Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for allowing me to share.
• Thank you for allowing me to share. Thank you so very much.
• Thank you so much for sharing that information.
• Thank you for allowing me this time to share my journey and progress.
• </c> we were introduced I learned we shared we were introduced I learned we shared many<01:54:57.840>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Similarly, Rinker Rock Creek Ranch and Haley is one of those shared endeavors.
• Sheriff, can you share with us? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
• Would you share your opinion of that? Mr.
• And I just want to thank you for having the strength to share. Thank you.
• Boyd and Ron Schurz shared essentially between '97 and 2005.

Keywords: 989, all

Summary: The committee heard a presentation from University of Idaho representatives on the university’s land-grant mission and its role in federalism, followed by detailed overviews of the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences and the College of Natural Resources. Speakers described the Morrill, Hatch, and Smith-Lever Acts, the university’s history, and examples of research, extension, and workforce training in agriculture, engineering, law, forestry, fire science, and youth programs such as 4-H. They highlighted facilities and programs including research stations, the Idaho Center for Agriculture, Food and the Environment, the deep soil ecotron, the Wildland Fire Center, the experimental forest, and the policy analysis group, while also noting the impact of federal and state funding delays and cuts on staffing and research capacity. Committee members asked about several current issues, including quagga mussels, screw worm, chronic wasting disease, and the effects of funding cuts. University officials said they were not actively researching some of those wildlife and livestock disease issues but were willing to help if capacity and funding allowed. They also said budget reductions had caused real losses, including layoffs and reduced programs, and that federal grant delays had disrupted research timelines. The committee also raised questions about conflicts of interest and university employees’ outside work; the university said it has annual conflict-of-interest and conflict-of-commitment training and review procedures. The committee then heard from Bonneville County Sheriff Sam Hulse and the Idaho Sheriffs Association on the federal 287(g) immigration partnership program. Hulse argued that participation should remain voluntary and locally controlled, describing the different 287(g) models, the training and liability concerns, and the distinction between local law enforcement and federal immigration enforcement. He said Idaho agencies already cooperate with ICE in other ways and that mandatory participation could create staffing, legal, and community-trust problems. Members asked about costs, liability, detention standards, and whether deputies lose local control under task force arrangements; Hulse said the answer depends on the specific model and operation, and he emphasized the need for local discretion. Later, the committee took testimony on the long-running bighorn sheep and domestic sheep conflict affecting western Idaho grazing allotments. Idaho Wool Growers representatives and affected ranchers described the history of state legislation, federal litigation, and the closure of grazing areas after bighorn sheep transplants, which they said cut livestock operations in half and caused major financial and personal hardship. They argued that the state and federal agencies had not lived up to assurances that permittees would be held harmless, and they urged continued attention to the issue. No formal votes or committee actions were taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• that individuals respond better when the doctor, for instance, looks like them, talks like them, shares
• </c><00:18:13.600><c> maybe</c><00:18:13.800><c> some</c> talks like them, shares maybe some talks like
• them, shares maybe some values<00:18:14.560><c> or</c><00:18:15.280><c> um</c><00:18:15.440><c> even
• County because of Bowling Green has surpassed Jefferson County in their foreign-born population by share
• </c> their foreign-born population by share their foreign-born population by share of<00:30:32.160><c

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Commission on Race and Access to Opportunity convened its first meeting of the 2026 interim, established a quorum, and introduced staff and a summer student intern. The chair explained that the commission’s first topic would be crime, public safety, violence prevention, and mentoring, and invited the police chiefs of Lexington, Louisville, and Bowling Green to discuss how the legislature could help them do their jobs more effectively. The chiefs described a shift in policing from a more enforcement-only approach to community policing built on relationships, trust, and prevention. They said community engagement and mentorship are central to reducing violence, and cited examples such as community engagement teams, youth programs, and efforts to build trust through regular presence in neighborhoods. Louisville’s chief said the department’s community engagement work has helped improve homicide solvability, while Bowling Green’s chief emphasized that juvenile crime and stolen guns are major concerns and that the state cannot arrest its way out of the problem. All three stressed that policing depends on cooperation with residents, prosecutors, and courts. Members then asked about recruiting officers who reflect the communities they serve. The chiefs said successful recruitment depends on personal relationships, officers serving as ambassadors, and reaching people through community presence rather than only traditional ads. Bowling Green described junior police academy and cadet programs that begin with youth and often lead to hiring, while Lexington said it uses social media, a community police academy, and outreach to keep local residents in the profession. They also said character matters more than background and that officers should be embedded in the neighborhoods they serve. A final exchange focused on immigrant and refugee communities and fear of police. The chiefs said they are trying to reduce fear through community police academies, multilingual outreach, neighborhood meetings, and clear communication that local police do not enforce civil immigration detainers. Louisville said it has marked SWAT vehicles more clearly and works with community organizations to spread accurate information. The chiefs repeatedly emphasized that their role is to keep people safe, protect constitutional rights, and make sure residents feel able to call 911 when they need help.

Transcript Highlights:

• It shares the risk across the project.
• It shares the risk across the project.
• We are the single non-federal sponsor primarily for the large cost share.
• We are providing a 35 percent cost share match to them.
• And again, when we're done, we still will owe—our cost share is in excess of $277 million.

Summary: The committee met for an informational hearing focused largely on the state capital outlay process and House Bill 2. Roger Husser and Matt Baker of the Division of Administration/Facility Planning and Control described how the office prepares and administers the capital outlay bill, said the bill has grown substantially over five years, and argued that recent changes in culture, staffing, project management, cash-flow analysis, and use of third-party support have more than doubled project expenditures and improved delivery. Members asked about the use and cost of third-party project managers, delegation of smaller projects to agencies, hiring difficulties, and whether the changes represented better interpretation of existing law versus statutory changes. Husser said some statutes were amended, some internal customs were removed, and the office would provide a list of those changes. He also explained that the office is trying to move away from overly rigid practices and toward faster project completion while still following public-bid and oversight rules. A major portion of the discussion centered on the size and structure of the capital outlay bill, especially the gap between Priority 1 cash capacity and the much larger Priority 5 backlog. Husser said the current annual Priority 1 limit is tied to construction inflation and is about $574 million, with additional surplus funds also available, but that the bill contains far more Priority 5 funding than can realistically move in a five-year plan. He and members discussed dormant projects, scope creep, legacy projects that have sat in the bill for years, and the problem of false expectations for non-state entities. Proposed solutions included limiting Priority 5 to five times Priority 1, requiring annual re-endorsement by members, setting district or project caps for non-state projects, requiring time limits and reporting for grant-like non-state projects, placing matches in escrow, requiring design readiness before submission, and consolidating the many existing reporting requirements into one clearer report. Members also discussed bundling multiple projects under one agency project, which the House had begun piloting for LSU, UL Lafayette, Southern, and DOTD, and which Husser said could improve flexibility, reduce overappropriation, and better reflect actual spending. Baker then explained cash-flow management and the commitment process, saying FPC now analyzes projects annually to estimate what can actually be spent in the next fiscal year and uses commitments to allow projects to proceed when future-year funding is expected. He said overappropriations can result from poor cash-flow estimates, delays, dormant projects, or projects coming in under budget, and that the office is already reworking cash-flow assumptions and reappropriating savings where possible. Members also raised concerns about change orders and low bids; staff said project managers review change orders closely, require concurrence on non-state projects, and sometimes reduce scope to keep projects within budget. After FPC’s presentation, the committee heard the beginning of Louisiana Economic Development’s capital outlay discussion, where LED explained that its projects generally fall into three categories, including the Economic Development Awards Program and Site Readiness Program, both used to support targeted economic development and job creation.

Transcript Highlights:

• They have been shared, but not enough.
• And so one last thing to share. Not affect us.
• We have the shared governance relationship.
• We have the shared governance relationship.
• And to align with what you shared, there's challenges with the system. There are.

Summary: The joint Senate Education and Budget Committee hearing focused on the Governor’s proposed education governance overhaul, which would shift day-to-day management of the California Department of Education from the elected Superintendent of Public Instruction to a new appointed education commissioner, while giving the Superintendent new voting roles on the State Board of Education and the Community College Board of Governors. Chair Perez opened by stressing that the proposal raises major policy questions beyond the budget process and should be evaluated for its effect on students, local control, and accountability. Brooks Allen of the State Board of Education argued the change would unify policymaking and implementation, reduce fragmented authority, and create clearer accountability, citing decades of reports criticizing California’s “crazy quilt” governance structure and noting the proposal is timed for the 2026 transition. Amber Alexander of the Department of Finance outlined the fiscal and staffing transfers, describing the plan as largely cost-neutral and explaining how positions would shift between the State Board, the Department, and the new Superintendent’s office over 2026-27 and 2027-28. Sarah Cortez of the Legislative Analyst’s Office said the LAO supports shifting management to an appointed commissioner but recommended several refinements: preserving legislative oversight, requiring Senate confirmation of the commissioner, clearly defining the Superintendent’s duties as a public representative/advisor/evaluator, and refining the State Board’s role to focus on major policies requiring public input. She also said the fiscal plan should be cost-neutral and more fully specified. Senators raised concerns about the timing during an election year, the constitutional status of the Superintendent, whether the proposal should instead be a constitutional amendment, and whether governance changes actually improve student outcomes or simply rearrange the org chart. Some members questioned whether the proposal would confuse voters and undermine democratic accountability, while others said the current structure is already confusing and that the reform could improve clarity for districts and local boards. The discussion also covered how curriculum is set, with LAO explaining that the Legislature has broad authority but has delegated much curriculum work to the State Board and the Instructional Quality Commission. Members asked how the new structure would affect local districts, who they would call for guidance, and whether the commissioner would have authority over policy; the presenters said policy authority would remain with the State Board, while the commissioner would handle administration and implementation. No votes were taken during the panel discussion, and the hearing was organized to continue with additional panels and public comment later in the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• worried about making sure a dental insurer, a nonprofit dental insurer, doesn't create too much market share
• I want to share some concerns about this bill.
• I'm here to share my experience on behalf of everyone who's ever leased a lemon in Arizona and share
• I wanted to share the concerns we have with the existing language.
• by all so impact fees ...for the cost of this new home, it has to be shared by all.

Bills: HB2072, HB2251, HB2279, HB2308, HB2323, HB2342, HB2400, HB2408, HB2456, HB2660, HB2697, HB2868, HB2873, HB2877, HB2910, HB2946, HB2955, HB2991, HB4001, HB4010

Keywords: Cesar Chavez, public holiday, state law, holiday repeal, Arizona Revised Statutes, midwifery, medication administration, healthcare, patient safety, advisory committee, licensed midwives, river trips, liability, outfitter, Grand Canyon, negligence, risk management, contractual waiver, dental practice, business registration

Transcript Highlights:

• We all share the responsibility of keeping Floridians safe. That goes without a doubt.
• I just want to share with you the impact right now.
• I just want to share with you the impact right now, like today.
• And so thank you so much for coming and sharing.
• There's an important case that I wanted to share. In Humanitarian Law Project v.

Bills: S0500, S0536, S0762, S1582, S1632, S1634, S1742, S1750, S1792

Keywords: security detail, protective detail, candidate protection, election security, statewide office, governor, lieutenant governor, cabinet officer, nominee, officer-elect, FDLE, Florida Department of Law Enforcement, primary election, general election, canvassing commission, political party, minor party, campaign safety, election protection, public safety

Summary: The committee first considered SB 536, which updates Florida’s criminal gang statutes to reflect modern recruitment and communication methods, including social media and encrypted messaging. Senator Martin and supporters said the bill does not criminalize gang membership, but helps law enforcement and prosecutors establish gang-related connections for warrants and sentencing enhancements. Senator Smith raised concerns about the lowered threshold for being observed with gang members and possible unintended impacts on business owners and others; Martin said the language was not intended to cover ordinary business interactions and that a gang tattoo must be one used by the gang. After an amendment aligning the Senate bill with the House version was adopted, the committee reported CS/SB 536 favorably. The committee also favorably reported CS/SB 762, which allows chief judges to assign capital conflict cases across regional counsel offices, with an amendment requiring judges to consider judicial economy and geographic proximity. Testimony from regional counsel emphasized projected long-term savings, estimated at about $150 million over 10 years. The committee then approved CS/SB 1742, creating a new indecent exposure offense involving sexual conduct directed at minors, and CS/SB 1750, which increases penalties for serious sex crimes and child sexual abuse material offenses; both bills were amended before passage, with law enforcement groups appearing in support. The committee next took up SB 1582, which creates statewide data sharing for secondhand dealer and pawnbroker transactions without creating a new state-run database, while preserving confidentiality protections and law enforcement access. An amendment was adopted, and pawnbroker and recycling stakeholders testified in support. The linked public records bill, SB 1792, creating an exemption for those transaction records while allowing certain information to be released to alleged owners, was also reported favorably. The committee then approved CS/SB 500, which provides FDLE protective security details to major party nominees for governor, lieutenant governor, and cabinet offices after primary certification and until the general election is resolved; a technical amendment was adopted, and the bill was described as mirroring federal candidate protection practices. The longest and most contentious discussion was on CS/SB 1632, which would bar Florida courts from enforcing foreign or religious law in a way that overrides the U.S. or Florida constitutions and would create a process for designating foreign or domestic terrorist organizations, with related consequences for schools, funding, and student conduct. Senator Grall said the bill is intended to protect constitutional principles and target violent, criminal conduct rather than protected speech or religious practice, and she explained that designations would follow a public process with judicial review. Senators Smith and Polsky pressed repeatedly on First Amendment, due process, vagueness, and academic-speech concerns, asking how “promotion” would be defined and whether students, attorneys, or advocacy groups could be swept in; Grall said she was open to clarifying language but maintained the bill is aimed at furthering illegal acts, not mere opinion. Numerous speakers opposed the bill, warning it could be used to target Muslim students, religious communities, advocacy groups, and political dissent, while a few supporters argued it was needed for public safety. The transcript ends during public testimony on SB 1632, with no final committee vote shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• There is a share agreement that they can buy into it, but that's kind of beyond our control.
• When we're joint force, it's spotty at best, then we get into these conflicts of not sharing.
• So it's not as simple as sharing a password because that password, you still need a CAC.
• Okay, so what are those implications, if you could share again, just for clarification?
• And I'd like to share it with the committee. Mr.

Bills: HB2006, HB2165, HB2245, HB2348, HB2806, HB2901, HB2902, HCR2016

Keywords: sample ballots, elections, primary election, general election, mailing deadline, ballot mailing, county election officials, board of supervisors, secretary of state, early voting list, election administration, voter information, postal service, USPS processing center, city elections, town elections, special district elections, Arizona election law, ballot proofing, party chair

Transcript Highlights:

• Conservation or MoDOT would certainly share those with us.
• We did make a small modification on the cost share.
• We did make a small modification on the cost share, first time in 11 years.
• Our share of what we pay for state employees has pretty much stayed the same.
• Do you see the cost share for employees increasing in FY27?

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• BECAUSE THEY DON'T SHARE IT WITH THE LAW OR WITH ANYBODY ELSE.
• THANK ALL OF YOU THAT SHARE YOUR PERSONAL TESTIMONIES, THANK YOU TO THE BILL SPONSOR.
• IT RESTORES WHAT WAS NEVER MEANT TO BE TAKEN, SHARED ACCESS TO A SHARED SHORELINE AND GOD-GIVEN NATURAL
• I DON'T SHARE THAT CONCERN.
• I'M HAPPY TO SHARE THOSE STUDIES WITH YOU. I DO HAVE A QUESTION.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• an experience with me that she shared an experience with me that she was<00:03:49.400><c> going</c><
• </c><00:05:27.560><c> with</c> prepared that she'd like to share with prepared that she'd like to share
• Sharing my story is not easy, as you can tell. Sorry.
• They share the same concern that you have, Chair Elliott, had this conversation in the Senate.
• They share the same concern that you have, Chair Elliott, had this conversation in the Senate.

Keywords: The live stream for this meeting cut off before the end. This is the complete meeting pulled from back ups. Meeting Start: 00:00:00 Roll Call: 00:00:05 HB 38: 00:02:42 HB 206: 00:29:22, 958, all

Summary: The committee began with roll call and introductory remarks, including recognition of new members and guests. It then took up House Bill 38, sponsored by Representative Tipton, which would increase penalties for repeated violations of an order of protection. Under the committee substitute, a third violation involving the same order and same individual could be elevated from a Class A misdemeanor to a Class D felony. Tipton and domestic violence survivor Maryanne Pratt testified in support, with Pratt describing repeated abuse, protective-order violations, and ongoing fear despite arrests and jail time. Several members spoke in favor of the bill and praised Pratt’s testimony. Members and outside witnesses raised concerns about the substitute’s language, especially the requirement that the same victim be involved and whether the bill could leave gaps for repeat abusers with different victims. Representative Burke and others questioned whether the conduct was already covered by stalking or assault statutes. Scott West, speaking for the Kentucky Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, argued that the bill could allow technical contempt findings to be used as predicate offenses and noted that existing assault and stalking laws already address much of the conduct. Sponsor Tipton said the language was not final and that further changes might be considered in the Senate. Despite the concerns, the committee adopted the substitute and passed HB 38 with favorable expression by a 19-0 vote. The committee then heard House Bill 206, sponsored by Representative Nemes, on wrongful conviction compensation. Nemes introduced exonerees and representatives from the Kentucky Innocence Project, and the substitute was adopted without objection. Testimony came from Paul Herd, who spent 20 years wrongfully convicted and described the difficulty of reentry, and Jon Acar, who said he was wrongly convicted as a teenager and spent years in custody and on parole. Both urged passage of the bill as overdue support for people exonerated after wrongful convictions.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> sharing of data. sharing of data. Thank<00:10:06.880><c> you.
• </c><00:15:52.160><c> share</c> know, basically willing to share share know, basically willing to share
• In the rely heavily on shared resources.
• Can I share that? Representative Godfrey.
• </c> Depends how many passwords you share Depends how many passwords you share with<01:07:16.280><c>

Bills: HF4456, HF4544, HF3698

Keywords: data broker, data brokerage, consumer privacy, personal data, data privacy, Minnesota attorney general, registration, public registry, civil penalties, enforcement, special revenue fund, privacy rights, data sales, data collection, consumer protection, chapter 325M, controller, processor, data broker registry, transparency

Transcript Highlights:

• I know we need to find a shared outcome.
• He said he was happy to share those resources.
• He said he was very happy to share those resources.
• He said he was very happy to share those resources.
• He said he was very happy to share those resources.

Bills: HF4470, HF2418, HF3417, HF3365, HF3463

Keywords: HF4470, Melissa Hortman, memorial, statue, memorial garden, State Office Building, Capitol Mall Design Framework, capital investment, appropriation, Capitol Area Architectural and Planning Board, Department of Administration, public art, commemorative monument, landscaping, artist selection, family consultation, Minnesota legislature, state building site, capital appropriation, political subdivisions

Transcript Highlights:

• They do not want a lot of private information about vulnerable adults being shared without cause.
• To share an example, at the beginning of the rollout for the up to 90-day prepayment screening, many
• To<01:19:05.680><c> share</c><01:19:05.880><c> an</c><01:19:06.000><c> example,</c><01:19:06.760><c>
• , at the beginning of To share an example, at the beginning of the<01:19:07.640><c> rollout</c><01:19
• I don't know, but if you want to share with people, I'm just looking for advice.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Some people will have cost-sharing requirements, whereas under current law they do not.
• 30:40.000><c> under</c> sharing requirements whereas under sharing requirements whereas under current
• </c> provisions to share with this committee. provisions to share with this committee.
• </c> over the summer and we're happy to share over the summer and we're happy to share those<01:41:58.239
• We can share that would be helpful.

Bills: HF3379

Keywords: housing stabilization, disability services, predatory funding, provider requirements, housing accessibility, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• There wouldn't be shared appreciation.
• So, you know, they don't share anything with us.
• There wouldn't be shared appreciation.
• </c> back it's equity plus shared back it's equity plus shared appreciation<02:15:37.599><c> when</c>
• , the appreciation share.

Bills: HB2611, HB2102, HB1710, HB1868, HB1920, HB1812, HB1733, HB1715, HB1723, HB1724, HB1727, HB1711

Keywords: HB2611, Hawaii antitrust, rental housing, rent price-fixing, algorithmic pricing, algorithmic rent-setting, property management software, pricing algorithms, rent coordination, price-fixing, collusion, cartel, multifamily housing, landlord software, occupancy levels, lease terms, Attorney General, public education program, consumer protection, housing affordability

Summary: The committee first took up HB 2611, which would prohibit algorithmic price-setting in Hawaii’s rental market, require public education by the Attorney General, and establish fines and penalties. The Department of the Attorney General opposed the bill, saying its language was too unclear and could expose landlords and agents to criminal and civil liability for ordinary rent-setting practices based on public information or assistance from property professionals. Members asked about antitrust standards, tacit agreement, and whether using county-published affordable-rent schedules would be unlawful; the AG said that would not be unlawful if based on public information and without collusion. Testimony was mixed, with the chair noting support from the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission, Hawaii Realtors with comments, 50501 Hawaii and General Strike Hawaii, Haloha Project, 13 individuals, and one opponent. The committee then heard HB 2102, which clarifies that residential projects involving ground disturbance in high-risk areas remain subject to state historic preservation review and removes an exemption for lands presumed nominally sensitive. The Office of Planning and Sustainable Development and the Department of Planning and Permitting supported the measure, saying it would improve clarity and ensure review focuses on projects most likely to affect historic properties or iwi kupuna, while also urging language refinements to better define sensitive sandy-soil areas and balance preservation with housing timelines. NAP Hawaii opposed the bill, arguing it would undo progress made last session and that the current process already includes protections for inadvertent discoveries and efficiency for lower-risk areas. The Office of Hawaiian Affairs strongly supported HB 2102, explaining it was responding to beneficiary complaints about late-added language in last year’s law and saying the nominally sensitive-area language should be removed because it was adopted without sufficient stakeholder input and could be harmful to iwi kupuna protections. Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation and several individuals also supported the bill. Committee discussion focused on how “nominally sensitive” areas are determined, whether project proponents could self-certify areas as exempt, and how high-density residential projects should be treated; SHPD said it uses survey and monitoring data to map sensitivity, that highly sensitive areas like Kīauea are not nominally sensitive, and that some high-density projects should remain exempt if they do not involve new ground disturbance. The hearing included no final vote in the portion provided, but the chair noted 48 individuals in support and continued questioning on the bill’s definitions and implementation.

Transcript Highlights:

• data that is necessary for that interaction is shared with the identifier.
• data that is necessary for that interaction is shared with the identifier.
• data that is necessary for that interaction is shared with the identifier.
• <01:05:25.160><c> the</c><01:05:25.319><c> data</c> sharing the data sharing the data uh<01:05:26.400
• Thank you for the opportunity to share these concerns today.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• I could go on and on, but I just wanted to share a little bit about my corner of the world and about
• I could go on and on, but I just wanted to share a little bit about my corner of the world and about
• </c><00:25:37.360><c> them</c> and tell your stories and share them and tell your stories and share them
• </c><01:33:25.040><c> our</c> appreciate the chance to s share our appreciate the chance to s share our
• </c><01:38:07.840><c> these</c> we can share these we can share these things.<01:38:10.000><c> Finally

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I’m joined here by Michael, who will also share more about his experience and his future plans.
• I learned we shared interests like baking, swimming, being outdoors, and show tunes.
• And I have to say, since we're talking about robotics, thank you for sharing.
• And I have to say, since we're talking about robotics, thank you for sharing.
• And I have to say, since we're talking about robotics, thank you for sharing.

Bills: HF1936, HF849, HF989, HF1130, HF1223, HF1907, HF1847, HF1957

Keywords: workforce development, youth employment, career guidance, education, job skills, Duluth Promise, education funding, career training, employment support, youth apprenticeship, economic development, minority support, internship program, Bloomington, funding, youth mentorship, job training, disadvantaged youth, Big Brothers Big Sisters, Youthprise

Transcript Highlights:

• He said he would be happy to share a link with the committee afterward.
• Again, this is an area of shared priority.
• Again, this is an area of shared priority.
• Again, this is an area of shared priority.
• </c><01:04:02.240><c> that</c> Northwestern Minnesota have shared that Northwestern Minnesota have shared

Keywords: 1183, house