Senate Floor

The Senate will begin the 2023-24 2nd extraordinary session that will come to order. The secretary, please call the roll. Excuse me, please. I'll repeat my instructions again to Members who weren't listening. As each name is called. As your name is called, we're asking that you give a verbal acknowledgement that you're here. Okay? So would secretary, please slowly call the roll?

[Roll Call]

Do we have a quorum, Members? A quorum is present. Would Members and our guests be on the rail here in our hearing room? Please rise. Will we let in prayer this morning by Senator Portantino? After which, please remain standing for the pledge of allegiance to the flag. Senator Portantino.

Thank you, Mister President and Members. I read from Joyce Rupp. Heart of love, in out of the ordinary. Heart of love, source of all kindness. Teacher of the ways of goodness. You are hidden in the pockets of daily life waiting to be discovered. Heart of comfort, sheltering wings of love. Refuge for sad and lonely ones.

You embrace all who bear loss, gathering our tears with care. Hard of understanding. One who gazes upon the imperfect, the incomplete, the flawed, the weak. You never stop extending mercy. Heart of generosity, abundance of insight and hope. Daily you offer us gifts of growth leading to continual transformation. Heart of deepest peace, resting place at a core of our being. You are waiting always for our return to the sacred home. Amen.

Amen. Members, please join me in the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of. The United States of America and to. The republic for which it stands, one. Nation under God and indivisible, with liberty. And justice for all.

Members and guests, it's so nice to see you this morning. As you can see, we are not meeting in the typical place, the Senate Floor. We're meeting in room 1200 in our swing space. We want to thank the staff who have made all these great accommodations for us.

So that we can continue our work because we are in this space and some of our common procedures are not in place in terms of desire to speak. If you do want to speak on an item on our agenda today, please raise your hand.

I will provide some level of acknowledgement so you don't have to keep it up. So we'll put your name on the list. The microphones to your right would be the place in which we're asking Members, I believe, to speak from a presentation. Microphone is on your left for that purpose.

All right, unless there's any questions, we're going to move to our agenda without objection. We're going to move to Assembly third reading, and we're going to take up file item number two. This is Assembly Bill one by Assemblymember Hart. Senator Skinner is floor managing this measure. We'd like to invite her to come up and present the Bill.

Secretary, please read

Assembly Bill 1 by Assembly Member Hart an act relating to Energy.

Yes, Senator Skinner.

May I turn this way so I can, you can face.

Any direction you wish.

Appreciate that. Whoops. Okay, Members, I'm pleased to present ABX2 1. On behalf of Assemblymembers Hart and Majority Leader Cecilia Aguiar Curry, ABX 21 will give the Energy Commission's new division of Petroleum market oversight, which was established last year with the passage of SB1 2. Last year or the year before getting mixed up.

But anyway, when we passed SBX1 2 additional authorities to help prevent gasoline price spikes. SBX1 2, the original Bill, directed the Energy Commission to analyze California's gasoline market and the factors that contribute to price spikes at the pump.

Based on the information gathered over the last year, experts at the new division have concluded that the primary causes of price spikes were when global crude prices rose and when there were shortages of refined gasoline. Now, while global crude prices are not something we can control, a shortage of refined gasoline is something that we can prepare for.

These shortages occurred when oil refineries did not maintain adequate supplies of gasoline during peak driving periods, which mostly occur during our summer months between Labor Day, I mean Memorial Day and Labor Day, or when refineries were shut down for maintenance.

In response, this Bill, ABX2 1, gives the CEC new tools to help ensure adequate gasoline supplies and to protect consumers from gasoline price spikes. So just like the Federal Government has a strategic petroleum Reserve, ABX2 1 will enable California to have strategic gasoline reserves if it passes the muster. And we'll discuss that in a moment.

So that when demand at the pump is high, we don't face a gasoline shortage, which can drive up prices. ABX2 1 also enables the division to coordinate and monitor planned and unplanned refinery outages. CECs analysis found that if refineries plan ahead for the summer division driving season, there is likely to be adequate gasoline supply for California's needs.

Gasoline shortages over the last couple of years caused prices at times to spike between $40 to gallon. In 2023, for example, there were 63 days when California refineries maintained less than 15 days of gas supply. The resulting price spikes cost the average driver about $10 more each time they went to the pump to fill their vehicle, a cost to all Californians in a given year of about $2 billion.

ABX2 1 gives the CEC authority to develop regs that could require and note that I said could could require refinery maintenance to be scheduled to avoid multiple refinery shutdowns at the same time and during times when gasoline demand is highest, and could require refineries to maintain a minimum inventory of gasoline supply.

And I state could because ABX2 1 does not in itself mandate these provisions, and in fact, it contains a number of thresholds that the CEC must meet before such regs could be issued.

So, for example, the CEC would have to demonstrate that the benefits of the regs outweigh potential costs to consumers, that the regs would lead to greater fuel supply in California's market, that they would lead to lower average retail prices on an annual basis, that they would reduce the severity of retail price volatility, that it would maximize the use of existing storage to avoid the cost of building new storage facilities and that the regs would provide a process where the CEC could, if they enacted a minimum inventory, where it could, waive that requirement.

Additionally, the Bill requires the CEC to annually evaluate these factors and to report to the Legislature as to whether the regulations meet the cost effectiveness test. It also contains provisions to protect the safety of our communities and of our workers so our communities near oil refineries and our workers at oil refineries.

And it does this by ensuring that our existing refinery safety measures remain in place and that no new regs could overturn any existing safety protocols. It also gives refiners, workers, refinery workers, a seat at the table, including them on the stakeholder group that must be consulted when and if regs are developed.

It also ensures that in emergency situations, workers still have the ability to shut down a refinery for safety. So as a final safeguard, ABX2 1 also contains a hard sunset date of January 1, 2033. Keep in mind that ABX2 1 does not ask oil refiners to do anything that they haven't done before.

During the pandemic, for example, California refineries routinely had substantial quantities of refined gasoline product on hand, higher than what the CEC has projected may be needed as a minimum supply to avoid price spikes.

And during winter months, the data shows that California's oil refiners routinely keep substantial amounts of refined gasoline on hand, much more than they've kept during summer and fall when driving demand is highest. My district contains and is adjacent to four of California's largest refineries.

And having lived through a number of dangerous refinery incidents, for me, safety is paramount. It's why I joined my predecessor, Senator Hancock, to author legislation that put in law rules about maintenance and refinery safety. This Bill does not overturn those rules and maintains and strengthens California's commitment to worker safety and to the safety of our communities. At its core, ABX2 1 is a very important consumer protection measure. And with that, I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Senator Skinner, is there discussion or debate on this measure? Members, any discussion or debate? I don't have great sight lines here, so if you have a hand up, please make sure I can see it. All right. I see. Senator Dahle, come on up to the microphone. You're first up.

Thank you, Mister President. Members, I through a two and a half hour hearing on Monday regarding this Bill. First I want to say I have no, I can't understand why we're actually having a special session. This Bill doesn't do anything urgent. There's nothing here that is urgent.

This is just quite frankly, in my opinion, the ability for the Governor to lead the Legislature around by the noes in the legislation itself, if you go to Section 253.25, 354.4, it talks about giving the CEC the ability to regulate. That's what this is about. This is going to allow the CEC in the future to be able to regulate and also be able to fine from $100,000 a day to $1.0 million a day. I don't know how that's going to drive down the cost of, of oil and gas in California.

On top of this piece of legislation, we're going to have other legislation that's already enacted that doesn't allow us to bring ships into port, which is going to constrain the supply of gas and oil in California.

And the point about COVID yeah, nobody was moving around California during COVID There was definitely, they were over filled because we weren't using fuel. Nobody was moving goods and services the other thing I want to point out, which I've been pointing out all year, is the CEC is funded by electricity ratepayers.

This is a Bill that is going to do stuff in the gasoline and fuel side of it. So electricity rate payers are going to pay for all this work to be done through the CEC. This Bill gives the CEC a lot of power, just like the California Air Resources Board, which is going to meet next month. And look at the low carbon fuel standards. And in their estimates, may raise gasoline prices by 47 cents a gallon next year.

Members, I just want to say we're talking about price gouging in the first special session we had earlier this year, and the Governor now is going to get involved in telling us when we're going to shut down the refineries and do maintenance. The trades were not on board. They spoke in opposition of this Bill.

I want to talk about who's getting gouged the most, who's the windfall profits from oil and gas in California. This is from the CEC website. You can all go take a look at it. They said during the Committee, 38 million gallons of gasoline are used every day in California, almost a gallon per person.

There's approximately $1.42 a gallon that is taxed, whether it's local, state, or federal tax. So who's making the money? Who's gouging? Californians. For every gallon of gas, it's the government. $1.42 for every single gallon of gas goes to taxes, whether it's state, local, or federal.

So when you want to talk about gouging, why don't we drop that tax? That'll help eliminate some of the cost for Californians. It's $54 million every single day that the taxpayers get from a gallon, from the gallons of gas in just in California. That does not include the diesel that's burned in California, which is over a billion gallons a year as well. So, Members, I just want to say I'm in opposition to the Bill. Obviously, I don't think we needed to have this special section session. I think it's a waste of taxpayers dollars.

And I've stated earlier that I think the Governor is just leading the Legislature around by the noes. There's no reason for a special session. There's no reason to get involved in this part. If you want to actually help Californians drop the gas price, take the taxes off, for Christ's sakes. I urge you, no vote.

Thank you, Senator Dahle, any further discussion or debate? Members, any further discussion or debate. Senator Alvarado-Gil.

Thank you, Mister President. I rise in opposition of Assembly Bill 1, which will put further constraints on California's petroleum industry. I heard the idiom 'pass the muster,' and it is an idiom that is foreign to me as English is my second language. But I did look it up, and it talks about measuring up to expectations.

And when I think about that, I think about Californians paying the highest gas prices in the nation with an average of gallon. I just took my family on a road trip, which is unheard of road trips here in California anymore, to Yosemite, one of the most beautiful national parks in our state, and just in gasoline, it was over $250. According to the California Department of Food and Agriculture.

California's pay upwards of 30% more for food, averaging $450 per week, which puts further pressure on families on the same road trip to Yosemite. The cost of food for a two night, three day trip to Yosemite was over $600.

Now, if your average family in California can't even get in the car, throw the kids in the cardinal couple of hot dogs and hamburgers and hit the road to enjoy the natural outdoors of our state, isn't that an indicator that we are not passing the muster?

Hardworking Californians, like my constituents, are already struggling to make ends meet, and now they're forced to make hard choices of whether to buy groceries to feed their families or put gas in their vehicles. And this is nothing new.

I've been serving with this body for two years, but yet I'm saying the same thing, which means we have not solved crisis, we have not put money back into consumers pockets, and we have not enabled the California family to thrive.

Now we're all sitting here in the extraordinary session, which to me is a gross negligence and misuse of public tax dollars, because to get everybody here in the room to have this conversation, we could have sent 100 families to Yosemite to visit the natural park.

We all know that gas prices are an all time high due to regulations, not the gas company greed. We know that because we talk about it. According to data from the California Energy Commission, taxes, mandates on production, special fuel blends, environmental program costs, and mandatory refinery upgrades continue the cost pressures on producers.

This adds yet another regulation that's already long list of just more cost to fuel production to further increase gas prices. This Bill is just another one of those mandates with no clear process on how it will be implemented or who will pay for it. But we all know the answer, and our constituents know the answer.

Californians will be paying for this. Now, if we truly wanted to lower the prices for consumers, we would do it because we know how to do it. That is what is expected of us, and that is what passing the muster test means. We need to stop talking in idioms and start fixing our state. That means that this Bill is not an acceptable solution. It is not satisfactory, it is absent of careful scrutiny, and it needs more evaluation.

So if we truly are going to pass the muster, as we say in this Bill, I ask that this body cease doing the governor's bidding because we have a long list of bills that would prove cost effectiveness to our consumers. We've got it. It's in our hands. We've all got them.

So at what point do we say no to the Governor? And we say no to these extraordinary sessions, which this is my second in two years, and take back our power as a state Legislature, independent of the Governor. This Bill is unacceptable. We know we can do better. We must do better by being here today. I know your goal is to do better. So I respectfully ask for a no vote as we move forward. Thank you.

Thank you, Senator. Any further discussion or debate, Members? Senator Grove, I see your hand. Anybody else want to get their hand up so I can make sure I have them in the queue? I see. Got it. Okay. Senator Grove, the floor is yours.

Thank you. Mister President and colleagues, I rise in opposition of this Bill, which intends to reduce the gas price volatility. But I compel you to understand that it will do just the opposite. On one hand, this Bill is exactly what the public has come to expect.

With us as a legislative body, we can routinely kick complicated issues to our unelected bureaucratic agencies and give them full authority to do, implement regulations that will be harmful to our constituents. On the other hand, the Bill is what the public, like I said, has come to expect.

And in respect to this Bill, it really doesn't do a whole lot, since most of the specifics will be determined at a later date by the California Energy Commission. But on the other hand, the broad regulatory authority this Bill is giving, the California Energy Commission will undoubtedly increase prices to the millions of people that we serve and that rely on gasoline to drop their children off for school or to go to work every single day.

The fact that the storage requirement decreases prices isn't my conclusion or big oil's conclusion. It's what the staff at the Energy Commission believes will happen. There's also a likely scenario that gasoline shortages will take effect because of the $1.0 million a day penalty that could potentially be charged to refiners.

And that would be on a downstream situation, which I'll explain. While the Administration claims that the increased storage will have saved consumers money by smoothing out gas spikes, there's no evidence to support that theory. And it certainly didn't factor in the increased cost associated with the additional storage and downstream supply shortages.

Like most of the things done in heavy regulatory can of government, this is bound to increase the price of gasoline instead of lower it. It's easy to make the argument that California has the highest cost of gasoline for this very reason.

The low carbon fuel standards, AB 5, which restricted our trucking and transportation and increased the cost of trucking and transportation requirements. Our special blend and many of these others regulatory processes have driven up the cost of California's fuel, making it the highest in the nation.

There's a handful of major refineries that are still left here in the State of California 50 years ago. We have to. We used to have 50, we used to have a dozen more refineries 50 years ago, and we've lost them in the last 50 years. A handful of major refineries are left. And to shut down the ripple, if just a few shut down, the ripple effects will be catastrophic to our consumers. Our refineries also provide about 90% of Nevada's fuel and also 50% of oil's, Arizona's fuel.

So I do have a question that I think all of us need to answer, and the media should probably press every Legislator who votes for this Bill on this question. We have the same supply chain. California doesn't get a different supply chain for its crude oil than it does if it supplies it to California, Arizona, or Nevada.

So we have a different. We have the same supply chain. We get it from foreign countries. It comes across our ecosystem. We've talked about that several times. We don't produce it here in California anymore. We can't get permits specifically in my district.

So these ships come from Ecuador, they come from Iraq, they come from Saudi Arabia, and they come across our ecosystem. They come to our ports, our ports, and our labor and our unions. They offload that product and they take it to our refineries via trucking and transportation. That fuel gets processed in that supply chain.

Same refineries that put it into trucks, some pipeline and railcar, but mostly trucking and transportation. And they provide that to our retailers or our downstream facilities, which are the gas stations that all of our consumers use every single day to put fuel in their car. Those same trucks, that same process, the same point of origin, the same point of origin which the product originates from, the same process it goes through. There's no difference.

Can drop off fuel in Blythe, California, at a gas station and it's over $5 a gallon for gas as of yesterday's average, the day before his average, last month's average. They can cross that state line into Arizona and save $1.30 a gallon per gas per gallon. $1.30. What's magic about that state line?

It's the same process, the same supply chain, the same strength of transportation system. You can't say we use union labor and they don't because they use union labor. Process that fuel that they get as well. But once they cross that state line, it's $1.30 a gallon cheaper. What's magic about that state line?

It's the same truck that stops in Blythe, drives across the border and goes to Bullhead City and drives to their gas station, and it's a dollar 30 gallon cheaper. In Nevada, it's like 90 cents a gallon cheaper. What's the magic of about that state line? You guys say it's not your policies, it's not AB 5, it's not.

It's not the low carbon fuel standards. It's not letting CARB regulate the industry to a point where they have to increase fuel prices. It's not any part of that. You won't admit to that. You won't admit to the subsidized green energy technology that goes, and I'm not against green energy.

My county produces 58% of the green energy in this state and there are only 58 counties. You need us for that green energy, and we produce 70% of the state's fossil fuels. Let's just figure out what makes it magic to reduce at $1.30 a gallon when you cross that state line and reduce our price to our constituents in the same manner. The other issue that my colleague from Bieber brought up is the issue about the CEC being funded by our PG&E bills.

We have the highest cost of living. We have the highest housing prices. If you can afford a phone, you can't a home, you can't afford the insurance, and you can't afford to fuel the the gas in your car. If you can afford the insurance, you can't afford the PG&E Bill. People are getting electricity, rates are tripling. I had one person tell me six months ago their PG&E rate or their PG&E Bill was $600 a month and now it's $1,400 a month.

All of those additional funds that we put as when we pass policies to affect the utility rates and have our consumers pay, our constituents pay for that funds, the California Energy Commission. So those are two things that we need to look at. Number one, it's unaffordable to live in California.

It's the policies that come out of this building that makes it happen. Sending this regulatory authority to an unelected bureaucratic agency is just going to increase the cost of fuel. Nevada and Arizona, where we supply their fuel almost 90% in one case, has already figured out how to reduce it $1.30 a gallon.

I suggest that we reach out to Nevada and Arizona, we find out what they're doing, and we instantly reduce our fuel costs to our constituents. And I respectfully ask for a no vote on this Bill that obviously will increase the cost fuel to all of our constituents.

Thank you very much, Senator Grove. Next up, call us up front. Senator Caballero.

Thank you very much, Mister President and Members, I rise to support ABX2 1, Members, we all know that gasoline prices are too high for California workers and their family. They eat into household incomes, making it harder to get to and from work and to affect the cost of goods and services and retail.

Spikes in costs are detrimental and they hurt everybody. And even though petroleum is produced in the Central Valley and in my district, prices at the pump are often higher than in the urban areas of the state. The cost of fuel impacts the poor and disadvantaged communities much more so than many others, and affects not only families in my district, but our farmers, farmworkers, and the bounty of agricultural produce that comes from the Central Valley region.

As we've heard in our policy and fiscal Committee hearings this week, the causes of those higher prices are extremely complex. Giving a state agency broad authority over gasoline supply and demand can be a challenge, and it raises some valid issues of concern. There's no question about it.

I support this measure not so much because it confers new authority to the Energy Commission, but because at its core it is designed to help control unnatural and costly price hike that hurt consumers. And it also establishes clear guide rails on the authority in order to protect our refinery workers, local communities, and to ensure that the Commission's action must benefit consumers, must benefit consumers so they can take action or not, depending on those findings.

Among other things, the Bill requires that any regulation adopted must, and I quote, protect the health and safety of employees, local communities and the public, end of quote. That's the finding that they must meet. Regulators must demonstrate that regulations will increase, not decrease supply.

And that it will lead to lower average retail prices that would exist that wouldn't exist without the minimum level of inventories. Finally, they must determine that regulations affecting the minimal levels of inventory will reduce the severity of the retail price spikes, which will help California's working family.

So there are a number of findings that have to be met in order for this to be implemented, and this is a balanced approach. And for those reasons, I support ABX2 1 and its protection against higher gas prices for consumers and for the new worker safety protections amended into the Bill by the Senate. So I respectfully ask for your aye vote today.

Thank you, Senator Caballero. Does any other Member wish to be heard on this measure? See no hands up. Senator Skinner, you may close.

Thank you so much and thank you Members for your comments. So in close as I mentioned in my opening comments, just like the Federal Government has a strategic petroleum Reserve, ABX2 1 will enable California, if the CEC meets the findings that are built into the Bill, to have strategic gasoline reserves so that when demand at the pump is high, we don't face a gasoline shortage that can drive up prices, which in recent years have raised the price of a gallon of gas between $40 to gallon.

ABX2 1 also enables the division, as we've discussed, the ability to coordinate and monitor planned and unplanned refinery outages so that maintenance maintenance occurs and that maintenance is done so that we are safe. But maintenance is not done by multiple refineries at a time when we might need supply the most.

And then, as has been mentioned before, before the new requirements are adopted, the CEC has to demonstrate that the regulations benefits outweigh the potential cost to consumers, among other things, that the maintenance to be scheduled would avoid shutdowns at times, as I mentioned, when the demand is highest and potentially that minimum supply requirement.

But again, only if the CEC can make all of the findings, as my colleague from Modesto Merced most clearly articulated just now, ABX2 1 provisions are also designed to protect safety, the safety of our oil refineries, their workers and the surrounding communities. And with that, I ask for your aye vote on this important measure to protect our California households.

Thank you, Senator Skinner. All debate having ceased. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Secretary, please call the absent Members.

[Roll Call]

Eyes 23 knows nine the measure passes. Members, we're going to move next. Next, without objection, we're going to go to Senate third reading file item number one. This is Senate Concurrent Resolution number two. Senator Mcguire is prepared. Secretary, please read.

Senate Concurrent Resolution two by Senator Mcguire relative to final adjournment of the 2023-24 2nd extraordinary recession of the Legislature.

Senator McGuire,

Thank you so much, Mister President. Colleagues, today I rise to present SCRX 2-2. This is despite strong objection by Senator Padilla, who would love to be able to stay here for many more days along with Senator Umberg. This once passed by our house and the Assembly will adjourn the second extraordinary session.

Mister President would respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you. Senator McGuire, any discussion or debate on this measure and on this resolution, any discussion. Senator Ochoa Bogh you're recognized.

Good morning. Thank you, Mister President. Members, I rise in opposition to this resolution because I believe that the Administration is engaging in political theatrics rather than having an open and honest discussion about how California's taxes and fees contribute to our rising fuel cost.

If we were truly committed to finding solutions, leadership would have allowed the body to consider more than one Bill during this session. But instead, all other proposals were either not referred to Committee or blocked from being introduced.

Every proposal should have been put to a vote before the Senate Rules Committee to ensure we are not undermining the legislative process. A process that should always be transparent so elected officials can be held accountable. If the process had been followed, we could have saved average Californians between $7 and $11 every time they filled up their tanks.

For the 550,000 workers whose commute is longer than 90 minutes, this would have meant an annual savings of more than $500.

Senator, I want to just remind you that the resolution at hand is the subject matter of debate. So if you could please keep your remarks to the resolution at hand.

Thank you. So, going back, I'm disappointed that our leadership did not allow me and others to introduce bills to ease the unnecessary financial burden imposed on drivers and to address the broader issue of affordability in the state. I strongly ask for a no vote.

Thank you, Senator. Any other discussion. Members on the resolution at hand, see no further discussion. Senator McGuire, you may close.

Thank you so much, Mister President. Mister President, Senate rules are well established. They're used equally, they're used appropriately. And per the governor's resolution, proposals weren't germane. Would respectfully ask for an aye vote for the adjournment.

Thank you, Senator McGuire. All debate having ceased secretary, please call the roll.

Roll Call

Please call the absent Members one last time.

On a vote of 25 to 8, the resolution is adopted.

All right, there we go. I'm not going to end with a trivia question, just a prediction that the Mets are going to beat the Yankees in the World Series in six games. And, Mister President, the desk is clear.

First and foremost, I want to say thank you so much, Senator, for your years of service. I want to say thank you to the Senator from. For your years of service to all of our outgoing Members. If we can please give them a round of applause and thank them for the service to the people of California. Mister President, we said that we would work quickly. We said that we would work efficiently, and that's what the Senate has done.

But we've also taken time to have thoughtful and respectful debates, and that's on an issue that is so impactful to 40 million Californians, and that's the issue of gas prices.

I want to say thank you so much to the Senator from Gardena for chairing our Special Committee on fuel supplies, the Senator from Bieber for being the Vice Chair of the Committee. I want to say thank you to the Senator from Berkeley for all of her work that she has put into this issue for nearly two years.

We are grateful to Senator Skinner and for stepping in to be able to chair the Senate Appropriations Committee. And I would be remiss if I did not. And we did not congratulate Senator Caballero, who just celebrated her 40th anniversary. Congratulations. If we can give a round of. Applause.

I want to take a moment to say thank you to the desk staff. We have the best staff in the world. I am so grateful to you, Bernie. Thank you, Hysani, to the entire team, to our secretary.

It has taken an enormous amount of effort and energy to be able to get us in here and in the beautiful digs of room 1200 as the new lights are going in.

And I just want to end it right here and say how grateful I am no matter what side of the aisle you are on, I want to say thank you. Thank you for taking time to be able to come into Sacramento, to be able to move forward with this special session. Valuable time away from the communities that you so proudly serve and deliver for each day. Mister President, until next time. The next floor session is scheduled for Monday, December 2, 2024 at 12:00 p.m.

Thank you, Senator McGuire. The 23-24 2nd extraordinary session is now adjourned.