remarks from committee members who expressed divergent views on Falkender's qualifications and the implications of his appointment. Senator Wyden voiced strong opposition, arguing that Falkender represents harmful policies expected to be perpetuated under the current administration, especially concerning taxpayer privacy and IRS tactics. Meanwhile, other members defended Falkender, noting his extensive experience, including a commitment to transparency in government operations if confirmed.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:15:33.120> it's think it's think it's like4ome,000<00:15:35.120> um<00:15:35.279>
• But I'm wondering if you could help think about how we are thinking a little bit more, because I think
• <00:40:32.320> we<00:40:32.560> all think to this point of I think we all think to
• But I think as we think about for sure.
• we think about our policym um I think we think about our policym um I think that<00:47:11.359>

Bills: HF2440

Keywords: labor market, employment, economic development, funding, data analysis, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• I think that I think are big projects.
• I think it does both.
• I think it Thank you for the question. I think it does<00:49:11.839> both.
• know, I think people want to think, you know, I think people want to know,<00:49:36.240> you<
• > the that's a piece I think it I think the that's a piece I think it I think the the<00:49:47.920

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I think it is.
• I think unless you're confronted with it, you don't think about it.
• I still think that's a fear.
• What do you all think? Yeah, I think that sounds good.
• I just think Yep, yeah, OK.

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I think the bill is pretty straightforward, and I think its intention is to move us backwards.
• I think the bill is pretty straightforward, and I think its intention is to move us backwards.
• So I think the threats of a lawsuit are, um, are just that. I think they are threats.
• And I think that's incredibly wise. I think that's incredibly smart.
• And I think that's incredibly wise. I think that's incredibly smart.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• I think everyone thinks it's a bad idea to put all of the state database on a device.
• I think everybody in the room thinks there's some good stuff in the bill.
• I don't think we should have to be here. I don't think we should have to repeat ourselves.
• I think it's a valid concern.
• I think it perfectly solves my concern. And I think it, in essence, solves—I don't know.

Keywords: 985, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Director Salih, I think, has it. I think it's in the General Fund financial summary.
• I think it's 50, Madam Chair, Representative, I think it's 50 billion dollars.
• 4th, I think...
• I think they maintain towers.
• So I think the clearest way for me to think about it and try to share.