Transcript Highlights:

• So the purchaser would have 10 days to review that information, review the disclosure information that's
• So the purchaser would have 10 days to review that information, review the disclosure information that's
• So the purchaser would have 10 days to review that information, review the disclosure information that's
• ,</c> 10day review for the buyer to review, 10day review for the buyer to review, uh,<00:17:50.559><c
• </c> intelligence in um utilization review. intelligence in um utilization review.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative, after reviewing what limited amount I could review...
• After reviewing what limited amount I could review, your letter mentioned an article that the mayor wrote
• And what we looked at is, during the course of our reviews, we looked at...
• district because there was not one for us to review.
• Three of them had no activity or revenue during the review period.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Auditing Committee met to consider several audit requests and enforcement items related to local government accountability. The committee heard requests for operational audits of the City of Miami Beach, the Delray Beach Downtown Development Authority, and the City of Daytona Beach. In each case, the requesting member cited concerns about transparency, financial management, or compliance with state law. Representatives from Delray Beach DDA testified that an internal audit had already been completed, that findings were limited, and that they were working to cure issues such as procurement, credit card, and disbursement policies; the DDA chair also said the organization was willing to cooperate and was considering transitioning out of operating Old School Square. For Daytona Beach, the sponsor pointed to excess building permit revenues, vehicle purchases, and reported P-card irregularities as reasons for a broader audit. The committee approved all three audit requests, directing the Auditor General to finalize the scope while considering the stated concerns. The committee also received a presentation on the statewide performance reviews of 21 neighborhood improvement districts. The reviewers reported that 15 districts were active and six inactive, with common issues including outdated or missing performance plans, weak web presence, inadequate meeting notices, and limited management mechanisms. They said staffing levels often correlated with the ability to meet statutory requirements, and recommended that several districts be reviewed to determine whether they were still needed. Members asked about staffing, inactivity criteria, and how the districts were administered, and staff explained that city or county liaisons often supplement district staffing. Later, staff reviewed enforcement actions for local governments that failed to file required financial reports or omitted required information from submitted audits. The committee discussed a list of noncompliant counties, municipalities, and special districts, including the town of Rayford, which staff said had long-standing reporting problems, no apparent municipal services, and no response to repeated outreach. The committee voted to send a letter to the Union County legislative delegation encouraging a local bill to dissolve Rayford. It also approved staff recommendations to proceed against entities still missing required filings or missing audit information, with authority for the chair and vice chair to delay action if additional information is later provided in good faith.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Review Subcommittee met on Tuesday and reviewed the methods of finance, one alternative delivery
• This would be the review report, Senator.
• I'm looking at the review report, review subcommittee F-12. Where is what he's talking about?
• Okay, I'm talking about Section E of the review committee. The E422.
• Remaining items were reviewed as well.

Summary: The meeting began with a prayer, approval of the prior minutes, and a February 2026 revenue report from Carlos Silva of the Bureau of Legislative Research. He reported gross revenues of $5.36 billion and net collections of $4.5 billion, both above the prior year, and said the updated forecast showed a larger expected surplus than before. Members asked about declines in some tax categories, natural gas severance fees, and possible effects of inflation and international conflict; Silva generally attributed the changes to timing issues, prior tax cuts, refund activity, and price fluctuations, and said he could not speculate on future impacts. The committee then heard and adopted several subcommittee reports, including the Executive Committee, Administrative Rules, Claims Review, Game and Fish State Police, Higher Education, Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Hospital/Medicaid/Developmental Disabilities, Occupational Licensing Review, State Insurance Programs Oversight, and APER filings. Most reports were approved without objection. One budget classification transfer for the Commissioner of State Lands was reviewed and failed. The review report also led to discussion of several contracts, including DHS staffing contracts and a Department of Education security contract, with some items held or separated for individual votes. A major portion of the meeting focused on DHS and state staffing contracts for the Human Development Centers, Arkansas State Hospital, and related facilities. DHS officials said the contracts were on track against seven-year projections, but members expressed concern about heavy reliance on contract labor, vacancy rates, and the need to move workers onto state payrolls. Officials said they were preparing a recruitment and retention plan and described staffing levels, vacancies, and turnover. Members also questioned contract projections and federal-state funding matches, and several urged faster action to reduce contract labor costs. The committee also discussed a Department of Commerce reduction-in-force affecting the Division of Services for the Blind and Employment and Training. Secretary Hugh McDonald said the cuts were driven by funding shortfalls, over-obligation of funds, and federal issues, and that 27 positions would be permanently eliminated while furloughed employees would be recalled. Members raised concerns about service impacts, board appointments, and the division’s fiscal management. The meeting ended after the personnel report was adopted and APER was filed as reviewed, followed by adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Either rational basis review, strict scrutiny, or intermediate scrutiny, and why?
• Of review, but that's for a conversation for a different day.
• If it's found on a quality assurance review, there are no limitations.
• </c> is fine on a quality assurance review. is fine on a quality assurance review.
• </c> review, there are no limitations. review, there are no limitations. Thank<01:02:45.440><c> you.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The alternative urban areawide review process is a substitute kind of environmental review that’s designed
• when that review is complete.
• when that review um and they're reviewed when that review is<00:05:25.360><c> complete</c><00:05:26.360
• review processes.
• review processes.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Good afternoon, and welcome to today's outcome review hearing focused on AB 519.
• I saw him on the way in here, and I said, we're about to go review some outcomes.
• , assuming once a project...” “...that those projects would be reviewed.
• Bottom line is this should be part of everybody's performance reviews.
• You know, performance reviews. Everyone should have the same North Star.

Summary: The committee held an outcome review hearing on AB 519, focused on streamlining California’s affordable housing finance system. State housing officials described the work group process and the resulting report, which calls for a consolidated application and coordinated review process across HCD, CalHFA, TCAC, and CDLAC, while preserving a separate direct path for projects that do not need state subsidy. They said the goal is to reduce duplication, align timelines, and get projects to construction faster, with implementation now being carried forward through the new Housing Development Finance Committee (HDFC) and related reorganization changes. Officials from HCD, CalHFA, and HDFC said the new committee launched July 1 and is developing regulations, a unified application workbook, and review procedures, with public comment and hearings planned before final adoption. They emphasized a two-track system: one for projects needing state subsidy and one for tax credits/bonds only. Members also discussed the transition period in 2027, the need to clear existing pipeline projects first, and the possibility of construction financing tools. Committee members raised concerns about transparency, stakeholder feedback, and whether additional statutory changes would be needed; staff said current authority appears sufficient. Affordable housing developers and advocates generally supported the reforms but said the work must go beyond a single application. They urged fully funding projects, simplifying post-award functions, modernizing asset management, preserving a direct path for locally funded and rehab projects, and improving geographic equity, especially for rural and farmworker housing. Several witnesses stressed that the system also needs stable funding, including general fund support and the proposed housing bond, and that the state should continue engaging stakeholders as the new process rolls out. Public comment echoed those themes and included a veteran describing the difficulty of navigating housing and VA-related systems, reinforcing the hearing’s focus on simplifying access to housing resources.

Transcript Highlights:

• And at the back end, it's the concurrent review of the construction plans.
• And then having the concurrent review is really important as well. Thank you.
• And then having the concurrent review is really important as well. Thank you. Any questions?
• But it will help us get more units online if we have greater capacity for the review.
• Counties and cities are required to review and, if necessary, revise those comp plans.

Summary: The Senate Local Government Committee heard several land use and infrastructure bills. SB 5633 on subdivision of land drew the most discussion: staff described a broad rewrite that would move many subdivision decisions from legislative bodies to administrative personnel, limit or eliminate public hearings for preliminary plats, require notice to nearby landowners, set completeness and 100-day decision timelines, and streamline concurrent review of related permits. Builders, Realtors, and some cities supported the bill as a long-overdue modernization that could reduce delays and housing costs, while county and city representatives raised concerns about eliminating public hearings, implementation details, and local accountability. The committee also heard SB 6274 on street standards and frontage improvements, which would require jurisdictions to identify infrastructure barriers to infill and middle housing and periodically review street and frontage standards; supporters said frontage mandates can make housing infeasible, while local government witnesses warned about conflicts with safety, ADA, and transportation goals. SB 6309 on high-capacity transit permits would let Sound Transit apply for permits before acquiring property and before some land use decisions, and would allow certain development agreements and subdivision exemptions to speed transit delivery; Sound Transit and city representatives supported it, and the committee waived the five-day notice rule to hear it. The committee also took testimony on SB 6279, which would incorporate the wildland-urban interface code into the state building code after statewide wildfire maps are completed and require state and local coordination on defensible space and local amendments. Supporters framed it as needed wildfire resilience planning, while opponents from counties, builders, environmental groups, and local officials argued the bill was premature, too rigid, and potentially inconsistent with environmental laws, local conditions, and insurance realities; several asked for more local flexibility, clearer map processes, and changes to the timing and scope of adoption. SB 6291 would extend from two to four years the period during which local health jurisdiction staff may inspect on-site wastewater systems under supervision before certification; public health officials supported it as a workforce and training fix, saying the current timeline is too short and costly. The committee also heard SB 5903, SB 6016, SB 5820, SB 6132, and SB 6189 in executive session, adopted substitutes on some bills, and advanced SB 6016, SB 5820, SB 6132, and SB 6189 out of committee by due-pass votes, with SB 6016 receiving a substitute and a member noting support but remaining concerns.

Transcript Highlights:

• Reviews. So please come forward: Jeff Cunningham, Aline, Ms.
• Today we'll present the 2025 tax preference performance reviews.
• Next, the reviews are scheduled by a five-member citizen commission.
• into the brief reviews here.
• And thanks for doing the good work every year of reviewing our tax preferences.

Bills: SB5754

Keywords: public bank, state bank, finance, banking regulations, economic development, state investment, 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This item is presented for your review and requires no action on your part.
• This item is presented for your review and required. but less than $250,000.
• This item is presented for your review and requires no action on your part.
• Number five, review and approval of the following for the Sabine River Authority.
• Number five, review and approval of the following for the Sabine River Authority.

Keywords: 965, house, all

Summary: The committee received the May fiscal status statement from the Office of Planning and Budget, which reflected the updated Revenue Estimating Conference forecast. The revised forecast reduced the FY26 general fund excess available from $292.6 million to $179.7 million and lowered projected revenues across the five-year baseline, including a drop in FY27 available funds and larger out-year imbalances. The statement was approved without objection. Members then considered several Facility Planning and Control items and approved them without objection: a $3 million LSU Health Sciences Center-New Orleans project to build out space in the Center for Advanced Learning and Simulation; a $343,600 increase for HVAC upgrades at the Louisiana War Veterans Home warehouse in Jackson; and a $700,000 increase for Southern University’s A.A. Lenoir Law Center addition. The committee also received, for information only, five change orders over $50,000 but under $250,000. The committee approved contract extensions and funding actions for several agencies. Louisiana Economic Development received approval for one-year extensions and increases for marketing contracts with Zender Communications and Graham Group. The Department of Education’s contract amendment for the Louisiana Gator ESA program with Odyssey was reported favorably after questions about the procurement process and how the contract amount relates to student enrollment. The Sabine River Authority’s $9.5 million operating budget increase and its 2026–2027 budget were approved favorably, with members discussing the planned takeover of Cypress Bend Resort operations. The Department of Health’s HERO Fund round of 15 grant awards, totaling about $4.6 million and projected to create 541 new health care credentials, was also approved favorably. Finally, the Water Sector Commission’s recommendations were adopted, including an additional $619,850 for St. Mary Parish Water and Sewer Commission No. 5 and $1.5 million in emergency subfund assistance for the city of Tallulah, conditioned on a limited fiscal administration order. The committee also reviewed a cooperative agreement between the Louisiana Community and Technical College System and its facilities corporation related to Act 35 projects, and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• These same items, JLBC declined to review at its January 29th meeting.
• These same items, JLBC declined to review at its January 29th meeting. declined to review at its January
• We need to review this request for $2.85 million.
• We need to put this agenda item for review.
• So please do not do that and schedule this for review immediately. Thank you. Mr.

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They have to go through the same review process as any California school. We re-review them.
• Based on that, we review curriculum. We review faculty requirements.
• What is your sort of review process?
• What is your sort of review process?
• a fee increase as part of this sunset review.

Summary: The joint Assembly and Senate Business and Professions sunset oversight hearing focused first on the Board of Registered Nursing (BRN), with chairs emphasizing oversight, consumer protection, workforce access, and the need to evaluate whether licensing boards are functioning efficiently. BRN leadership reported major process improvements since the last sunset review, including faster license processing, streamlined enforcement, improved consumer satisfaction, and growth in nursing education enrollment. Members questioned the board extensively about nurse practitioner scope and supervision, international licensure, online nursing programs and clinical placements, military pathways, the 30-unit LVN-to-RN option, workforce shortages, diversity in nursing, and retention of new graduates. The board explained California’s tiered APRN system, the NCLEX and national certification requirements, clinical hour standards, and its role in approving programs and assigning nursing education consultants. Public testimony on the BRN was mixed: nurse practitioner, nurse midwife, and nurse anesthetist groups largely supported the sunset report and especially the proposed APRN-to-RN delegation language, while physician and hospital stakeholders raised concerns about out-of-state NP practice, specialty delegation, ratios, and the need for regulatory parity and clearer standards. Higher education representatives urged reduced duplication in documentation, more flexible clinical placement rules, and better coordination to address bottlenecks in placements and faculty hiring. The committee did not take a vote during the excerpted BRN discussion. The hearing then moved to the Physical Therapy Board of California, where the board’s president began an overview of the board’s mission, structure, vacancies, and public-protection role under the Physical Therapy Practice Act. The transcript excerpt ends before substantive questioning, testimony, or any action on the physical therapy item is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's just plan review. And the board does accept partial experience count for plan review.
• Okay, thank you. plan review. plan review.
• </c> I guess planning review. I guess planning review.
• </c> reviewer uh meets those qualifications. reviewer uh meets those qualifications.
• </c> members uh for your review. members uh for your review.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Labor met on February 19, 2026, and heard a series of bills largely focused on public employment, staffing, and professional licensing. Early measures included HB 2276 and HB 2472, both relating to Hawaii Employer-Union Health Benefits Trust Fund staff salaries, which were supported by trust fund representatives and received no opposition or questions. The committee also heard HB 1714 HD1 on housing, where the Hawaii Public Housing Authority testified with comments and the Deputy Attorney General raised concerns about the scope of autonomy, civil service, collective bargaining, and a possible separation-of-powers issue involving legislative approval of long-term contracts. The committee then considered several personnel and civil service bills. HB 2325 HD1, relating to civil service exempt positions at DLNR, drew support from DLNR and the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development, but HGEA opposed it and urged the department to seek other recruitment and retention solutions while keeping employees in civil service. HB 1541, relating to Department of Health positions, was supported by DOH on the grounds that the positions serve vulnerable populations and require specialized expertise, while HGEA opposed. HB 2140 HD1, relating to essential permanent positions, received support from OPSD, HGEA, and the Chamber of Commerce, with written comments from the city Department of Budget and Fiscal Services. HB 2315 HD1, relating to state employment benefits, was strongly supported by DOH, UPW, and HGEA as a recruitment and retention incentive; members questioned the pilot program, and DOH explained it would allow employees to cash out vacation leave earlier than current policy allows. The committee also heard HB 2295 on government contracting, with DOE support not present and IBEW 1186 in opposition. HB 1720, relating to professional engineers, drew strong support from the City and County of Honolulu’s planning department, which argued the bill would help with affordable housing review and only affect eligibility to sit for the licensure exam, but strong opposition from engineering industry and licensing board representatives, who warned it would lower licensing standards and harm reciprocity; members questioned both sides about plan review experience and licensure requirements. HB 2367, relating to employment earnings and pay transparency, received strong support from the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission, AAUW, the Commission on the Status of Women, and others, who said transparency helps small businesses and retention, while written opposition came from the Maui Chamber of Commerce and NFIB. Finally, HB 1935, relating to personal information, drew comments from the Attorney General and the Campaign Spending Commission about implementation burdens and disclosure requirements, with UPW supporting the home-address redaction portion but opposing the broader disclosure process; additional written testimony was noted from OIP, the League of Women Voters, Public Press Law Center, HGEA, and DCCA.

Transcript Highlights:

• Seeing none, without objection, the rule is reviewed and approved.
• Seeing none, without objection, this rule is reviewed and approved.
• Seeing none, without objection, this rule is reviewed and approved.
• Seeing none, without objection, the rule is reviewed and approved.
• Seeing none, without objection, the rule is reviewed and approved.

Summary: The Administrative Rules Subcommittee reviewed several agency rules and most were approved without objection. The Department of Agriculture repealed rules tied to the now-repealed Arkansas Catfish Processors Fair Practice Act. The Department of Human Services updated Medicaid policy to clarify child support enforcement treatment for pregnant women, remove the word “forcible” from rape/incest good-cause language, and eliminate a 90-day waiting period for ARKids B after loss of group coverage; members highlighted the significance of the language change and asked for a quick-reference eligibility chart. DHS Medical Services also received approval for a CMS cell and gene therapy model rule for sickle cell drugs and a technical Medicaid-assisted medication-assisted treatment update that was described as cost-neutral and non-substantive. The Department of Labor and Licensing presented several rules implementing recent acts and internal cleanup changes. These included procedures for local construction plan disputes under Act 591, Contractors Licensing Board amendments raising the restricted commercial license threshold from $750,000 to $1.5 million and allowing deferral of owner-complaint investigations during civil litigation, and a similar residential contractors change. The HVACR Licensing Board presented broader revisions under Act 746, including grammar and cleanup changes, elimination of the Class C license with transfer of existing holders to Class B, expansion of allowable work limits, a change to continuing education from four hours annually to eight hours per three-year code cycle, and clarification on training, child labor, and licensing issues. Several members questioned the practical impact of the HVAC changes, but the rule was approved. The committee also granted the Department of Inspector General’s request for exclusion from rulemaking reporting under Act 473, concluding that no rule was necessary because the act already defines the key terms and review process for foreign-adversary cultural exchange agreements. In addition, the Arkansas State Library’s report recommending continuation of its existing rules was accepted. During the status updates on outstanding 2023-session rulemaking, Education explained delays were due to overlapping 2025 amendments and the large volume of rules, while members expressed concern about the length of time since enactment; staff noted only a small number of 2023 rules remain outstanding. The meeting ended after written 2025-session updates were received with no further questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• What we found in our review of DHS's grants management practices was that, of the 41 grant reviewers
• What we found in our review of DHS's grants management practices was that, of the 41 grant reviewers
• Grant reviewers so the individuals<00:08:20.560><c> who</c><00:08:20.759><c> review</c><00:08:21.199>
• <c> Grant</c> individuals who review Grant individuals who review Grant applications<00:08:22.759><c>
• </c><00:08:46.720><c> within</c> that of the 41 Grant reviewers within that of the 41 Grant reviewers

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• TDI is still going to review 100% of the rate filings that are made that are subject to our review.
• So in those reviews.
• Well, no, I'm talking about we've done it once, the actuarial review. Oh, the actuarial reviews.
• For auto, 34% are reviewed and closed within 30 days and 74% are reviewed and closed within 90 days.
• We review all their comments.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> Grants Management officials to review Grants Management officials to review and<00:04:10.879><c>
• </c><00:08:53.680><c> MHC</c> to serve on its review panels. MHC to serve on its review panels.
• For example, MHC reviewed 64 review panel applications for our cultural heritage grant line.
• For example, MHC reviewed 64 review panel applications for our cultural heritage grant line.
• </c> select folks for the review panel. select folks for the review panel.

Bills: HF4148

Keywords: Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council, Outdoor Heritage Fund, executive director, natural resources, conservation, wetlands, prairies, forests, wildlife habitat, fish and game, bipartisan hiring, interview panel, legislative branch, Minnesota Statutes 97A.056, administrative expenses, nonpartisan staff, council governance, environment and natural resources, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> the New Hampshire building code review the New Hampshire building code review board<00:52:21.799
• ><c> which</c> starting our review now thank you which starting our review now thank you which will<04
• </c><04:25:01.279><c> and</c> which they have already reviewed and which they have already reviewed and
• then it comes here for your review then it comes here for your review<04:25:24.159><c> and</c><04:25
• As I said, the Building Code Review Committee really, they're the experts, and they should be reviewing

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 216, which Representative Carol Maguire described as a fix to a workers’ compensation/retirement “glitch.” The bill would remove the current limit that only one year of workers’ compensation time can be credited as retirement service time. Maguire argued the limit is arbitrary and affects only a very small number of grievously injured workers, while committee members asked about the fiscal impact, available data, and whether the change could affect workers’ compensation rates or incentives. Mark Kavar of the New Hampshire Retirement System said Labor could not provide data on how many people exceed a year on weekly indemnity benefits, so the fiscal note used a conservative estimate that could be scaled down; he also explained that workers’ comp is not earnable compensation, which is why service credit stops after a year, and noted that many long-term cases move into disability retirement or lump-sum settlements. The committee closed the hearing, entered executive session, and voted ought to pass on HB 216 by a 13-0 roll call, sending it to consent and noting it would also go to Finance. The committee then acted on House Bill 85, adopting Amendment 0037 and then voting ought to pass as amended by another 13-0 roll call. The bill was described as allowing second-year respiratory therapy students to work under supervision using the skills they have already learned, with support from the Hospital Association and no opposition noted. Finally, the committee took up House Bill 267, the animal chiropractors bill. Members said the bill had been approved previously but was vetoed because of a defect; the problem has now been corrected, and the bill is intended to reduce delays caused by requiring veterinary referrals before chiropractors can treat animals. The committee voted ought to pass 13-0 and placed the bill on consent.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:34:29.919><c> process</c> review process review process handled<00:34:31.919><c> at</c><00:34:32.240
• review review and ability<00:36:38.960><c> to</c><00:36:39.280><c> come</c><00:36:39.520><c> up</c><
• </c> county projects reviewed under 6E-42. county projects reviewed under 6E-42.
• </c> permit technicians and plan reviewers permit technicians and plan reviewers with<03:51:48.319><c
• </c> because it just wasn't ready for review. because it just wasn't ready for review.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Do we have any minutes to review? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
• This came out of our Title 18 review that I know a lot of you took part in during the summer, where we
• The execution protocols developed by the director are not subject to judicial review, rulemaking, or
• I guess my concern is... ...rulemaking, judicial review, or other provisions of the chapter.
• I think we do need to codify the exemption from judicial review because it's becoming pretty annoying

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes from Thursday, January 29, 2026. Members were also told the next meeting would be the following Friday at 1:30 p.m. The agenda included three introduction hearings and one bill hearing. The committee introduced three RS drafts. Representative Monks presented RS 331-26C1, which would update an antiquated justifiable homicide provision by replacing references to specific family or household relationships with “another person.” Representative Shirts presented RS 331-1-1-1, a Title 18 cleanup bill repealing chapters on camcorder piracy, tape piracy, and motion picture fair bidding, which he said were outdated and apparently never prosecuted. Representative Scott presented RS 33036, which would create a formal process for the legislature to notify the Idaho Supreme Court by resolution when court rules appear to conflict with statute or affect substantive rights; all three RS drafts were moved for introduction and approved. The committee then heard House Bill 525 on execution procedures. Representative Skog and the Department of Correction said the bill would extend confidentiality protections and make explicit that execution protocols developed by the director are not subject to rulemaking or judicial review, describing it as a clarification of existing practice and recent court interpretations. Representative Rubel raised concerns that the language was too broad and could limit transparency and oversight, while other members noted the wording may need clarification to reflect only the development of procedures, not the procedures themselves. After discussion, the sponsor agreed that clarifying the language would be helpful. A motion to send the bill to the floor with a due pass recommendation was replaced by a motion to send House Bill 525 to General Orders, which passed.

Transcript Highlights:

• ><c> and</c> We reviewed grant agreements and We reviewed grant agreements and amendments. amendments
• > closeout</c> We also reviewed grant closeout We also reviewed grant closeout evaluations evaluations
• ><c> grant</c><00:12:32.160><c> payments</c> We reviewed 44 individual grant payments We reviewed 44
• </c> reviewed before payments are issued. reviewed before payments are issued.
• They're<00:36:18.040><c> reviewing</c><00:36:19.160><c> um</c> They're reviewing um They're reviewing

Keywords: 1183, house