Transcript Highlights:

• We obviously work very closely with the Department of Corrections throughout all these processes.
• They process warrants and other alternative sanctions, They process warrants and other alternative sanctions
• I mentioned our judicial structure.
• So that kind of challenge in delivering due process is an ongoing concern.
• We end up with solving the process. We end up with a resolution.

Summary: The Justice Budget Subcommittee met for an introductory overview of the justice budget and the major agencies within it. Chair Maney explained that the committee would hear broad presentations rather than detailed budget questions, and the first panel included the Department of Juvenile Justice, Department of Corrections, Commission on Offender Review, Department of Law Enforcement, Office of the State Courts Administrator, and the Attorney General’s Office. Each agency described its mission, staffing, budget, and major responsibilities, with repeated emphasis on public safety, rehabilitation, staffing shortages, technology needs, and the importance of mental health services and education in reducing recidivism. Secretary Hall described DJJ’s prevention-to-aftercare continuum, including civil citation, detention, probation, and residential commitment programs, and highlighted reductions in juvenile arrests and commitments. Secretary Dixon said DOC’s biggest issues are staffing, overtime, and inflation, while noting progress in education, reentry, and a low recidivism rate. FDLE Commissioner Glass outlined the agency’s investigative, forensic, intelligence, and protective functions, including work on fentanyl enforcement and crime reporting systems. The State Courts Administrator emphasized the judiciary’s constitutional role, case volume, and challenges in providing interpreters, experts, and technology support. Chief Deputy Attorney General Guard described the office’s litigation, criminal appeals, consumer protection, and opioid recovery work, especially defending state laws and recovering opioid settlement funds. Members then asked questions about prison conditions, immigration enforcement, court filing fees, crime reporting, staffing ratios, and transnational gangs. Agency leaders responded that they were not aware of ICE contracts in some cases, that FDLE works with immigration authorities and detention facilities under existing authority, and that filing fees are a legislative policy decision. The committee also heard from the Justice Administrative Commission, prosecutors, public defenders, guardian ad litem, regional conflict counsel, and capital collateral regional counsel, who focused on indigent representation, dependency and death penalty cases, and persistent staffing and retention problems. No votes were taken, and the meeting concluded after the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• I like it better in the judicial I like it better in the judicial protection<00:08:42.400> and
• way the judicial way the judicial protection<00:08:54.520> works.
• family members in the judicial family members in the judicial protection<00:08:59.080> law
• <00:17:18.520> provisions, process provisions, process provisions, protect<00:17:20.360> the
• being put on through judicial fiat. being put on through judicial fiat.

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:16:39.120> but weigh their decision-making process but weigh their decision-making process
• However, the same concept applies here. judicial conduct, judicial conduct, similar<00:17:09.679>
• kept in mind um throughout this process kept in mind um throughout this process from<00:17:23.839
• Um, as a member of the judicial Um, as a member of the judicial retention<00:22:55.679> committee<
• process process and<00:44:54.701> [snorts]<00:44:54.800> then<00:44:55.119> did

Keywords: 927, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• In that process, we helped her get her birth certificate and her ID.
• a process by which...
• It creates a non-judicial avenue for citizens to use before being required to file a judicial challenge
• Used for judicial notice. That was the intent. Is that right?
• This is literally submitting based on a judicial notice standard.

Bills: SB801, SB1200, SB1410, SB1717, SB1862, SB1863, SB2216, SB2681, SB506, SB2626, SJR63, SB 3

Keywords: SB 801, birth certificate, birth record, certified copy, homeless, homelessness, unhoused, vital records, state registrar, local registrar, county clerk, fee waiver, identity documents, ID access, housing insecurity, shelter, transitional housing, Health and Safety Code, HHSC, Health and Human Services Commission

Transcript Highlights:

• Judicial counsel. for uh judicial counsel if you'd like to for uh judicial counsel if you'd like to go
• <00:24:08.799> All judicial council. I see. Thank you. All judicial council. I see.
• <00:30:17.120> Does judicial council? I don't have any. Does judicial council?
• you know, lost in the process. Right. you know, lost in the process. Right.
• because the judicial branch now will have to take care of this appeal process through the superior court

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee worked through several HB 2 budget amendments, focusing first on energy-related transfers and then on judicial funding. For the energy item, members discussed moving remaining money from the renewable energy fund into the general fund for the biennium, with later-year amounts going to the general fund rather than ratepayers. They noted the proposal was based on prior House Bill 111 language, that the exact amount was still being worked out with the Department of Energy, and that some language about “incentive payments” was being removed or clarified. Amendment 1211H was moved and adopted on a 5-4 vote. The committee then considered amendment 1040 on the governor’s scholarship fund, which would eliminate the program and sweep uncommitted funds. Members supporting the program argued it helps New Hampshire students afford in-state college and should be reworked rather than repealed; opponents said the remaining balance was limited and the program should be ended. Amendment 1040 was defeated 4-5. The committee then turned to a judicial council request tied to a Franklin Pierce criminal justice clinic that had previously used ARPA funds. Supporters said the clinic cleared 323 cases in nine months, provided training for future attorneys, and could reduce more expensive assigned-counsel costs by helping the public defender system handle cases more efficiently. The amendment would add $100,000 to the judicial council line for that purpose. There was some confusion over the line item and whether the request should be attributed to the judicial branch or judicial council, which was corrected during discussion. Members also discussed a larger issue: the judicial council’s budget request appeared lower than intended because of a possible clerical error in how prior-year funding was calculated, especially after the last budget combined HB 1 and HB 2 funding. The committee compared the public defender line and assigned counsel line, noting that if public defender funding is cut, more cases would shift to assigned counsel, which is more expensive. No final vote on the judicial council amendment is shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• we'll work with the broker on a process. we'll work with the broker on a process.
• <00:20:40.960> There curious about the RFP process. There curious about the RFP process.
• Uh thank you whole process works.
• And in this particular RFP process.
• So essentially the payment obligation went from the judicial branch to the judicial council. >> Okay.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Fiscal Committee met on Friday, November 21st and first approved the October 17th minutes, with one member abstaining because she was not present. The committee then adopted the remainder of the consent calendar after removing two items for separate consideration. On tab four, members discussed item 25282 with the Commissioner of Administrative Services and Public Works staff; the project had been delayed after testing revealed design errors and flaws, and the committee was told the work would restart with test piles the following week and was projected for completion in fall 2027. The item was approved. On tab five, item 25279 concerned a Health and Human Services facility project and a federally required element added late in the process. Commissioners explained that the project had originally been funded at $21 million, later required additional financing, and that the legislature had recently lifted a restriction so non-ARPA funds could be used. They also said the sale of the existing Manchester property would not be needed to complete the build, that a broker RFP was about to be issued, and that any sale would require further approvals. The committee approved the item. The committee then approved item 25280 after a brief exchange about rainy day fund estimates and prior budget assumptions, and approved item 25278 without discussion. Item 25272 drew questions about the consumer advocate’s RFP for outside utility-rate-case assistance; the office said it eliminated proposals focused only on return on equity work after the Eversource decision, selected a Michigan firm for spreadsheet and operating-cost analysis, and noted there were no in-state firms doing this specialized work. The committee approved the item, with one member recorded in opposition. On tab nine, item 25261 concerned a new judicial council budget obligation tied to legislation and public defense staffing needs. The presenter said the request reflected a late-added obligation from the judicial branch, that more requests may still be needed, and that public defense staffing was strained by vacancies and competition from Massachusetts. The committee approved the item. Under informational items, members received an update on 529 plan distributions and on interest and dividends tax refunds, with Revenue Administration saying roughly $21 million more in refunds remained and that the repeal-related refunds were nearly finished. The committee also noted an environmental services item for which questions would be submitted separately. The next meeting was set for December 19th at 11:00 a.m., and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our thought process there was...
• involved in the Contracting process involved in the Contracting process so<00:33:58.399> I
• called the Judicial Council, we are not in fact part of the judicial branch.
• <01:45:09.159> at<01:45:09.320> the Financial processes at the Financial processes
• <01:58:51.760> Council to the judicial Council to the judicial Council um<01:58:53.840>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony from Insurance Commissioner DJ Bettencourt on the New Hampshire Insurance Department budget. He said the department is self-funded through assessments on insurers based on New Hampshire premium volume, with about $8 billion in premiums written in the state and a department budget of roughly $15.5 million. He explained that the department has 88 authorized positions, eight vacancies, and that three full-time positions were unfunded after the governor’s requested 4% reduction exercise. He also said the department is trying to balance staffing needs with not overburdening carriers during a hard insurance market. A major topic was the department’s $2.6 million rebate to industry from the prior fiscal year, which Bettencourt described as a credit against the next assessment rather than a direct cash payment. Members questioned why that credit was not reflected as a reduction in the upcoming budget, and Bettencourt and staff explained that the budget assumes full staffing and full spending, with any year-end surplus returned to insurers. The commissioner said the department had added staff in recent years for succession planning and to preserve institutional expertise, and that the rebate reflects careful budgeting rather than excess spending. Members also asked about staffing changes by division, including positions unfunded in fraud, property and casualty examinations, life and health examinations, and tax. Bettencourt said fraud investigations remain strong and that the department can use outside contractors for examinations, with those costs billed to the company being examined. He also described the department’s examination process, including periodic financial exams and targeted market conduct reviews triggered by consumer complaints or trends. Additional questions covered OIT transfers, the department’s oversight of fully insured health coverage, the insurance premium tax and fines going to the general fund, and the department’s limited role in auto repair reimbursement disputes, where he said complaints have recently declined.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:54:03.319> has<00:54:03.559> the the process has the the process has the necessary
• > for<01:08:09.400> making a Judicial uh review process for making a Judicial uh review process
• I think it's a corruption of our process.
• think it's a Corruption of our process think it's a Corruption of our process so<01:30:07.840>
• substantially more access to the process substantially more access to the process that's<01:31:09.440

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Elections Committee met on February 6, 2025, and first considered the reappointment of Steven Swanson to the Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board. Swanson described his background in legal aid, lobbying, judging, and international rule-of-law work, and said he wanted to continue serving the public. Committee members praised his experience and discussed the importance of campaign finance oversight, including preventing corporate participation in Minnesota elections. Senator Wosinski moved to recommend Swanson’s confirmation, and the motion was adopted. The committee then heard Senate File 529, a proposed constitutional amendment to state that elections shall be free, fair, and equal, and that no civil or military power may interfere with the free exercise of the right to vote. Senator Dibble presented the bill as a way to strengthen voting rights and provide a constitutional basis to challenge voter suppression, gerrymandering, and unfair campaign practices. Testimony in support came from David Fischer of Clean Elections Minnesota and Jean Massie of Fair Vote Minnesota, both of whom argued the amendment would protect access to voting, increase confidence in elections, and align Minnesota with other states that have similar language. Members discussed whether the amendment’s broad language could invite judicial interpretation or affect future election laws. Senator Koran questioned how the proposal would improve Minnesota’s already high turnout, while Senator Grant raised concerns that the terms “free, fair, and equal” were undefined and could shift power to the courts. Senator Lucero proposed an oral amendment to add “ensuring one eligible citizen, one vote” after the word “equal,” saying it would address concerns about future voter ID laws. The amendment was restated by counsel and discussed, with Senator Dibble saying it did not significantly harm the bill but suggesting it might imply a requirement he did not intend. The transcript ends during discussion of that oral amendment, and no final vote on the bill itself is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is judicial review de novo?
• into the judicial branch?
• They have to at least look at it as a due process and let him go through the process.
• They have to at least look at it as a due process and let him go through the process.
• They have to at least look at it as a due process and let him go through the process.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 90 / Senate Bill 17, a birth-related measure backed by the Kentucky Birth Coalition. Sponsors said the bill had been worked on for several years and described changes including a transfer agreement, insurance requirements, proximity to a hospital, informed consent, and accreditation/medical director standards that helped win neutral or non-opposition from the Hospital Association. The bill was reported favorably after a roll call vote with unanimous support. The committee then heard Senate Bill 65, presented by Senator Steve West and Representative Derrick Lewis. They said the bill would make regulations found deficient through the committee review process null and void by statute, and would bar agencies from reissuing the same or similar language for up to a year. Supporters argued this was needed to hold agencies accountable because deficiency findings alone had not led to action. After questions about specific Medicaid behavioral health regulations and concerns about legislative overreach, the bill passed the committee on a roll call vote, with some members passing or explaining reservations. Finally, the committee considered Senate Bill 84, with a House committee substitute. Sponsors said the substitute was intended to strengthen the bill and reflect the U.S. Supreme Court’s Loper Bright decision by ending Chevron deference and requiring courts, not agencies, to interpret law. Opponents, including Audrey Ernsberger and Katherine Hargraves, argued the bill would intrude on the judiciary, violate separation of powers, and could harm public health, environmental, and workplace protections. Committee members also raised concerns about whether the bill told courts what standard to use; sponsors responded that agencies could still present persuasive arguments, but courts should not defer to them. The committee substitute was adopted, and the bill then passed the committee on a roll call vote, with several members passing or expressing constitutional concerns.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senate File 4067, the omnibus judicial branch supplemental appropriations bill, will be handled first
• Do you want me to explain the whole process or just this bill?
• the judicial branch branch supplemental<00:02:21.680> appropriations?
• <00:02:41.000> branch,<00:02:41.920> um judicial branch, um judicial branch, um particularly
• c> and particularly the judicial officers, and particularly the judicial officers, and then<00:02

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I want to thank you as now we move to a judicial branch.
• Judicial branch.
• Let's start with the department, judicial branch. Good afternoon, Assemblymember Ramos.
• Is there a process that has?
• And I hope that as you go through this process, you really do find these cost savings.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill is not a judicial process bill.
• So if this is not a judicial process, if there's no judicial process, why are at a rally, but it's just
• This bill is not a judicial process bill.
• So if this is not a judicial process, if there's no judicial process, why are Representative Gant: This
• is not a judicial process.

Summary: The House convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and a quorum present, then moved into returning messages from the Senate. Early action focused on CS/CS/HB 1503 on computer science education and certification, which would add computer science and artificial intelligence content in high school and create a K-12 teacher certificate program; after adopting a House amendment restoring certificate language and adjusting implementation timing, the House concurred in the Senate amendment and passed the bill 105-0. The chamber then took up CS/CS/HB 1085 on local government cybersecurity, adopting a House amendment to allow local governments to buy into the cyber grant program and add a five-year sunset, then concurring in the Senate amendment shifting grant administration back to the Florida Digital Service; the bill passed 104-1. The House refused to concur in Senate amendments to CS/HB 351 on concurrent legislative jurisdiction over U.S. military installations and HB 6011 on reporting gifts or honoraria, sending both back to the Senate. It also refused to concur in the Senate amendment to CS/HB 851 on professional learning for instructional and school administrative personnel, saying the Senate version expanded the bill beyond its original autism-focused scope. After a recess, the House unveiled Speaker Daniel Perez’s portrait and heard extended remarks praising his leadership, institutional reforms, and the work of House staff and members. In the second returning-message list, the House debated CS/CS/HB 1471 on systems of law and terrorist organizations. The Senate amendment clarified the definition of “promote,” refined notice and timeline provisions for terrorist organization designations, and kept references to Sharia law as an example in the foreign religious law section. Supporters argued the bill was aimed at conduct beyond speech and was intended to protect the Constitution and public safety; opponents warned it would chill free speech, target Muslim Floridians, and give the governor and cabinet unprecedented power without adequate due process. After lengthy debate, the House concurred and passed the bill 80-25. The House then took up CS/CS/HB 1473, a public records bill tied to HB 1471, and moved to concur in a technical Senate amendment aligning the records exemption with the revised structure of HB 1471.

Transcript Highlights:

• as it came to us from judicial budget as as it came to us from the<00:04:27.360> judicial<00:
• I I want to say the judicial branch.
• <00:14:25.839> employees quite sure that the judicial employees quite sure that the judicial
• increased staffing of the judicial increased staffing of the judicial security<00:36:06.160>
• > judicial<00:37:05.040> security employees for the judicial security employees for the

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up House File 3874, the Judiciary budget bill, and first moved it to the Ways and Means Committee. The bill was described as funding the judicial branch’s budget request, including courthouse and judge security measures, home safety for judges and staff, a $1 million courthouse safety grant program, and funding related to paid family and medical leave costs that the courts must absorb. A court administrator explained that some base adjustments were budget-neutral internal shifts within the court system, moving money from district courts to other courts to better meet overall needs. Members then debated several amendments. The A7 amendment, which reduced some of the requested security funding for administrators and aligned it more closely with legislative security levels while retaining flexible Supreme Court security personnel, was adopted. The A1 amendment, which would have deleted the additional operating adjustment for paid family and medical leave, failed on a 7-7 tie after debate over whether the courts should bear the employer share of that cost and whether the program itself was an unfunded mandate. The A2 amendment, also related to paid family and medical leave funding, likewise failed on a 7-7 tie after similar discussion about the judiciary’s ongoing employment costs and the branch’s inability to raise its own revenue. The committee then adopted the A4 amendment, which increased the courthouse safety grant program from $1 million to $4 million. Supporters said there was unmet demand for courthouse security grants and that the money would help with hardware such as screening equipment, while the court administrator said the branch would not spend more than it could use and that the grants would be reviewed by a committee including law enforcement and county representatives. The administrator noted the funding would be one-time money and would not cover staffing costs. The committee also discussed the judiciary’s ongoing need for funding, with members arguing both that the courts should be treated like other employers and that the judicial branch, as an independent branch of government, must be funded by the legislature. The final A5 amendment was then introduced, with staff noting it would delete a section already covered by the adopted A7 amendment and reduce an appropriation on page four, line 14.

Transcript Highlights:

• judicial district because uh judicial judicial district because uh judicial districts<00:37:12.160
• process, just like it did for me at 18. process, just like it did for me at 18.
• question processes that we don't have. question processes that we don't have.
• judicial space is actual information. judicial space is actual information.
• we include judicial candidates. we include judicial candidates.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• What's the current process? I'm sorry, what's the current process for filing a protective order?
• So with the online process, where does that part of the process take place?
• What I understand from the Judicial Administrator is that it was assessed that the Judicial Administrator's
• Well, that's the civil process in Louisiana.
• So that's the civil process in Louisiana.

Summary: The committee first took up SCR 30 by Senator Connick, which memorializes Congress to compel the Department of Justice to release unclassified Epstein-related records. Senator Connick gave personal remarks about child sexual abuse and the need to hold powerful people accountable. Representative Newell supported the resolution, and the committee reported it favorably without opposition. Next, the committee considered SCR 40 by Senator Selders, urging Congress to timely pass defense appropriations that fully fund and align with the National Defense Authorization Act. The measure was briefly explained as a statement of support for military readiness and proper appropriations, and it was moved favorably with no opposition. The main substantive discussion centered on SB 259 by Senator Barrow, which would authorize an online portal for civil protective order applications. A Supreme Court protective order registry representative explained that the portal would let domestic and dating violence survivors complete petitions online, with the same judicial review, service, and hearing process that exists now; the bill would not eliminate manual filing. Members asked about fees, guidance for applicants, verification, judicial review, public access, and the risk of false filings. The witness and several members emphasized that the process remains temporary and ex parte at the outset, that final orders are issued by judges, and that the registry is not public. A domestic violence coalition representative also testified in support. Representative Newell moved favorable, Representative Edmondson objected, and the committee reported the bill favorably by a 10-1 vote. Finally, Representative Baham presented HR 245 condemning political violence in the United States. He cited recent and historical examples of political attacks and argued that violence against public figures and activists is harmful regardless of party. Members voiced support, no one objected, and the resolution was adopted before the committee adjourned, with the chair noting it was the last meeting of the session.

Transcript Highlights:

• On line 63, the Board of Judicial Standards came in with a base of $645,000 per year.
• These sections are from the underlying House File 2300, which was the judicial branch's bill carried
• Section 12 is also from the judicial branch bill carried by Representative Scott.
• This has the updated definition that does not include employees of the Minnesota Judicial Branch.
• I'm going to speak to the judicial safety provisions in the bill, which are under Article 5, Section

Bills: HF2300

Transcript Highlights:

• addresses that I got off the judicial addresses that I got off the judicial branch<00:23:09.159>
• is working and if about how the process is working and if the<04:38:29.240> process the process
• It's quasi-judicial.
• You know, even when the court orders mediation and you're in a judicial process, a lot of times, I know
• mediation and you're in a judicial mediation and you're in a judicial process<05:02:18.718> a

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee met for its first meeting of the new session with opening remarks, member introductions, and a discussion of committee logistics. Members described their backgrounds and priorities, including criminal justice, right-to-know and privacy issues, domestic violence, death-with-dignity legislation, abortion, firearms, landlord-tenant policy, housing, and technology/privacy concerns. The chair noted there were already 34 bills assigned to the committee and expected more, and said the committee would likely continue to have a heavy workload this session. The chair also outlined how the committee would operate: meetings would generally be on Wednesdays, with possible Mondays as needed; hearings would not require a quorum, but executive sessions would; and members were asked to provide updated phone numbers and email addresses, especially cell numbers. He explained that the committee would continue its practice of seating members in a mixed partisan arrangement to encourage communication, and that the new clerk had joined the committee. A significant portion of the meeting focused on procedures for executive sessions and meeting times. The chair said the committee would follow the traditional rule allowing executive sessions on bills heard that day if proper notice was given, but he would avoid taking up controversial matters without full attendance. Members then discussed whether meetings should start at 9, 9:30, or 10 a.m., with concerns raised about long commutes, evening obligations, and winter driving after dark. No formal vote was taken in the portion provided, but the chair indicated he would try to accommodate the committee’s preference while balancing the workload.

Transcript Highlights:

• sales process.
• Basically what this does is it strengthens Florida's judicial sales process by requiring courts to follow
• I consider to restore fairness, transparency and integrity in Florida's judicial sales process.
• That is a separate process that sort of the more voluntary process.
• The pull up process is very similar and to the bars grievance process in that a complaint is filed.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Bucky from Judicial Council here? Say that again. Jay Bucky from Judicial Council is here.
• Oh, Bucky from Judicial Council is here. Oh, the Judicial Council. Yes, welcome.
• over which bills would get judicial over which bills would get judicial review<00:40:55.480>
• But it is a long-term view. that money from a different judicial that money from a different judicial
• right other questions for judicial right other questions for judicial councel<00:58:25.680> no

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first discussed a proposed increase to the annual elevator certificate fee in the Department of Labor. The commissioner said the fee had been $50 for years and generated just under $300,000 annually, while the Inspection Division’s broader revenue far exceeded its expenses. Members noted the fee only covered the certificate, not the inspection itself, which is billed separately at $100 per hour. After comparing the fee to neighboring states and discussing the department’s revenue and staffing, the committee agreed to rewrite the language to set the fee at $75 and to vote on an amendment later. The committee then took up Section 139, which would expand the list of labor-law violations that can be penalized without first issuing a warning. The Department explained the change was meant to align House Bill 157 with other chapters, including youth employment and workers’ compensation provisions, where immediate civil penalties are already allowed. The section was accepted unanimously. A longer discussion followed on the Second Injury Fund. The commissioner explained that the fund reimburses insurers for certain workers’ compensation costs tied to claims involving pre-existing conditions, is financed by assessments on insurers, and requires notice within 100 weeks of injury plus a $10,000 deductible before reimbursement. He said the fund currently holds roughly $16 million to $22 million, one full-time employee administers it, and total staff involvement is about five to six people. Members questioned whether the fund should be sunset, but the department said the current House Bill 2 language does not propose a sunset; instead, it addresses increased hearing and litigation burdens after a recent Supreme Court decision. Sections 140 and 141, dealing with hearings, were then accepted unanimously. The committee also briefly discussed fines for late insurance coverage reporting, with the department noting the current rubric allows up to $50 per day but uses $112 per day, and members suggesting a lower amount.

Transcript Highlights:

• , workers' comp process, to the Court of Appeals.
• We have a really formal internal budget process.
• We have a really formal internal budget process.
• , within the court system process.
• So let's talk about the First Judicial Magistrate cases.

Keywords: 996, all