Transcript Highlights:

• She has some examples where there's going through settlement or trying to have settlement discussions
• I can tell you, settlement is a consideration in every class action.
• Settlement is always a consideration.
• Settlement is not an option here. Thank you. Settlement is not an option here.
• And lastly, House Bill 1269 allows a pawnbroker to accept online payment through an online payment system

Bills: HB2229 , HB2274 , HB2294 , HB1269 , HB1078

Committee: House Consumer Protection & Business

Keywords: professional engineers, registration act, licensing, engineering practice, state regulations, email regulation, commercial communications, consumer protection, data privacy, electronic mail, consumer access, real property, food security, medicine access, restriction, pawnbroker, fees, interest rates, financial regulation, pet insurance

Transcript Highlights:

• She has some examples where there's going through settlement or trying to have settlement discussions
• I can tell you, settlement is a consideration in every class action.
• Settlement is always a consideration.
• Settlement is not an option here. Thank you. Settlement is not an option here.
• And lastly, House Bill 1269 allows a pawnbroker to accept online payment through an online payment system

Summary: The Consumer Protection and Business Committee held public hearings on three bills. House Bill 2229 would update the professional engineers registration act by removing the U.S. citizenship requirement for board members, increasing pro tem board positions, giving the board more discretion over experience and continuing education requirements, removing some registration exclusions, and making various technical updates. The bill sponsor and the board described it as a cleanup and modernization measure, and a board representative said one naming change in the draft was unintended and would be corrected. No public testimony was taken before the hearing was suspended and later closed. House Bill 2274 would revise the Washington Commercial Electronic Mail Act after a Washington Supreme Court decision led to a wave of lawsuits over email subject lines. The bill would require a sender to have a “reliable basis” to know an email is held by a Washington resident, narrow when a subject line is actionable, require recipients to show they reviewed and relied on the email to recover damages, and repeal the act’s per se Consumer Protection Act violation while keeping statutory damages. Retailers, small business owners, hospitality groups, and e-commerce representatives supported the bill, saying the current interpretation is producing costly, technical lawsuits over ordinary promotional language and creating settlement pressure even without consumer harm. Consumer advocates opposed the bill, arguing it would weaken protections against deceptive subject lines and that the current law already targets false or misleading claims. The committee took no final action on the bill. House Bill 2294 would prohibit future negative use restrictions on real property that block grocery stores or pharmacies, with exceptions for existing restrictions, relocations, and certain retail centers. The sponsor said the measure is intended to improve food and pharmacy access, especially after grocery closures such as the one in Lake City, and noted similar local ordinances already exist. Food industry and grocery association witnesses generally supported the bill as a way to reduce barriers to food access and help independent grocers, while also asking for clearer guardrails to avoid unintended effects on legitimate business arrangements. The sponsor said she was open to working on enforcement and other details. The committee then moved to executive session and passed House Bill 1269, which would adjust pawn broker loan terms, interest, document preparation fees, storage fees, and allow online payment for renewals. Members described it as a modest increase after 11 years without changes, and the bill was reported out of committee with a due pass recommendation by voice vote, with 15 members voting in the affirmative.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's supported by special revenue, that's criminal fees and damage settlements.
• That's criminal fees and damage settlements.
• payments to the state, and on the second page are all expenses by fiscal year.
• The bulk of the rest of the transfers are our weekly transfers for the nursing home payments.
• It also depends on some quarterly payments that will be made and some end-of-the-year payments.

Committee: All ALC-PEER

Transcript Highlights:

• If they lift the injunction against us and reverse the... >> When do you think that will happen?
• Today during this special session, based on the Louisiana ruling and our appeal, should the court reverse
• we think about the lawyers, when we think about the litigations and all that, when we talk about settlement
• And so as we kind of start looking at cost, we're spending money on litigation, settlement, and all those
• It didn't reverse it. It altered it. >> Well, they altered it. You're right. I'm sorry.

Transcript Highlights:

• The payment should be made to the homeowner.
• This is different when we list a bank on a payment, you know, the mortgagor and the homeowner together
• There were some cuts we proposed in committee that were reversed on the floor.
• Well, I struggle to think about, you know, there were some cuts we proposed in committee that were reversed
• The idea is to avoid long protracted litigation for things that are meant to just extract settlements

Transcript Highlights:

• :42.880><c> to</c><01:03:43.119><c> student</c> these payments directly to student these payments directly
• And as a result, the settlement lawsuit.
• >> This is the settlement that we're talking about, the House settlement.
• </c> members who opt into the settlement. members who opt into the settlement.
• </c> the settlement. That's possible. Yeah. the settlement. That's possible. Yeah.

Summary: A joint informational briefing of the House and Senate higher education committees focused on how the University of Hawaiʻi athletics department plans to remain competitive in the new NIL era, including the effects of the House v. NCAA settlement, direct institutional payments, and the need to balance competitiveness with the university’s educational mission. Senators and committee members introduced themselves, and the briefing featured remarks from women’s basketball coach Laura Beeman, football coach Timmy Chang, and Athletic Director Matt Elliott. Coach Beeman said NIL has already affected recruiting and retention in women’s basketball, estimating the program has lost six to 10 student-athletes because it lacks the funding to keep comparable talent. She emphasized that the issue is not greed but retention, culture, and keeping student-athletes who value the university and community, while also using NIL as a way to teach financial literacy, privacy, and adult responsibilities. Coach Chang described similar pressures in football, including transfer portal volatility and competing offers from other programs, and gave examples of players whose personal and family circumstances made NIL support important for staying at Hawaiʻi. Athletic Director Elliott said the department’s vision is to create an outstanding student-athlete experience, recruit and retain elite athletes, compete at the top of the Mountain West, and strengthen community ties. He said the department wants to preserve the educational focus while adapting to a system in which student-athletes can share in revenue. Elliott explained that UH is seeking a $5 million annual NIL fund, is fundraising through the community and the “Boost the Bose” account, and is also pursuing individual NIL deals, corporate sponsorship-related deals, and licensing opportunities. In response to Senator Kim’s question, he said NIL compensation can come through two tracks: institutional payments within the department’s discretion and outside deals that must be reviewed for market value under the new reporting system. No votes or formal actions were taken; the meeting was informational only.

Transcript Highlights:

• Determining the availability of connecting transfers, ease of payment, whether or not there might be
• CDCR oversees payments for individuals who are incarcerated, but the collection for people who are on
• California lacks a standardized system for tracking payments.
• This leads me to believe that my payments are consumed by interest or administrative fees.
• DPR reversed the CAC decision on eight of those appeals.

Committee: Senate Joint Legislative Audit

Summary: The committee began with a status report from the State Auditor on staffing and audit capacity, noting 14 audit supervisors, 14 audits in progress, several audits scheduled for release, and a planned high-risk review of state financial reporting. The committee then approved a consent calendar covering six audit requests, including topics such as kindergarten oral health assessments, prison infrastructure management, Los Angeles fires prevention and response, community college financial aid and enrollment, wildfire management at Chino Hills State Park, and the Chiquita Canyon landfill. The first major item was Assembly Member Gonzalez’s request for an audit of Coachella Valley Unified School District’s contract and fiscal management. Supporters described long-running fiscal mismanagement, a projected $60 million deficit, layoffs, concerns about contracting practices, foundation donations, and weak governance. District representatives said they were already working with Riverside County Office of Education and FICMAT, had adopted a fiscal stabilization plan, and were making cuts to restore solvency. The State Auditor said the proposed audit would examine the district’s financial condition over 10 years, ELOP spending, partnership agreements, foundation funds, and contracting practices. After extensive discussion and public comment, the motion to approve the audit failed because it did not receive the required votes. The committee next approved Senator Wahab’s request for an audit of East Bay transit agency administrative oversight. The senator argued that the Bay Area’s fragmented transit system creates duplication and wastes resources, while agency representatives and transit advocates said the agencies already face extensive oversight and are actively coordinating through existing regional efforts. The State Auditor outlined objectives focused on agency autonomy, coordination, ridership, finances, and the potential effects of consolidation. After debate and public comment, the audit was approved. Finally, Senator Archuleta introduced a request to audit excessive unrestricted reserves at selected California Community College districts and Calbright College, arguing that reserve balances have grown substantially and may be diverting funds from student services and instruction. He said the audit would examine why districts are holding large reserves and whether those funds are being used effectively for students.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> um of the assignment of that payment um of the assignment of that payment from<01:21:25.040><c>
• Those payments as was testified utility.
• Um, the thing that would take longer is to qualify for capacity payment.
• Um, the thing that would take longer is to qualify for capacity payment.
• </c><04:23:17.279><c> charge</c><04:23:17.600><c> and</c> reversible rusting process to charge and reversible

Committee: House Science, Technology and Energy

Transcript Highlights:

• First of all, is... the payment per hour reimbursed or paid, or is it per case? Mr.
• This is for an increase to foster care maintenance payments.
• They identified some of the gaps we filled, like down payment assistance and rapid rehousing.
• We're currently about 50 basis points below the market, and we offer down payment assistance.
• Like for paying down payments or what exactly is that? Mr.

Bills: SB48 , SB64 , SB100

Committee: Senate Senate Finance

Keywords: State Fairgrounds District, fairgrounds bonds, public financing, bond authorization, gross receipts tax, gaming tax, tax-backed bonds, infrastructure funding, Albuquerque fairgrounds, State Fair Tid, economic development, municipal bonds, revenue pledge, capital projects, New Mexico finance, special education, office of special education, deputy secretary, public education department, IEP

Transcript Highlights:

• Why were these payments paid late?
• Why were these payments paid late?
• incentive-based payments.
• incentive-based payments.
• Value-based payments or other incentive-based payments, MCOs are not required to use to base their rate

Committee: Senate Senate Health and Human Services COR

Summary: The committee continued its fourth hearing on fraud, waste, and abuse involving Arizona’s Medicaid and behavioral health systems, with a major focus on Access/ALTCS eligibility, behavioral health licensing, and payment delays. Senator Shamp presented findings alleging large gaps in ABD Medicaid asset verification, including that only a portion of enrollees were checked and that many with substantial liquid assets remained on the program. She argued the state’s waiver and lack of asset limits created a compliance and fiscal risk, and urged referrals to law enforcement, tighter verification, and broader reforms. Heather Dukes, representing behavioral health and sober living operators, testified that ADHS and Access have become overly punitive toward licensed providers, often sending technical paperwork violations straight to enforcement instead of allowing correction plans, and that zoning and licensing delays are harming legitimate businesses. Reva Stewart testified that patient brokering and fraudulent recruitment of vulnerable people into behavioral health and sober living settings remain ongoing, especially through social media, and called for stronger accountability and enforcement against bad actors. ADHS Deputy Assistant Director Tiffany Slater said the department has received more than a thousand complaints about unlicensed sober living operations, which has diverted staff from routine oversight of licensed facilities. She said ADHS has expanded enforcement tools for sober living homes, is using a new licensing system to flag repeat bad actors, and is trying to make the application process easier, while acknowledging that inspections can tip off unlicensed operators. Access Director Virginia Roundtree described steps the agency has taken since the prior hearing, including daily staff huddles, live dashboards, added project management support, an external claims vendor, and an independent review of the Division of Fee-for-Service Management. She said Access is trying to balance fraud prevention with support for legitimate providers, and committed to follow up on a specific provider payment dispute by early the next week. Committee members repeatedly pressed Access and ADHS on delayed claims processing, prepayment review, and whether the current system is driving providers out of business. Roundtable testimony from Access staff described the new Provider Resolution Roundtables, which are intended to work with a small number of providers facing the most claims and authorization problems. Members questioned why claims are being denied or held for long periods, why some providers are still waiting on payments from 2023 and 2024, and whether the agency’s actions are sustainable. Access also explained the Targeted Investment Program, saying it is a federally approved Medicaid initiative with large dollar amounts still being paid out on a delayed schedule, and agreed to provide more information on provider participation and payment timing. No formal votes or committee actions were taken in the portion provided, but the chair indicated the committee would continue reviewing the issue and requested additional reports and follow-up information from Access and ADHS.

Transcript Highlights:

• AB 760 was amended in the Senate to provide a tax exclusion for settlements from this incident.
• The bill ensures that settlement payments intended to compensate those affected by this emergency are
• These settlements are intended to help residents and businesses recover their losses and restore some
• Taxing those payments would reduce the resources available for that recovery and undermine the basic
• payments from taxable income.

Committee: House Revenue and Taxation

Summary: The Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee met to consider three Senate-amended bills. AB 672 would extend an existing property tax exemption for community land trust projects that develop or rehabilitate low-income housing. The author and sponsor said the measure helps preserve and create permanently affordable housing, noted the exemption has supported 101 units at a relatively low state cost, and argued it is essential for project feasibility. No opposition was presented, and the committee recommended concurrence in the Senate amendments on a 5-0 vote, later completed as 6-0 with an absent member’s vote. AB 760 would exclude certain settlement payments from California taxable income for residents and businesses affected by the Garden Grove chemical incident that displaced more than 50,000 people. Supporters, including the Orange County Board of Supervisors, said the bill would preserve compensation intended to help with housing, lost wages, business interruption, and other recovery costs, and that taxing the payments would undermine relief. The measure had no opposition in the hearing and passed the committee 6-0, with a later vote from an absent member recorded in support. AB 1519 would clarify the state’s 20-year statute of limitations for Franchise Tax Board collection actions by preventing fees, penalties, or interest from restarting the clock. The author said the bill would create a true limitations period and not materially affect revenue, while supporters from the California Society of Enrolled Agents and the California Society of CPAs said it would provide certainty and resolve ambiguity for taxpayers and practitioners. There was no opposition, and the committee recommended concurrence in the Senate amendments on a 6-0 vote, later finalized with the absent member’s aye vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> graduate school or maybe a down payment graduate school or maybe a down payment on<00:32:09.919>
• This is a new model of adding these payments directly to student athletes.
• </c><01:06:25.280><c> structure</c><01:06:25.680><c> the</c> settlement and the the structure the settlement
• </c> the settlement. That's possible. Yeah. the settlement. That's possible. Yeah.
• </c> However, it is unclear whether payments However, it is unclear whether payments made<01:40:44.159

Summary: The joint House-Senate higher education briefing focused on how the University of Hawaii athletics department plans to remain competitive in the NIL era, especially as the House settlement and related changes allow new forms of athlete compensation. Chair and Senator Kim opened by framing the issue as balancing competitiveness, sustainability, compliance, and UH’s educational mission. Coaches Laura Beeman and Timmy Chang described how NIL and the transfer portal are already affecting recruiting and retention, with Beeman saying women’s basketball has lost six to 10 recruits because UH cannot yet match offers, and Chang citing examples of players being courted with large sums and the need to retain proven local and out-of-state athletes. Both emphasized that student-athletes should still prioritize education, culture, and team values, while also receiving support that helps them stay at UH. Athletic Director Matt Elliott then outlined UH’s broader strategy. He said the department’s vision is to create an outstanding student-athlete experience, recruit and retain elite athletes, compete at the highest level of the Mountain West, and strengthen the bond with the community. He described NIL as having moved from a largely unregulated period to a new phase in which institutions can directly control some NIL payments, while outside deals still must be reviewed for fair market value. Elliott said UH wants to use NIL to help athletes cover basic needs and build financial stability, while also keeping them academically on track. He noted the department is pursuing fundraising, including a “Boost the Bose” account, corporate sponsorships, and licensing deals, to support NIL opportunities. In response to questions from Senator Kim, Elliott clarified that UH’s approach involves both institution-controlled payments and outside NIL deals: internal payments can be structured at the department’s discretion within the cap, while external sponsor deals must go through NIL Go and meet market-value standards. No votes or formal actions were taken during the informational briefing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Most athletes don't understand self-employment tax, quarterly payments, multi-state tax obligations,
• They will not tax, from a state income tax standpoint, their NIL or their rev share payments.
• You touched on this a little bit, too, about the House Settlement, House v. the NCAA, right?
• Oh, I thought I heard you talk about House Settlement.
• It's not just football and basketball, but it's some sort of payment plan usually.

Summary: The committee held an informational hearing on name, image, and likeness (NIL) and financial literacy for student athletes, with members framing California as a national leader on NIL but emphasizing the need for stronger protections and more consistent education. The chair and witnesses discussed how NIL opportunities now include both third-party endorsement deals and school revenue-sharing arrangements, and how the current landscape varies widely by institution, leaving athletes with a patchwork of rules and support. Several witnesses argued that student athletes, especially younger ones and those from low-income or first-generation backgrounds, are vulnerable to predatory contracts, tax problems, and pressure from family, agents, or lenders. The first panel featured Tyree Dillingham and Brandon Copeland, who called for standardized financial literacy, better guardrails against predatory NIL advances, and a player-led association or similar collective voice for athletes. They described examples of athletes not understanding paychecks, taxes, or contract terms, and warned that some schools and collectives blur the line between education and marketing. Copeland also argued that college athletics now functions like a professional business and that athletes need representation and a standard contract structure to protect them. The second panel focused on lived experience, including testimony from attorney Anthony Coronae and student athlete Mikey Williams. Coronae described reviewing a contract that he said functioned like a predatory loan disguised as marketing support, with the company taking exclusive rights to Williams’ NIL and requiring repayment far beyond the advance. Williams testified that he signed without a lawyer, later lost endorsements, scholarship, and housing stability, and only later learned the contract’s consequences. He said a required financial literacy course at Sacramento State helped him begin to understand budgeting, taxes, and contracts, and he urged the legislature to require legal review or stronger safeguards for athletes. The third panel, from San Diego State University, highlighted a more structured institutional model. Athletic director Brendan Hill described a mandatory four-year life-skills program that includes financial literacy, resume workshops, internships, and branding education, while student athlete Sloan Benchoff said the program helped her manage money and prepare for post-college life. Witnesses agreed that support is uneven across schools, that some agents and lenders are exploiting athletes, and that California should consider standardized financial education and agent regulation while also being careful not to create rules that unintentionally restrict athlete rights. No formal vote or bill action was taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• The first item of business was the litigation settlements.
• The chair asked who would present the settlements and whether it would be the department.
• She explained that there are two proposed settlements and that the committee would take up the first
• The presenters clarified that this is a proposed settlement that both sides, plaintiffs and defendants
• On follow-up, the committee asked whether this was at the same facility as the first settlement.

Committee: All JBC-CLAIMS

Summary: The Joint Budget Committee’s Claims Review and Litigation Oversight Subcommittee met to consider two proposed litigation settlements from the Department of Corrections and one appealed claim from the Claims Commission. In the first settlement, Caroline Arnett v. Larry Norris, et al., members asked about the underlying sexual assault allegations, whether policies had changed, and whether PREA audits and other safeguards were in place. The department said audits were underway and that steps had been taken to prevent similar conduct. The committee approved the settlement by voice vote. In the second settlement, Latasha Ridgel v. Arkansas Department of Corrections, members raised concerns about the length of the case and the fact that it involved similar allegations. The department cited attorney turnover, COVID-related delays, and scheduling difficulties; the settlement was approved by voice vote. The committee then reviewed Sharon Greer and Deanna Hayes v. Commissioner of State Lands, an appeal of a Claims Commission dismissal involving a 2009 tax sale of family property in Crittenden County. The claimants said they did not learn of the sale or the $4,200 in excess proceeds until 2025, and argued that notice was inadequate and that the overage should not have gone to the county. The Commissioner of State Lands’ office responded that notice was sent to addresses on file, certified mail receipts were returned, and a post-sale notice explained the process for contesting the sale and claiming excess proceeds. The office also argued the claim was untimely, that the commission lacked jurisdiction, and that state law bars monetary damages against the commissioner for actions related to tax-delinquent land sales. Members discussed broader concerns about the tax-sale and excess-proceeds process, including whether excess proceeds should be held longer or routed differently, but noted those issues would require legislative changes rather than action in this case. The committee then voted to affirm the Claims Commission’s dismissal of the claim. The meeting adjourned after the motion passed.

Transcript Highlights:

• This year we reversed our roles but are still standing strong Representative Bankson: To stop this dangerous
• Special Master found this as an uncontested claim arising Representative Grow: from a settlement agreement

Transcript Highlights:

• If they failed to ever make that payment, it automatically defaults in.
• And I've also requested that we have a training for final settlements...
• Who approved the payment is what I'm asking.
• The receipt books in which these payments were recorded could not be located.
• The town council minutes indicated Ordinance No. 1001 was adopted to authorize these payments.

Committee: All LEGISLATIVE JOINT AUDITING-COUNTIES AND MUNICIPALITIES

Transcript Highlights:

• Epinephrine auto-injectors, often known as EpiPens, are life-saving treatments that reverse the symptoms
• approval in the Senate, requiring health care providers to give an itemized bill when requesting payment
• itemized bills within 30 days, and about 33% took legal action against patients for insufficient payments
• itemized bills within 30 days, and about 33% took legal action against patients for insufficient payments
• Eiliff, Senior Research Fellow with the Paragon Health Institute: Even with those slots, we can't reverse

Bills: HB163 , HB216 , HB721 , HB2035 , HB2038 , HB3057 , HB3153 , HB3233 , HB3595 , HB3801 , HB3812 , HB4076 , HB4129 , HB4377 , HB4535 , HB4666 , HB4730 , HB4743 , HB4903 , HB5149 , HB5155 , HB1534 , HB163 , HB216

Committee: Senate Health & Human Services

Keywords: epinephrine, healthcare, emergency response, administration, medical policy, health care, itemized billing, patient rights, provider regulations, Texas Health and Safety Code, cost disclosure, insurance, benefit plan, administrators, chemical dependency, treatment facilities, minor admissions, parental notice, mental health, medical licensing

Summary: The committee met without a quorum at first, then established a quorum with five members present. Members heard and left pending several House bills, including HB 4743 on allowing hospitals to license mobile stroke units under a hospital license, HB 4129 on earlier DFPS enforcement tools for single-source continuum contractors in community-based foster care, HB 4903 creating a Quad Agency Child Care Initiative to coordinate child care regulations across state agencies, HB 3812 revising the gold card/prior authorization process for physicians, HB 4535 requiring written informed consent before COVID-19 vaccination and a standardized state information sheet, and HB 4666 reducing the frequency of some HHSC reports to the legislature. The chair also noted HB 35 would be voted on later after a subcommittee back was received, and that a large number of bills would be heard the next day. Most of the testimony focused on HB 4535 and HB 4730. On HB 4535, supporters argued the bill would strengthen informed consent for COVID vaccination by requiring written consent and clearer state-level information about risks, manufacturer liability protections, and adverse-event reporting; opponents, including a pediatrician and medical groups, said existing federal and state informed-consent materials already cover these topics and warned the bill could create duplicative paperwork and penalties. On HB 3812, the Texas Medical Association supported changes that would extend the gold-card evaluation period to one year, raise transparency, and make prior authorization exemptions easier to administer, while health plans said they were neutral and viewed the bill as a balance between reducing burden and preventing fraud or unsafe care. HB 4730 drew extensive testimony from adoption professionals, birth mothers, adoptive parents, and child welfare advocates. The bill would require DFPS to create a relinquishment form, train child-placing agency staff, and extend the minimum waiting period for voluntary relinquishment from 48 hours to seven days. Supporters of the current law argued the 48-hour period aligns with hospital discharge, allows informed decisions, and helps birth parents and adoptive families begin healing and bonding without pushing children into foster care or creating legal and Medicaid complications. The author said the bill would be revised and that the seven-day provision was a work in progress. No votes were taken on the bills during the meeting; each bill was left pending after public testimony closed.

Transcript Highlights:

• to the settlement of claims related to the 2023 Maui wildfires and for the payment of administrative
• expenses related to the Maui wildfires settlement agreement.
• of claims related to the 2023 settlement of claims related to the 2023 Maui Maui Maui wildfires.<00:
• the settlement state's contribution to the settlement of<00:58:58.720><c> claims</c><00:58:59.119><c
• </c><00:59:02.319><c> of</c> wildfires and for the payment of wildfires and for the payment of administrative

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> Higher caps mean greater settlement Higher caps mean greater settlement pressure,<01:21:42.880><
• Certainly, there's a judgment being made by the defendant in paying a settlement, but the settlement
• Certainly, there's a judgment being made by the defendant in paying a settlement, but the settlement
• cost</c><01:54:36.159><c> will</c> settlement, but the settlement cost will settlement, but the settlement
• </c> settlement or a good ruling. settlement or a good ruling.

Bills: HB0068 , HB0062 , HB0127 , HB0109

Committee: House Revenue

Transcript Highlights:

• a third party as a condition of settlement.
• The funds offered on payment to a third party as a condition of settlement, and would codify that as
• And because we were not informed of this settlement, we had no idea of the terms of this settlement.
• We had no idea of the terms of this settlement. We had...
• And because we were not informed of this settlement, we had no idea of the terms of this settlement.