Transcript Highlights:

• on the impact statement, because here's what happens in the budget: they budget for an increase in property
• <00:09:53.920> the<00:09:54.200> FIS budget what what the budget the FIS budget what
• c><00:09:58.800> increase<00:09:59.640> in budget they budget for an increase in budget
• for<00:10:31.760> every budget because they budget for every budget because they budget for
• since you don't have the the analysis since you don't have the analysis<00:10:58.959> I'll<00

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00 Attendance Roll Call: 00:08 Senate Bill 79 (Sen. McDaniel): 00:48 Senate Bill 67 (Sen. Nemes): 08:09 Adjournment: 12:43, 958, all

Summary: The Senate State and Local Government Committee met and first took up Senate Bill 79, sponsored by Senator McDaniel, with testimony from McDaniel and Deputy Secretary Robert Long of the Personnel Cabinet. They described the bill as a cleanup measure for personnel law that would, among other things, add interns to the definition of employee while excluding them from full-time employee status, remove the Personnel Cabinet secretary as an ex officio member of the KERS Board, clarify personnel board membership and grievance rights, limit appeals of satisfactory-or-above evaluations, address layoffs and reemployment rights, allow leave donation in certain resignations or retirements, restrict remote work from outside Kentucky without approval, permit deductions for unreturned state equipment, and make DJJ facility supervisors non-merit positions. The committee voted on SB 79 and passed it with favorable expression. The committee then heard Senate Bill 67, presented by Chair Nemes, an elder property tax bill. The bill would freeze the assessed value of a primary residence for homeowners age 65 or older until the property is no longer their primary residence, while still taxing at the current rate. Nemes said the measure was intended to help seniors on fixed incomes and noted a fiscal analysis showing little to no direct revenue loss, though it could reduce projected budgeted growth in property tax revenue. Committee discussion noted a local impact and a statewide budget impact estimate of about $4 million for the first two fiscal years. SB 67 also passed with favorable expression, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• I just saw that in my analysis. Maybe my analysis was...
• I just saw that in my analysis. Maybe my analysis was incorrect. But, okay.
• Madam Speaker and gentlemen, what that will include is an analysis of the economic impact, the status
• For example, when WorkForce Solutions presents to budget committees in the legislature or to LFC, would
• There will be analysis of the economic impact.

Bills: HB111, HB103, HB109, HB128, HJM2, HJM3, HM7, HM17, HM4, HM22, HM23, HM24, HM26, HM2, HM16, HM11, HM14, HM21, HM34, HM50, HB49, HB60, HB108, HB120, HB124, HB145, HB154, HB158, HB164, HB180, HB291, HJR6, HJR7, HR1, HJM1, HM13, HM47

Keywords: water law, state engineer, civil penalty, compliance order, water rights, overdiversion, illegal diversion, groundwater storage and recovery, well license, permit violation, water enforcement, New Mexico water code, irrigation district, conservancy district, water diversion, unauthorized water sales, measuring device, district court appeal, water resources, water compliance

Transcript Highlights:

• Being on appropriations, that $2 billion is a very important part of this budget.
• Legislation is to plug the $2 billion hole in the budget.
• Number one, this is not the money bill that's in the budget. You already voted, or some of you did.
• For the budget. This money is placed in the budget. That's not this bill. You already voted.
• Finalize the budget. That's what they're being discussed, but you'll have a ceiling of that.

Bills: SB835, SB3070, SB22, SJR59, SB926, SB1494, SB251, SB456, SB500, SB1307, SB2615, SB2995, SB2321, SB973, SB974, SB865, SB506, SB781, SB1522, SB1558, SB510, SB667, SB763, SB2073, SB1858, SB1660, SB505, SB2900, SB1433, SB1540, SB1964, SB1300, SB1644, SB2217, SB2373, SB2431, SB1758, SB2480, SB3039, SB3047, SB3073, SB2920, SB2781, SB826, SB766, SB2460, SB527, SB1946, SB2885, SB1243, SB2610, SB2595, SB857, SB37, SB8, SB10, SB227, SB261, SB12, SB15, SJR27, SB552, SB835, SB3070, SB22, SJR59, SB25, SB57, SB127, SB293, SB441, SB3059, SB512, SB241, SB1718, SB140, SB2055, SB2075, SB2018, SB1534, SB1567, SB785, SB1233, SB1580, SB1663, SB413, SB447, SB519, SB467, SB1579, SB1191, SB1021, SB1838, SB2807, SB2835, SB546, SB2121, SB2167, SB2035, SB2024, SB1032, SB1049, SB1266, SB1400, SB1302, SB401, SB1596, SB1281, SB1242, SB1343, SB310, SB1346, SB2753, SB2703, SB2221, SB1719, SB2177, SB800, SB790, SB748, SB571, SB1957, SB1923, SB1896, SB1760, SB1335, SB2368, SB2477, SB2587, SB2972, SB2986, SB2965, SB1563, SB1467, SB1164, SB1137, SB614, SB705, SB961, SB918, SB955, SB869, SB850, SB863, SB1610, SB1055, SB2206, SB457, SB2337, SB1362, SB926, SB1494, SB251, SB456, SB500, SB1307, SB2615, SB2995, SB2321, SB973, SB974, SB865, SB506, SB781, SB1522, SB1558, SB510, SB667, SB763, SB2073, SB1858, SB1660, SB505, SB2900, SB1433, SB1540, SB1964, SB1300, SB1644, SB2217, SB2373, SB2431, SB1758, SB2480, SB3039, SB3047, SB3073, SB2920, SB2781, SB826, SB766, SB2460, SB527, SB1946, SB2885, SB1243, SB2610, SB2595, SB857, SCR9, HB5560, HB762, HB 107, HB 114, HB300, HB138, HB4386, HB2495, HB581, HB3348, HB5323

Keywords: sexual abuse, nondisclosure agreements, confidentiality agreements, public policy, victim rights, lottery, bingo, regulation, Texas Lottery Commission, Department of Licensing and Regulation, criminal offenses, state administration, audits, transfers, Texas, moving image industry, incentive program, film production, grant funding, job creation

Transcript Highlights:

• background of the legislative budget background of the legislative budget office<00:03:10.560>
• process the FIS the legislative budget process the FIS the legislative budget office<00:03:35.799
• included in the most recent um budget included in the most recent um budget and<00:09:26.800>
• submitted to the legislative budget submitted to the legislative budget office<00:10:25.200>
• <00:55:56.280> IES conducting the analysis IES conducting the analysis IES representative<

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Welcome to Assembly Budget Sub 4.
• So for ELRP in 2025, the budget was $219 million dollars across all. 2025, the budget was $219 million
• That was the authorized budget.
• , including our budget requests.
• It's an analysis of all of them.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Welcome to Assembly Budget Sub 4.
• That was the authorized budget.
• , including our budget requests.
• It's an analysis of all of them.
• It was the budget they lived by.

Summary: The committee first heard Issue 1 on trailer bill language to redirect funding for emergency demand-response programs. The Department of Finance proposed using about $26.9 million in General Fund originally set aside for the Distributed Energy Backup Assets program to bolster the Demand-Side Grid Support Program for summer 2026, and using about $70 million in CalCHAP interest to support ratepayer-funded demand response in summers 2027 and 2028. The CEC and CPUC said they are working on a transition from DSGS to ELRP or a successor program, while the LAO noted the General Fund money would otherwise revert to savings. Members pressed the administration on whether demand response remains important, whether DSGS has been successful, and whether the state should keep funding it through the CEC rather than shifting to a ratepayer-funded CPUC program. The CEC and CPUC said the programs are not directly comparable, emphasized different cost structures and enrollment metrics, and said a CPUC rulemaking is underway with a proposed decision expected in Q3 2026. No vote was taken in the transcript. The committee then took up Issue 2, a budget proposal tied to SB 254 and the new transmission accelerator. GoBiz and the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank described a five-year, roughly $26 million request to staff and administer the accelerator and manage Proposition 4 and AB 1207 funds for transmission financing. Members asked about state liability, ownership of financed lines, FERC revenue requirements, and whether the program would help underserved regions and offshore wind development. Staff explained that the accelerator would only consider projects already identified through CAISO’s competitive transmission planning process, and that state financing would be a small portion of large projects intended to lower overall costs to ratepayers. The LAO said it had no specific concerns but urged the Legislature to ensure the final language matches its intent. The committee also heard Issue 3 on petroleum market oversight. The CEC and its Division of Petroleum Market Oversight requested additional positions and funding to implement ABX2-1 and continue work on supply stabilization, refinery monitoring, and transportation fuels analysis. Members questioned why the work was funded through the Energy Resources Programs Account, whether existing staff from the paused price-gouging work could be reassigned, and whether the program had produced evidence of price gouging or improved supply conditions. CEC and Finance said the new positions are needed because the workload has expanded, while some existing staff remain on related analysis and reporting duties. The discussion ended without a vote in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• So when we do our salary analysis, ...we do our salary analysis of public sector comparisons against
• I cannot vote on it unless I have that cost-benefit analysis.
• An analysis would confirm that for us.
• We also did actuarial analysis.
• insurance department would pay for the cost-benefit analysis services through their budget.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• up the uh the budget up the uh the budget bill.<00:01:17.159> Um<00:01:18.159> I've
• budget uh conversation. Lay that over. budget uh conversation. Lay that over.
• our budget omnibus. our budget omnibus.
• > budget<01:31:41.120> is This budget is forward-looking.
• the context that we have on our budgets. the context that we have on our budgets.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I cannot vote on it unless I have that cost-benefit analysis.
• An analysis would confirm that for us.
• We also did actuarial analysis.
• services through their budget.
• I'll move the analysis. A second. further analysis. So Representative Vetter?

Summary: The Employee Benefits Committee met to hear presentations on state employee health insurance, compensation, leave policies, labor market conditions, and prevailing wage issues, then later took up committee rules and bill-draft jurisdiction. PERS reviewed the history and structure of the state health plan, noting the state has paid the full family premium since 1979, described cost-control and benefit-enhancement changes over time, and explained current plan options, wellness incentives, employer wellness discounts, and the upcoming bid process for the 2027-29 contract. HRMS then presented compensation comparisons showing state classified pay generally trails private and regional markets, with larger gaps at higher-level jobs, and reviewed benefits and leave policies, including the new enhanced annual leave and new-hire leave, the state’s unpaid family leave structure, and varying tuition reimbursement practices. Job Service reported on labor force trends, low unemployment, high labor force participation, job openings, and wage growth, and OMB said there are no state prevailing-wage requirements beyond federal Davis-Bacon rules for federally funded projects. The committee then considered a proposed amendment to Joint Rule 211 to better align the health insurance mandate review process with recent statutory changes. Members discussed how the rule should reference both the committee’s required actuarial reports and the Legislative Council cost-benefit analysis, and the amendment was adopted on a roll call vote. The committee also discussed how its jurisdiction decisions affect whether a bill draft receives actuarial analysis, with staff explaining that a decision not to take jurisdiction means the bill is not treated as impacting the relevant retirement or health plans for purposes of that analysis. After that, the committee began reviewing bill drafts for jurisdiction. The first draft, bill draft 33, would automatically renew pre-tax elections for dental and vision coverage during open enrollment instead of requiring annual re-election. Members debated whether it had any actuarial impact, noting the state does not pay those premiums directly, and the discussion was still underway when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• So this is built into the budget that you guys approve for each agency.
• I cannot vote on it unless I have that cost-benefit analysis.
• An analysis would confirm that for us.
• We also did actuarial analysis.
• insurance department would pay for the cost-benefit analysis services through their budget.

Summary: The Employee Benefits Committee met to approve prior minutes, hear presentations on state employee health insurance, compensation, leave, and related policy issues, and then recess for lunch. PERS reviewed the history and structure of the state health plan, noting the long-standing state-paid family coverage, cost-control measures, wellness incentives, the current grandfathered PPO and high-deductible options, and the effects of recent benefit mandates such as insulin caps, prosthetic coverage, medication management, prescription copay changes, and ambulance balance-billing limits. Committee members questioned the fiscal impact of adding benefits and the possible cost of moving to a non-grandfathered plan, while PERS and HRMS emphasized that health insurance remains the top-ranked employee benefit and that any major plan changes should be considered carefully. HRMS also presented compensation comparisons showing state pay generally below private-market benchmarks, discussed targeted market equity adjustments, identified ongoing recruitment and retention concerns in fields like nursing, IT, engineering, and attorneys, and reviewed leave policies, tuition reimbursement, and family leave comparisons with neighboring states. Job Service provided labor market data showing low unemployment, high labor force participation, and wage growth that still trails some neighboring markets, and OMB explained that prevailing wage requirements apply to federally funded projects under Davis-Bacon, not to ordinary state contracts. After lunch, the committee took up the required process for health insurance mandate bills and adopted an amendment to Joint Rule 211. The amendment clarified that the deadline for submitting mandate measures is intended to allow time for all required reports, including both the cost-benefit analysis and any Employee Benefits Committee actuarial report, while leaving the existing deadline unchanged. The amendment was adopted on a roll call vote, with several members voting yes and a few no votes recorded. The committee then moved into its jurisdiction review of bill drafts, beginning with a bill that would automatically renew pre-tax dental and vision elections; members debated whether it had any actuarial or administrative impact on PERS or the state, and the chair explained that the committee’s role was only to decide whether further analysis was needed before later testimony and recommendations.

Transcript Highlights:

• With respect to the department's budget, the proposed budget for fiscal year 2026-27 totals $3.2 billion
• The proposed budget includes four permanent positions and two one-year limited-term positions in budget
• So they’re ongoing budget requests.
• approved through the Budget Act.
• The broader budget context matters.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• in the budget year.
• We haven't done an analysis to say.
• Another question: when we were talking about budgeting, we're budget...
• Another question: when we were talking about budgeting, we're budgeting for 100% ADA, right, average
• The governor's budget moves forward with the plan from the Budget Act of 2021 with full implementation

Summary: The committee heard presentations on the Governor’s education budget proposals for the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), Learning Recovery Block Grant, and Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELOP), followed by testimony from State Board of Education President Linda Darling-Hammond. On LCFF, Finance outlined the proposed 2.43% COLA, repayment of prior deferrals, and a trailer bill penalty for LEAs that fail to adopt Local Control Accountability Plans on time. The LAO said its COLA estimate was slightly lower and raised concerns that the Governor’s proposed TK staffing ratio increase may be more costly than estimated. Members also discussed whether the current COLA formula should better reflect California-specific or district staffing costs, and whether TK should be more clearly separated from the K-3 grade span adjustment to avoid larger K-3 class sizes. The chair asked staff to work with the LAO on both the TK/K-3 issue and alternative COLA calculations. For the Learning Recovery Block Grant, Finance proposed restoring the first of three delayed payments, $378.6 million one-time Proposition 98 General Fund, while the LAO recommended adopting the proposal but extending the expenditure deadline by at least a year. The LAO reported that districts had spent $1.6 billion of the $6.8 billion received through 2023-24 and said most districts were only now shifting from federal COVID relief to block grant spending. Members questioned whether the large state and federal investments were improving outcomes, citing declining reading and math trends, while Finance and the State Board president pointed to some signs of improvement, especially in math, attendance, and gains for some student groups. Darling-Hammond emphasized that student needs have grown, that recovery spending has gone to devices, ventilation, staffing, tutoring, summer school, and community schools, and that targeted interventions appear to be helping some districts recover faster than others. On ELOP, Finance proposed adding $435 million to expand universal access by lowering the Tier 1 threshold from 75% to 55% unduplicated pupils, bringing ongoing funding to $4.4 billion. The LAO said the estimate was reasonable but recommended delaying implementation for a year, aligning ELOP with ASES to reduce overlap, moving toward funding based on participation rather than enrollment, and considering a fixed Tier 2 rate. Members and witnesses discussed staffing challenges, the use of funds for students with disabilities, and uncertainty in Tier 2 funding caused by unspent dollars and opt-outs. Darling-Hammond supported ELOP as part of California’s broader after-school and summer learning strategy, said most districts are now offering full-day TK and expanded learning, and urged the state to reduce fragmentation across categorical programs and build more unified systems for funding, reporting, and support.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're going to move to issue number six, HCAI budget overview and general budget change proposal and
• HCAI's proposed budget for the budget year is $581 million, of which $702 million is.
• We are asking DMHC to provide a brief overview of its budget and 12 budget change proposals.
• Our total proposed budget is $25.25 million. Budget is $186 million and 800 authorized positions.
• Budget.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We have a balanced budget.
• We have a budget bill, we've structured it within the budget, so the repayment is scheduled within our
• budgeting system for the 20-30 fiscal year.
• The budget request is slightly higher.
• We're now in the process of crafting the budget bill language for this budget act looking ahead.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We saw MassHealth costs grow by 10% in the FY2026 budget.
• We saw mass health costs grow by 10% in the FY26 budget.
• There's a lot of pressures on this budget.
• I run the Center for State Policy Analysis at Tufts.
• I run the Center for State Policy Analysis at Tufts.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Senate and House Ways and Means chairs opened the FY 2027 consensus revenue hearing by emphasizing the need for a balanced, fiscally responsible budget amid federal funding cuts, health care cost pressures, and uncertainty around the federal tax law changes referred to as OB3. They also noted the state’s current revenue performance is slightly above benchmark and paid tribute to the late Representative Anne Margaret Ferranti. Secretary of Administration and Finance Matthew Gorkowitz echoed the call for caution, saying Massachusetts has protected core services while building reserves and that the FY27 budget process begins with a careful revenue estimate. Department of Revenue Commissioner Jeff Snyder, along with DOR staff, presented FY26 and FY27 tax forecasts and identified major drivers and risks: OB3’s negative impact on state revenue, surtax collections, labor market conditions, capital gains, and corporate/business excise taxes. DOR estimated OB3 would reduce FY26 revenue by about $664 million and FY27 by about $282 million, while surtax and capital gains were expected to remain strong in FY26 but soften in FY27. Members questioned the outlook for surtax, capital gains, and the potential fiscal effect of a ballot question reducing the income tax rate from 5% to 4%; DOR said that proposal could cost roughly $4.2 billion to $4.8 billion annually, with a smaller but still significant impact in FY27 because of phase-in timing. Treasurer Deb Goldberg testified next on the stabilization fund, lottery, PRIM, unclaimed property, and the Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission. She reported the rainy day fund at about $8.1 billion, said the lottery was on track for $1.5 billion in FY26 net profit and projected $1.25 billion in FY27, and highlighted that iLottery is expected to launch in summer 2026 with revenue beginning in FY27 and dedicated to child care initiatives. She also described strong PRIM performance and record unclaimed property returns, while members asked about the child care use of iLottery revenue, multilingual outreach, and the economic impact of expanded liquor licensing. Mass Taxpayers Foundation President Doug Howgate and Tufts’ Evan Horowitz then offered differing revenue outlooks and policy warnings. Howgate projected modest growth, cautioned against overusing reserves for ongoing obligations, and urged caution on federal tax conformity changes and health care spending pressures. Horowitz projected higher FY26 and FY27 revenues than other witnesses, warned that the surtax and capital gains make the tax system more volatile, and said a 4% income tax ballot question could reduce FY27 revenues by roughly $800 million to $1 billion. He also flagged the rent control ballot question as a potential risk to municipal finance and suggested the state consider giving a permanent home to the independent revenue model used by Alan Clayton-Matthews.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Budget 25 Budget Act included estimating savings targets as a result of the anticipated contract
• They've been put into our budget and reduced from our budget.
• I know members of this budget strongly value nonpartisan, accurate data to help inform budget deliberations
• Between the January proposed budget and the May Revision, California's total state funds budget increased
• Budgets prioritize what they care about.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The proposed state budget would cut our budget by 8%, or $396 million.
• Yeah, certainly I would have concerns with looming budget cuts. I just came out of Budget Sub 3.
• And I fully appreciate the UC's concerns with their budget and the uncertainty regarding state budget
• your analysis.
• Well, according to the analysis, it means sex. Okay.

Summary: The committee hearing covered several higher education bills, with extensive testimony on student aid, affordability, and institutional debt. AB 587 would add veteran representation to the California Student Aid Commission; the author said the change would bring lived experience from the veteran community to student aid policy, and members raised a concern about keeping the commission’s membership odd-numbered, which the author said would be addressed by amendment. AB 791 would standardize cost-of-attendance housing calculations using objective data and improve notice of the adjustment process; supporters said current budgets often underestimate students’ real living costs, while UC, CSU, and independent colleges opposed or had concerns about the bill’s prescribed methodology, fiscal impact, and a 14-day turnaround for adjustments. AB 850 would create a one-term grace period for students with institutional debt to re-enroll while arranging repayment, bar reporting that debt to credit agencies, and require more transparency; proponents described students being blocked from continuing school over debts, while CSU, UC, and private-college representatives said they already use holds and payment plans and worried about added liabilities and budget pressures. AB 537 would extend the California College Promise Program to part-time community college students; supporters said most community college students attend part-time and should not be excluded from fee waivers, while the committee noted fiscal concerns but ultimately advanced the bill. AB 7 would allow universities to consider whether an applicant is a descendant of American chattel slavery in admissions as a reparative measure; supporters framed it as lineage-based reparative justice, while opponents argued it would function as a racial proxy and conflict with Proposition 209 and equal-protection principles. The committee took roll-call votes on the measures, advancing AB 587, AB 791, AB 850, and AB 537 to Appropriations, with AB 850 and AB 537 receiving fewer votes and the roll left open for additional members.

Transcript Highlights:

• So what all went into that risk analysis, and is it the appropriate level based on the risk analysis?
• So what all went into that risk analysis and is at the appropriate level based on the risk analysis,
• And if you're in the budget area, you know when you deal with those budgets for a significant number
• We don't have any cost-benefit analysis.
• And so maybe it's just those budgets that they are said, 'You've got to attend this budget hearing because

Summary: The task force first approved the March 25, 2026 minutes as amended, including a correction removing language that suggested the auditor’s office would contract with a security vendor. Members then moved to a bill draft on concessions (LC 27.0161.00000), which would raise the competitive solicitation threshold from $25,000 to $50,000, allow requests for proposals in addition to bids, clarify that proceeds go to the entity’s operating fund or general fund, and make other technical updates. OMB explained the draft and answered questions about scope, fragmentation, vendor restrictions, school districts, and whether concession proceeds could be directed to nonprofits; OMB said the draft could be refined further, including clarifying covered entities and contract length. No vote was taken on the draft during the discussion. OMB also reported on other survey items. It said a proposal to broadly allow agencies to create pre-qualified architect/engineering/land surveying vendor pools would not move forward, because the existing authority is working well for the agencies that already have it. On legal notices, OMB said it has been working with the North Dakota Newspaper Association on modernization, including an ADA-compliant online notice system and possible statutory updates to reflect changing technology and notice definitions. On click-through agreements for routine IT purchases, OMB and the Attorney General’s office said policy clarification—not statutory change—was enough, and the $20,000 threshold was intended to distinguish low-dollar adhesive contracts from purchases where terms can be negotiated. The committee also heard that OMB and the Center for Distance Education had resolved questions about alternate procurements and food/beverage expenditures through existing policy, so no statutory changes were needed there. North Dakota University System representatives gave a brief update on ongoing collaboration with OMB on statutory efficiency ideas, including concessions and surplus property. Finally, the task force discussed a draft on requirements for new or expanded spending programs, which would require agencies to identify purpose, expected benefits, alternatives, success measures, and full implementation costs, and would require reporting on outcomes over time. Members debated whether OMB or Legislative Council should collect and report the information, how to use the new program evaluators, whether real-time dashboards should be used, and how to choose which programs to evaluate; staff from Legislative Council said they would work with OMB and the auditor’s office to revise the draft and process.

Transcript Highlights:

• the 2024 tax expenditure budget the 2024 tax expenditure budget published<00:03:59.040> by
• According to analysis by the penalty.
• tax expenditure budget um going forward. tax expenditure budget um going forward.
• taken from the 2024 tax expensure budget taken from the 2024 tax expensure budget published<01:00
• 2024 tax expenditure budget.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So the bulk of the budget for House... ...budget.
• First, do you have this in the budget, this appropriation?
• So it's not in the budget, and according to our analysis, it's not enough. Madam Chair.
• So it's not in the budget, and according to our analysis, it's not enough for you to get an independent
• own budget?

Keywords: 996, all