►
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
D
B
B
It's
brought
by
the
select
committee
on
blockchains.
I
don't
know
mr
kaufman
or
representative
olson.
You
can
both
come
up
if
you'd
like
all
right.
Whichever
would
like
to
present
the
bill
to
the
committee
proceed
at
your
convenience.
E
Have
mr
kaufman
give
some
opening
remarks
and
then
I'd
like
to
I'd
like
to
go
through
walk
through
the
bill
with
you,
so
I
can
get
some
good
practice
with
it,
mr
chairman
and
but
we'll
both
be
here
to
answer
questions.
E
So
this
is
an
engrossed
bill
and
when
I
walk
through
the
bill,
I'll
show
you
I'll
show
the
change
to
the
committee.
This
is
a
for-profit
public
benefit,
corporation
law
and
just
to
I'm
gonna,
try
to
so
I
to
define
what
that
really
is.
You
know
outside
of,
of
course,
the
bill
itself.
Let's
just
talk
about
it
in
a
in
a
real
general
perspective,
and
I
think
one
way
I
like
to
look
at
it
is,
I
start
with
what
it's
not
and
then
I
I
work
into
what
it
is.
E
E
It's
essentially
a
corporation
that
has
a
balance
between
a
pecuniary
interest,
profits
to
its
shareholders
and
some
public
benefit,
and
that's
what
it
is.
So
then
the
next
question
is
why
and
there's
there's
some
legal
reasons
why?
But
I
want
to
give
you
the
non-legal
reason
why
just
real,
simple,
non-legal
reason
why
and
I
should
back
up
and
say
you
know,
and
I'm
sure
mr
kaufman
will
would
have
a
lot
more
information
on
this
as
well.
But
you
know
delaware
has
what
they
call
b
corps.
E
So
that's
essentially
what
we're
talking
about
benefit
corporations,
this
whole
other
class
of
corporation,
and
so
one
of
the
whys,
of
course,
is
to
keep
us
up
to
speed
and
in
competition
with
delaware.
Always
we
can
finally
claim
the
the
the
crown
for
all
things:
corporate
and
company,
wise
management
and
formation,
but
the
main-
why
that
I
like
to
think
about,
is
simply
what
it
does
is
allow
for
a
corporation
to
exist
again
for
profit.
E
So
it's
not
a
nonprofit,
but
it
allows
it
to
exist
for
profit
and
have
a
strong
message
of
what
it
believes
in.
That
is
a
public
benefit,
because
the
law
requires
that
to
be
in
its
articles,
whatever
that
public
benefit
is
because
it
requires
it
to
provide
notices
to
its
shareholders
and
notices
essentially
to
the
world
on
why
it
does
what
it
does.
I
see
that
as
the
number
one
reason
that,
if
I
I
want
to
have
a
corporation,
that
I
want
to
provide
a
living
for
myself.
E
Of
course,
if
I'm,
if
I'm
interested
in
that
company,
now,
I'm
a
shareholder
that
I
want
to
obtain
or
provide
some
money
for
my
living
and
provide
for
my
family.
But
at
the
same
time
I
want
to.
I
want
to
make
it
really
really
clear
that
my
corporation
has
a
purpose,
a
purpose
that
goes
beyond
the
boilerplate
language
that
you
find
in
almost
every
corporate
article
of
incorporation,
which
is
for
any
lawful
purpose.
E
That's
what
you
normally
see
in
a
corporation,
but
this
statute
requires
a
for
public
or
for-profit
public
benefit
corporation,
to
specifically
say
what
it
is
that
it's
going
to
benefit
the
public,
what
it
stands
for,
and
I
think
that's
a
unique
opportunity
for
a
corporation.
So
that's
those
are
just
my
intro
comments
on
the
legislation.
Of
course,
I'll
walk
you
through
it,
but
any
intro
comments
from
mr
kaufman,
who
does
serve
on
our
select
committee.
F
F
Mr
chairman,
my
introductory
remarks
about
this
would
be
pretty
straightforward,
and
that
is
one
of
the
reasons
that
this
legislation
becomes
so
important
is
a
lot
of
people.
Don't
realize
that
when
you
are
the
director
of
a
corporation,
you
have
obligations
and
legal
duties
that
exist
beyond
just
statute.
We
have
common
law
duties
that
have
been
adopted
by
almost
every
court
in
the
country.
One
of
the
most
famous
cases
in
this
in
this
country
is
something
called
the
revlon
case
stemming
from
the
revlon
makeup
company.
F
So
if
you
take
action
or
a
vote
as
a
director
that
doesn't
maximize
shareholder
profit,
you
can
actually
be
held
liable
for
that
and
there's
long-standing
lines
of
case
law
in
this
country
on
that.
So
one
of
the
one
of
the
outgrowths
of
that
was
the
public
benefit
corporation.
What
if
an
entity
wants
to
be
for-profit,
but
the
directors
want
to
take
into
consideration
in
fulfillment
of
their
duties,
something
that
doesn't
necessarily
maximize
the
shareholder
profit
and
that's
where
the
public
benefit
corporation
comes
in.
F
It
allows
an
entity
to
have
a
dual
purpose:
we're
both
going
to
be
for-profit,
but
we're
also
going
to
have
some
greater
good
or
cause
at
our
core.
That
will
allow
the
directors
to
conduct
a
balancing
of
those
interests
and
make
a
decision.
That's
best,
two
examples
I'll
give
really
quickly
before
we
go
into
the
bill,
there's
a
very
famous
company.
The
name
is
escaping
me
at
the
moment
from
massachusetts,
and
it's
a
it's.
A
bread
company
manufacture
bread.
F
The
company
has
made
it
a
corporate
purpose
that
they
want
to
only
purchase
american
wheat
and
so
their
their
promise
to
their
shareholders
is
look
we're
only
going
to
buy
american
wheat
we're
only
going
to
source
american
wheat.
If
that
hurts
our
bottom
line
a
little
bit
in
doing
so
so
be
it.
That's
that's
our
that's
our
corporate
decision
and
that's
what
we're
going
to
do.
I
came
to
this
bill.
Quite
frankly,
mr
chairman,
from
a
young
woman
over
in
laramie
at
the
university
of
wyoming
that
developed
some
remarkable
software
that
helps
organizations
detect.
F
If
there
is
sex
trafficking
happening
in
their
organization,
she
tried
to
make
it
as
a
non-profit
but
was
having
a
really
hard
time:
licensing
the
software
and
raising
money.
This
would
have
been
her
go-to
entity
because
she
could
be
a
for-profit
entity
but
recognize
that
that
software
and
the
actions
that
she
takes
in
rolling
that
software
out
through
her
company
might
not
maximize
every
bit
of
profit.
So
that's
that's!
The
legal
outgrowth
of
an
entity
like
this.
E
All
right,
mr
chairman,
if
there's
no
questions
on
the
intro
I'll
walk
through
the
bill,
okay,
so
nothing
happening
on
page
one
page,
two.
E
We
provide
a
definition
and
I
think
you
go
down
to
the
bottom
of
that
definition.
Lines:
five
through
seven,
including
not
it's
not
necessarily
limited
to,
and
then
here's
a
list
of
what
we're
talking
about.
What
could
it
be?
It
could
be
something
for
artistic
purposes,
charitable
purposes:
cultural,
economic,
educational,
environmental,
literary,
medical,
religious,
scientific
or
technological
in
nature,
and
it
doesn't
if
you
go
back
up
to
the
top
half
of
that
definition.
Just
to
clarify.
E
If
the
bottom
of
the
page,
3
subsection
b,
all
that's
saying
is
that
if
you,
if
you
convert,
if
you're
an
existing
company,
you
can
elect
to
become
convert
et
cetera
to
a
for-profit
public
benefit
corporation.
If
you
do
that
in
accordance
with
the
statutes
and
how
you
do
that
you're
subject
to
obviously
the
wyoming
business
corporation
act
and
what
we're
putting
in
place
in
this
law
that
takes
us
over
to
page
4
and
17-31-104
are
the
contents
of
the
articles
of
incorporation.
E
So
what
we're
going
to
require
be
in
that
filing
document
initially
filed
document
that
you're
going
to
place
with
the
secretary
of
state's
office,
you
have
to
identify
what
your
public
benefit
is
that
makes
sense
and
then
number
two.
You
have
to
state
that
it
is
a
for-profit
public
benefit
corporation.
So
it's
going
to
be
clear
that
that's
what
it
is
subsection
b
talks
about
a
naming
convention.
E
It's
a
may
option
to
include
the
words
for-profit
public
benefit
corporation
or
some
derivative
of
that
you
know:
pbc
public
benefit,
corporation,
etc.
That's
an
option!
If
you
don't
elect
to
go
through
that
naming
convention,
you
just
want
to
call
your
corporation,
the
smith
corporation
or
whatever
you
want
to
call
it.
E
The
corporation
shall
bottom
up
page
4
line
22
prior
to
issuing
any
unissued
shares
of
stock
or
disposing
of
treasury
shares.
It's
going
to
provide
notice
to
any
person
whom
the
stock
is
issued
or
who
requires
a
treasury
shares
that
it
is
a
for-profit
corporation.
E
What
it's
and
the
notice
has
to
include
what
what
it's
what's
benefit
beneficial
purposes:
page
five
midway
through
17-31-105,
non-profit
stock
corporations.
E
This
just
says
that
a
non-profit
can't
be
a
constituent
part
of
any
merger
or
consolidation
with
a
for-profit
public
benefit
corporation.
Remember
when
I
started
out
my
opening
remarks
start
with
what
it's
not
we're,
not
talking
about
non-profits
we're
talking
about
something
completely
different,
and
I
think
so.
We
want
to
keep
a
clear
distinction
between
those
stock
certificates
bottom
of
the
page
notices
regarding
uncertificated
stocks,
and
that
substance
appears
on
page
six.
E
This
is
the
substantive
change
I'll
get
to
that
occurs
and
creates
the
engrossed
version
that
we
have
so
the
change
of
the
senate
made
number
one.
Any
stock
certificate
issued
by
a
for-profit
public
benefit
corporation
has
to
conspicuously
obviously
note
that
the
corporation
is
a
for-profit
benefit
corporation,
and
then
this
is
the
part.
E
That's
added
lines,
four,
essentially
down
to
eight
at
the
end
of
the
period
so
you're
going
to
provide
in
your
notice
that
this
is
in
fact
a
for-profit
public
benefit
corporation
and
that
the
directors
of
the
for-profit
public
benefit
corporation
are
required
to
balance
the
pecuniary
interests
of
the
stockholders
and
the
public
benefits
identified
in
the
corporation's
articles.
So
everything
we've
been.
I
guess
I
could
turn
it
over
to
my
good
co-chairman
from
the
senate.
E
If
you
have
a
question
when
you
do
about
why
the
senate
added
this
language,
but
just
in
looking
at
it
from
I
wasn't
there,
but
looking
at
it.
In
my
perspective,
it
seems
pretty
obvious
that
we
really
want
to
drive
home
the
point
that
everyone
involved,
whether
you
are
you
know
the
the
former
or
you
are
simply
a
stakeholder
who
comes
along
later
and
acquires
an
interest
in
the
company.
E
We
want
to
make
sure
that
everybody
understands
that
it
is
a
for-profit
company
and
that
you
understand
that
to
mr
kaufman's
point,
what
the
director
is,
balancing
his
or
her
or
directors,
are
balancing
their
their
fiduciary
duties
with
for
profits
and
for
that
benefit,
bottom
of
page
six
or
halfway
through,
I
should
say
17-31-107.
E
These
are
the
duties
of
the
directors.
This
is
what
mr
kaufman
was
speaking
to.
So
what
is
the
duty
we're
going
to
spell
it
out?
You
have
a
duty
to
drive
profits
and
balance,
balancing
that
pecuniary
area,
interest,
driving
the
profits
of
your
stakeholders,
with
the
public
benefits
identified
in
your
articles
of
incorporation,
bottom
of
page
six,
a
director
we're
going
to
clarify
that
a
director
for
a
non-profit
shall
not,
by
virtue
of
simply
it
being
the
public
benefit
corporation
and
having
the
duty
of
to
the
public
benefit.
E
Corporation
kaufman,
what
is
remind
me,
what
is
this
subsection
b.
F
Yeah,
mr
chairman,
so
the
the
the
purpose
here
is
that
it
doesn't,
by
virtue
of
being
a
director
in
a
public
benefit
corporation.
It
doesn't
create
a
duty
necessarily
to
the
public
just
to
those
shareholders
and
stockholders,
recognizing
that
you
have
to
balance
that
duty.
That's
owed
to
the
public
that
make
sense.
E
Perfect
subsection,
see
it
directors,
ownership
of
or
other
interest
in
the
stock
for
the
of
the
for-profit
public
benefit
corporation,
create
a
conflict
of
interest
in
the
part
of
the
director
with
respect
to
the
director's
decision-making,
except
to
the
extent
that
the
ownership
or
interest
would
create
a
conflict
of
interest.
Otherwise,
so,
obviously
that
direct
that
director
or
directors
or
may
have
and
likely
do
have
individual
interests
in
that
public
benefit.
E
It's
why
they
became
a
member
or
of
of
the
corporation
and
so
that
by
itself
doesn't
create
the
conflict
unless
it
would
have
otherwise
created
a
conflict
under
existing
law.
For
that
director.
B
Can
I
just
a
quick
question
that
I'm
not
sure
was
mentioned?
Is
this
boilerplate
language
I
mean
30,
some
states
have
this?
Are
we
pre
anything?
That's
not
part
of
there
apparently
is
no
standard
model
act,
but
anything
that's
not
generally
accepted
in
other
states.
If
you
just
highlight
as
you
go
along,
I'm
sorry.
F
Yeah,
mr
chairman,
approximately
36
ish
states
have
some
form
of
the
public
benefit
corporation.
There
is
not
a
model
act,
the
same
as
there
is
for
for
model
business
corporation
act.
This
this
act
is
based
on
delaware's,
largely
colorado
has
a
statute,
that's
also
very
similar
as
well.
E
And
I
think
to
your
point,
mr
chairman,
when
I
get
to
page
10,
1731
109,
I
do
believe
that
half
of
that
statute
is
essentially
lifted
from
delaware.
I
do
think
there.
I
do
think
we
made
some
changes
to
that,
and
maybe
mr
kaufman
can
or
specifically
address
that,
or
maybe
I'm
thinking
of
something
else.
E
Okay,
sorry
didn't
mean
to
stop
to
go
ahead,
all
right,
page
8,
17-31-108,
periodic
statements
and
third-party
certifications.
So
these
are
going
back
to
the
notices
I
was
speaking
to
earlier.
A
for-profit
public
benefit
corporation
has
to
notice
and
every
notice
of
a
meeting
to
its
stakeholders
or
stockholders.
Sorry,
it's
going
to
save
the
following.
It's
a
for-profit
public
benefit
corporation
form
pursuant
to
this
chapter
and
no
less
than
annually
so
once
a
year
which
it
could
provide
more
than
I
once
a
year.
D
Go
ahead.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
This
statements
and
third-party
certification,
that's
included
in
this
section.
Here
it
seemed
to
cover
what
was
covered
in
the
addition
to
the
stock
certificate
earlier
by
the
senate
amendment
and
to
me,
it
didn't
seem
like
the
senate
amendment's
necessary,
because
there's
plenty
of
notification
in
this
section
here
is
that
I'm
thinking
clearly
is
there
a
good
reason
why
the
stock
certificate
should
have
that
notification
as
well.
Maybe
it
seemed.
D
E
G
Mr
chairman,
as
always,
mr
chairman,
this
was
raised
by
one
of
the
members
of
the
senate
corporations
committee
as
a
means
of
making
sure
that
it's
clarified
during
purchase
in
theory
of
the
stocks,
whereas
a
stockholder
meeting
would
take
place,
obviously
at
a
different
time.
So
the
idea
is
to
make
sure
that,
at
all
steps
where
you
might
be
engaging
with
that
institution
and
having
a
financial
investment,
that
you
would
have
the
benefit
of
understanding
that
those
pecuniary
interests
would
be
balanced
against
the
public
benefit
of
the
corporations.
G
So
I'm
not
entirely
certain
whether
or
not
it
would
be
critical
and
that
it
wouldn't
make
itself
evident.
But
that
was
the
interest
of
the
member,
and
I
had
no
objection.
I
don't
see
it
as
detrimental,
but
potentially
clarifying.
Thank
you,
mr
mr
chairman,.
E
Mr
chairman,
you
know
mr
kaufman
deals
with
corporations
on
a
much
more
daily
basis
than
I
do,
but
I
would
wonder
maybe
maybe
the
reason
why
you
double
up
on
the
notices
is
that
and
not
all
of
us
are
as
not
always
pay
as
much
attention
to
both
to
the
notices
as
stockholders
and
then
not
all
of
us
read
our
certificate,
just
kind
of
gets
filed
away.
So
maybe
maybe
this
maybe
that's
the
reason
for
it
is
just
trying
to
cover
multiple
bases,
because
not
everybody
reads
all
of
that.
F
Yeah,
mr
chairman,
if
I
may,
that
was
exactly
the
reasoning.
Is
most
corporations
these
days
don't
even
issue
physical
stock
certificates.
Those
are
kind
of
going
away.
So
obviously,
if
they're
issuing
stock
certificates,
you
got
to
put
that
notice
in
there,
but
otherwise
we're
relying
on
that
third
party.
That
annual.
E
Certification-
mr
chairman,
almost
through
here
on
page
nine,
subsection
c,
the
articles
of
incorporation
or
the
bylaws
of
a
for-profit
public
benefit
corporation
may
require
the
corporation
to
do
any
one
of
the
following.
So
now
I
think
I
mentioned
one
of
these
earlier.
I
think
this
is
the
one
where
you
can
yeah,
so
we
require
the
annual
notice.
Of
course,
this
is
simply
saying
you
can
have
you
can
do
that
as
much
as
you
want.
E
You
can
have
as
many
of
those
notices
as
you
want
make
the
statement
described
in
subsection
b
of
this
section
available
to
the
public.
So
that's
the
notice
right
that
representative
air
is
talking
about.
We,
you
can
put
that
up
on
your
website
or
nothing
prohibits
you
from
doing
that.
I
suppose,
if
you
want
to,
I
think
that
would
have
probably
have
been,
maybe
that
I
don't
know
that
we
had
to
write
that
in
to
allow
for
that
to
happen.
E
Okay,
bottom
of
page
10
has
17-31-109
the
enforcement.
So
how
do
you
enforce
it?
So
we've
been
talking
about
balancing
right,
gotta
balance,
the
pecuniary
interest
of
the
company,
with
the
public
benefit,
who
gets
to
enforce
that
any
individual
derivative
could
have
an
individual
action
or
derivative
action
of
any
type,
but
it
cannot
be
brought
unless
the
plaintiff
in
the
proceeding
owns
individually
or
collectively,
as
of
the
date
of
instituting
the
proceeding
at
least
two
percent
of
the
corporation's
outstanding
shares.
E
E
F
And
mr
chairman,
I
would
just
add
that
both
of
these
provisions
appear
with
a
majority
of
the
states
that
have
the
public
benefit
corporation.
E
So,
somewhere
in
the
somewhere
in
the
statutes
we
looked
at,
I
get
you
okay,
last
page,
11,
no
effect
on
other
corporations.
This
statute,
1731
110.
E
H
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
Two
things
one,
the
first
one
is
is
this:
is
this:
how
is
it
taxed
differently
than
either
a
for-profit
or
a
not-for-profit
corporation,
and
then
the
second
thing
is:
how
does
it
tie
into
the
blockchain
specifically?
Is
it
with
our
looking
to
the
future
for
banking
and
stuff,
like
that?
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
mr
kaufman.
F
Mr
chairman,
thank
you
for
the
question
in
response
to
the
first
question.
As
far
as
wyoming
is
concerned,
since
we
don't
tax
entities,
there's
not
going
to
be
a
difference
for
irs
purposes,
they're
still
considered
for
profit
and
at
ease
and
they're
taxed.
Just
the
same,
so
there's
there's
no
distinction
from
a
for-profit
entity
for
taxation
purposes.
F
With
respect
to
your
second
question
about
how
this
ties
into
blockchain,
the
the
direct
answer,
mr
chairman,
is
it?
Is
it
doesn't
necessarily?
This
is
just
another
entity
type
that
exists
in
again
about
35
36
other
states.
You
know
my
observation
would
be.
I
work
a
lot
with
with
venture
capital
and
private
equity
companies.
There's
definitely
a
trend
we're
seeing
nationally
of
folks
that
want
to
invest
in
all
types
of
what
they
call
impact,
investing
that
might
be.
You
know,
investing
in
entities
because
they
consume
american
wheat
or
they
utilize.
F
I
Ripped
in
a
pun,
thank
you,
mr
chairman,
on
page
three
top
of
the
page
romanette
to
when
we're
defining
what
a
public
benefit
is.
How
do
you
separate?
I
I
guess
what
what
does
I
mean?
We
got
our
definitions
spelled
out
here,
but
if
you
already,
for
example,
because
it
says
effects
of
an
artistic,
charitable,
etcetera,
etcetera,
literary
blah,
blah
blah,
but
if
you're
already
an
art
studio,
if
you're
already
a
publishing
company,
if
you're,
already
some
sort
of
private
medical
firm,
how
does
this?
How
did
you
distinguish
between
your
for-profit
efforts
and
what
would
be
considered
a
public
benefit
to
the
the
greater
good
mr
cobb.
F
Mr
chairman,
thank
you
for
the
question,
so
I
think
that
the
first
part
of
that
would
be
if
an
entity
is
already
existing
and
already
has
right
business
activities
to
generate
a
profit
and
they
want
to
become
a
public
benefit
corporation
they're,
going
to
have
to
convert
they're
going
to
legally
file
documentation
with
the
secretary
of
state's
office
and
take
the
legal
steps
necessary
to
convert
to
where
they
can
have
a
public
benefit
corporation
standing.
F
The
second
part
of
that
question,
though
I
think,
is
if,
if
an
entity
has
an
existing
business
line,
and
now
they
all
of
a
sudden
want
to
have
some
other
outside
or
I
I
keep
referring
to
it
as
an
extrinsic
purpose
or
value
that
they
want
to
take
into
consideration
again,
I
think
they
can
do
that.
They
can
add
that
to
the
mix.
I
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
not
so
much
for
follow-up
directly
to
that,
but
over
on
page
six,
with
the
under
the
duties
of
the
directors
and
we're
saying
on
line
17
that
balances
the
pecuniary
interests
of
the
stockholders
and
the
public
interests
identified.
I
I
guess
what,
when
we're
saying
balances,
are
we
not
talking
to
try
and
strike
a
balance
literally
of
50
50
between
the
interests
of
the
stockholders
and
the
public
benefit,
or
I
guess
what
is
ultimately
prioritized
at
the
end
of
the
day,
the
interest
of
the
stockholders
for
profit
or
whatever
the
charitable
component
is.
F
Go
ahead,
chairman
again
great
question,
and
thank
you
for
that.
So
I
I
think
the
language
here
is
intended
to
create
sort
of
a
you
know
a
scale
you
know,
and
you
could
be
one
end
of
the
scale
or
the
other
if
a
company
truly
has
benevolent
or
charitable
purposes,
probably
their
first
choice
is
going
to
be
to
consider
being
a
non-profit.
F
But
again,
it's
not
always
a
black
and
white
answer
for
these
entities
and
at
some
point
in
time
it
makes
sense
for
them
to
be
a
for-profit.
So
the
statute
isn't
intended
to
create
a
perfect
balance
of
50
50
balance.
It's
not
even
intended
to
prescribe
what
that
balance
has
to
be
it's
giving
the
directors
the
option
and
the
ability
just
to
weigh.
We
both
have
pecuniary
interests,
and
we
we
also
have
these
extrinsic
right
interests
that
we're
going
to
try
to
balance
it's
up
to
to
the
directors
to
find
that
balance.
F
E
E
So
at
some
point
one
individual
or
a
collection
of
individuals
believe
the
balance
is
broken
whatever
that
may
be
in
their
mind,
they
may
think
it's
51
49
or
50
50
or
60
30
or
60
70,
sorry,
so
they
they
bring
the
action
and
the
end
result
is
litigation
in
court.
Where
you
know
over
time.
I
think
I
think,
based
on
what
these
entities
typically
do
in
wyoming,
how
they
typically
balance
them
will
will
eventually
evolve
a
case
law
to
that
percentage.
E
J
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
This
directed
anybody,
but
so
is,
is
there
a
portion
that
either
adds
liability
or
shirks
liability
being
added,
adding
liability
for
your
public
duty
or
benefit
duty
or
jerking
liability
for
profits?
E
That,
I
think
so,
I'm
going
to
kind
of
restate
it
to
make
sure
I
got
it.
Mr
chairman,
through
you,
representative,
claussen,
so
you're
you're
you're,
asking
if
an
individual
has
a
public
duty,
but
I
think
that
we're
not
necessarily
talking
about
a
public
duty
in
the
sense
that
we're
talking
about
the
public
duty
that
you
have
or
that
maybe
representative
hunt
has
on
the
boards
that
he
serves
on
we're
talking
about
whether
it
is
a
public
benefit,
so
whether
it
has
a
beneficial
purpose
to
the
public
that
doesn't
that
does
not
in
itself.
E
E
Mr
chairman,
representative
claussen,
yes,
I
mean
that
that
was
the.
I
think.
The
explanation
that
mr
kaufman
was
giving
in
his
introduction
is
that
in
a
typical
corporation
I
have
I
have
liability
from
my
stockholders
if
I
don't
pursue
the
best
interests
of
my
company,
so
my
best
interest
of
the
company
being
profits,
and
so
now
I
I
do
shield
myself
from
some
liability,
because
now
I
can
pursue
both
the
profits
and
the
benefit
the
public
benefit.
B
G
Often
add-on
thanks,
ms
chairman,
just
to
add
on
to
that
and-
and
I
believe
mr
kaufman
gave
the
example
of
the
east
east
coast,
wheat
company,
that
prefers
to
buy
only
domestic
wheat,
and
I
think
it's
a
good
example
for
representative
claussen's
discussion
where
that
isn't
necessarily
going
to
be
in
the
best
financial
interest
at
all
times
for
that
company.
G
So
by
being
a
public
benefit
corporation,
they
can
make
that
option
and
they've
declared
that,
as
as
part
of
the
public
benefit
of
their
purpose,
that's
going
to
be
part
of
their
articles
and
and
indicate
that
that
that's
their
intent,
and
so
at
that
point
they
will
not
have
liability
to
their
shareholders
for
not
optimizing.
The
process
with
regard
to
that-
and
I
think
that's
an
important
characteristic
is
you
would
not
be
completely
removed
from
having
any
obligations
of
any
sort.
G
You
need
to
be
expressing
your
public
benefits
and
you
need
to
characterize
some
of
that,
but
with
the
balance
there
between
the
bikini
area
and
the
benefit
purpose,
it
provides
more
flexibility
than
you
would
otherwise
have
maguire.
K
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
think
that
we
need
to
clarify
just
a
little
bit.
There
have
been
a
lot
of
statements
about
duties
to
shareholders
and
ultimate
profitability
and
everything
the
board
of
directors
has
a
broad
range
of
direction
that
they
can
take
a
company
in,
and
there
are
companies
that
have
never
shown
a
profit
that
are
entirely
devoted
to
developing
new
technology.
K
So,
let's
back
off
on
that
just
a
little
bit
and
yes,
there
are
duties
that
the
board
has
to
the
shareholders,
but
those
are
very
well
balanced
and
it's
at
the
direction
of
the
shareholders
and
the
board,
and
so,
let's,
let's
just
kind
of
keep
things
in
balance
a
little
bit.
Thank
you.
Wouldn't
you
agree,
mr
trump.
K
B
So
I
just
want
to
make
sure
there's
no
on
the
secretary
of
state's
office,
this
doesn't
change
any
type
of
filing
fee,
anything
that
they
have
to
do.
You
basically
get
to
elect
and
you
form
a
corporation,
otherwise
that
you
are
a
for-profit
public
benefit
corporation
and
that's
why
we
call
it
a
supplement
to
our
laws.
F
B
Because
I
know
you
know
this
question
is
coming
because
it's
a
great
idea-
and
I
thought
I
covered
it
10
years
ago,
when
I
brought
the
l3c.
What
is
the
difference
in
a
for-profit
public
benefit
corporation
versus
a
low-profit
limited
liability
company?
Besides?
Is
it
just
not
being
sued
by
your
shareholders?
I
mean?
Is
it
another,
maybe
too
basic,
but
that's
the
primary
purpose.
F
Yeah,
mr
chairman,
great
question,
and
I
think
that
the
simple
answer
to
that
question
is
no
one:
is
using
nationwide
low
profit,
limited
liability
companies
because
it's
a
pass-through
tax
vehicle,
whereas
corporations
are
taxed
on
their
own,
and
so
the
election
is
is
clear
in
the
market
that
people
prefer
to
have
these
entities
be
a
corporation
tried.
So.
B
Hard
there's
a
great
bill
a
decade
ago
committee
I
thought
it
was
revolutionary
and
then
no
one
picked
it
up.
Resonabear.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
D
F
Representative,
yes,
I
do
think
so
again
in
in
that
vein
of
keeping
wyoming
competitive,
where
we
have
all
of
the
the
tools
available
in
the
tool
kit.
This
is
another
one
of
those
vehicles,
that's
very
attractive
for
certain
types
of
entities.
You
know
to
represent
mcguire's
point:
is
it
suitable
for
every
company?
No,
absolutely
not,
but
there
there
are.
You
know
those
types
of
companies
that
do
strive
to
take
into
account
some
extrinsic
value
or
benefit,
and
for
those
companies
this
becomes
very
attractive
and
very
useful.
D
B
F
Mr
chairman,
patagonia
is
a
public
benefit
corporation.
Now
they
have
a
public
benefit.
That
might
not
necessarily
be
one
that
I
would
choose.
You
know
they're
they're,
more
environmentally
oriented,
but
there
are
lots
and
lots
of
public
benefit
corporations
out
there.
I
do
want
to
make
one
quick
distinction
just
for
the
committee
in
case
anybody
researches
this
or
looks
up
on
their
own.
There
is
an
entity
out
there
called
b
labs
and
b.
F
B
Okay,
any
further
questions
at
this
time
for
any
of
the
presenters
don't
go
too
far.
Let
me
see
if
there's
any
public
comment.
Anyone
here
in
the
audience
here
to
testify
on
senate
file
36
anyone
online
which
just
been
sent
file
36,
I'm
guessing
they're
all
here
for
the
psc
bill,
wildly
popular
concept,
not
a
single
person
can
testify.
Mr
coffin,
I'm
not
seeing
any
public
comment,
then
committee.
B
G
I
will
say
we
did
have
public
testimony
in
the
interim
and
even
in
the
senate
committee.
I
think
this
one
snuck
up
a
little
bit
on
me.
I
I
realized
it
was
a
committee
meeting
last
night,
pretty
late,
so
I
might
not
be
the
only
one
with
regard
to
the
purpose.
There's
a
couple
of
things
that
really
brought
it
through.
G
The
blockchain
select
committee
that
I
wanted
to
raise,
and
one
is
we
did
have
folks
in
the
blockchain
community,
saying
well
we'd
love
to
be
able
to
set
up
in
wyoming
and
and
we
love
everything
you're
doing
with
blockchain,
but
we
actually
wanted
to
to
formulate
around
a
public
benefit
corporation,
and
so
we
we
couldn't
have
let
them
do
that
and
and
the
idea
that
we
would
exclude
a
corporation
from
wyoming
that
can
domicile
in
36
other
states
just
because
we
we
lacked
something
on
the
books.
G
That
seems
to
be
popular,
seems
to
happen
and
and
seems
to
be
reasonable.
We
thought
it
was
appropriate
for
us
to
bring
that
forward
and
obviously
working
with
mr
kaufman
and
others
allowed
us
to
get
that
done
and,
and
he
has
clients
that
have
been
interested
in
it
as
well.
G
So
again,
I
I
don't
know
how
many
corporations
will
choose
to
domicile
here
because
of
this,
but
as
we're
looking
at
concepts
in
the
blockchain
select
committee,
there
are
a
lot
of
these.
These
public
interest
groups
that
are
contemplating
corporate
structures
and
in
blockchain
and
working
with
coin
offerings,
and
we
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
everything
was
available
and
we
didn't
see
any
reason
why
we
would
exclude
this
type
of
a
corporation
just
because
it
wasn't
on
our
books
and
we.
G
We
certainly
hope
that
you'd
support
this
and
move
it
along
just
to
make
sure
that
we
do
have
all
of
the
arrows
in
the
quiver.
That
corporations
are
interested
in
utilizing
and
startups
are
interested
in
working
with.
Thank
you,
mr.
B
Let
me
turn
my
mic
with
that.
We'll
close
public
comment:
reptile
roscoe's
move
senate
file,
36
seconded
by
representative,
heir
any
amendment
committee
you
want
to
put
on
senate
file
36
representative
hunt.
Thank.
I
You,
mr
truman,
I'm
wondering
on
page
4
and
line
17
about.
I
would
move
to
change
the
may
to
it,
shall
so
that
it
would
read
that
that
they
shall
contain
the
words
public
benefit
corporation
or
the
abbreviation
of
pbc.
B
B
Okay
and
then
further
on
it
does
say
if
they
choose
not
to
do
that,
they
still
have
to
put
on
their
stock
and
shares
notice
that
they
are
a
for-profit
public
benefit
corporation.
I
don't
know
if
it's
the
biggest
change
in
the
world,
but
I
just
want
to
make
sure
we're
not
screwing
up
anything
wrong
in
america.
D
B
D
B
And
chairman
olson,
I
assume
you're
carrying
this
on
the
floor.
Great.
Thank
you
very
much.
Senator
rothfuss.
B
B
I
don't
know
how
you
take
a
one
sentence
and
you
change
the
date.
It's
always
the
simple
bills
that
have
the
most
fun
so
we're
working
off
indian
gross
copy,
which
just
reappeals
37
to
404
b.
This
is
actually
brought
by
management
audit,
and
so
I
would
expect
somebody
from
management
audit
to
be
here
to
present
the
bill
that
I'm
not
seeing
anyone.
D
B
Be,
oh,
do
you
want
to
present
the
bill
chairman
eric
go
ahead?
Can
I
do
it
from
here?
You
can
certainly
do
it
from
there.
We
have
like
nine
people
to
testify,
so
you.
D
Don't
have
to
do
too
much
work.
Well,
this
bill
is
very
simple.
There
was
a
sunset
date
on
the
office
of
consumer
advocate
the
oca.
If
you
will,
and
the
original
version
of
the
bill
was
just
extended
another
five
years
senate,
a
minute
to
just
repeal
the
sunset
date
altogether,
which
I
think
was
a
really
good
move.
D
Requirements
more
and
more
duties
on
the
public
service
commission,
the
office
of
consumer
advocate
is
a
bit
of
a
they're
there
to
look
out
for
the
well-being
of
the
rate
payers
in
the
state
and
it's
a
highly
technical,
highly
complicated
field
that
they
deal
in
and
they
need
to
have
longevity.
They
need
to
have
certainty.
D
H
Thank
you,
mr
chairman
representative.
Do
we
know
how
much
it
costs
the
state
for
this
office.
B
B
And
so
mr
freeman
well,
you
can
certainly
introduce
yourself,
but
you
are
the
director
of
the
office
of
consumer
advocate
last.
I
knew
correct,
and
so
certainly
if
you
have
thoughts
without
lobbying,
you're
welcome
to
share
any
thoughts
you
have
on
your
office.
If
you'd
like.
L
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
thank
you
representative
there
for
introducing
the
bill.
My
name
is
bryce
freeman.
I
am
the
administrator
of
the
lyming
office.
Consumer
advocate
I've
been
the
administrator
since
the
office
was
formed.
L
Reps
and
error
is
quite
correct
in
stating
that
what
we
do
at
the
office
consumer
advocate
is
not
rocket
science,
but
it's
pretty
close.
It's
very
complicated
area.
We
have
to
have
expertise
in
accounting,
finance
economics,
engineering
operations,
all
of
those
things
and
we're
a
small
office.
There's
only
six
of
us
there's
four
of
us,
including
me.
I
I
am
a
working
rate
analyst,
so
we
testify
as
witnesses
before
the
state
public
service
commission.
L
We
also
have
two
attorneys,
and
so
our
mission-
and
I'm
probably
telling
many
of
you
things
that
you
already
know,
but
just
for
those
who
maybe
don't
know
our
mission
is
to
serve.
We
serve
the
public,
we
serve
the
rate
payers
of
the
state
of
wyoming
and
we
serve
the
public
service
commission.
It's
our
job
to
present
evidence
fact-based
evidence
to
the
public
service
commission
so
that
they
can
make
informed
decisions
with
regard
to
public
utility
issues.
L
In
other
cases,
we
are
a
party
and
there
are
other
parties
in
the
case
that
have
different
interests.
They
have
their
own
interests
to
represent
that
don't
necessarily
coincide
with
the
interests
of
the
general
public
or
the
general
body
of
rate
payers.
So,
with
regard
to
representative
roscoe's
question,
we
are
not
a
generally
funded
agency,
so
the
money
that
funds,
the
public
service,
commission
and
the
office
of
consumer
advocate
comes
from
a
gross
revenue
receipts
tax
on
public
utilities
that
is
passed
on
to
customers.
L
Customers
pay
that
and
we
recently
did
some
calculations
and
determined
that
it
costs
the
average
rate
pair
in
wyoming
about
seven
cents
per
month
to
have
us
in
their
corner
fighting
for
them,
and
you
know
what
I
hate
to
use
the
word
fight.
What
we
really
do
is
provide
a
counterbalance
to
what
the
utilities
want
to
do.
L
And
they
they
have
obviously
a
fiduciary
responsibility
to
their
shareholders,
and
when
you
understand
that
you
know
we're
not
necessarily
we're
not
necessarily
we
don't
hate
the
utilities,
I
guess
is
what
I'm
trying
to
say.
They
have
a
duty
to
serve
their
customers
in
wyoming
as
well.
They
have
a
duty
to
provide
safe,
adequate
and
reliable
service.
We
often
disagree
about
what
the
best
way
to
do
that
is,
but
we
can
all
work
together
and
find
the
best
way.
L
Sometimes
we
can't
we're
in
a
contested
case,
as
a
matter
of
fact
this
week
with
one
of
the
state's
largest
utilities,
where
we
couldn't
agree
on
the
best
way,
and
so
the
commission
we're
bringing
our
evidence.
Other
parties
are
bringing
their
evidence
and
the
commission
will
weigh
that
evidence
and
decide,
but
my
mission
is
to
ensure
that
they
have
the
best
evidence
before
them
that
they
can
so
that
they
can
make
the
best
decision
possible.
B
So,
there's
not
a
negotiated
kind
of
settlement
coming
forward
on
this
one,
because,
historically,
is
it
fair
to
say
that
many
times
the
utility,
especially
some
of
the
largest
utilities,
electric
rates
and
the
oca
and
others
have
kind
of
got
together
and
bounced
stuff
back
and
forth
and
you've
presented
here's
what
we
think
will
work
to
the
psc,
but
not.
L
In
this
case,
mr
chairman,
not
in
this
case
but
but
in
in
some
cases
we
do
work
with
utility
and
other
parties
and,
to
the
extent
that
we
can
arrive
in
a
negotiated
stipulation
that
gets
before
the
commission
and
the
commission
is
not
obligated
under
law
to
accept
that
agreement.
We
file
it
with
them.
B
With
the
questions
from
mr
freeman,
I
believe
we
do
have
three
or
four
people
to
testify.
I
know
miss
throne
has
her
hand
up
representation
of
the
question.
Mr
freeman,
at
this
time,.
D
K
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
so
question
for
you
as
to
taking
a
look
at
the
budget.
So
I'm
looking
at
the
white
sheet,
which
still
has
the
fiscal
note
attached
and
says
the
budget
give
or
take,
is
two
million
dollars.
Eighty
percent
of
that
is
fixed
cost,
which
is
personnel.
It's
listed
as
six
people
plus
some
office
space.
I
presume
that
that's
state
office
space,
so
I'm
just
curious.
K
L
Freud,
mr
chairman,
represented
mcguire
about
80
percent
of
our
budget,
is
salaries
and
benefits,
and
that
sort
of
thing
we
do
have
some
rent
that
we
pay.
One
of
the
interesting
things
regarding
the
office
is
that
when
it
was
created,
it
was
created
as
an
independent
division
within
the
public
service
commission.
L
L
We
share
certain
things
with
the
public
service
commission.
We
share
I.t
personnel,
we
share
payroll
and
administrative
services,
so
we
pay
our
share
of
that,
but
that
avoids
us
having
to
procure
that
on
our
own,
which
would
be
more
expensive.
L
M
L
With
it,
mr
chairman,
senator
mcguire,
yes,
that
I
was
gonna
get
to
that
point.
We
do
have
a
900
series
budget,
it's
about
240
000
year.
I
did
not
spend
any
of
that
money.
We
it
is
there
and
I
have
in
the
past,
when
we've
gotten
to
certain
particular
things
that
were
beyond
the
expertise
of
our
office.
To
do.
I
have.
L
A
number
of
the
offices
around
the
country
really
have.
If
they
have
six
employees,
they
have
six
attorneys
and
they
hire
out
everything
else.
We
don't
do
that.
We
develop
our
own
evidence
and
and
run
our
own
cases
so
that
we're
thoroughly
familiar
with
the
issues
that
come
before
the
commission.
B
Other
questions,
mr
freeman,
as
you
can
tell
he's,
done
this
a
lot
of
times
before
the
legislature
and
that's
why
he's
very,
I
want
to
say
defensive,
but
very
thorough
on
his
explanation,
because
yeah
it's
a
brand
new
day,
mr
freeman,
certain
legislators
are
no
longer
here
who
are
going
after
agency
to
the
level
they
were
and
the
further
questions
cinna
and
miss
throne
is
in
the
room.
Former
representative
and
minority
leader
throne
go
ahead.
Mary.
You
have
the
floor.
N
Usually
I'm
in
the
hearing
room
when
we
do
this,
I
want
you
all
to
notice
that
I'm
wearing
my
cowgirl
colors
today.
I
don't
know
what's
wrong
with
all
of
you
that
you're
not
in
your
brown
and
gold,
mr
chairman,
but
anyway,
I'm
I'm
happy
to
be
here
and
just
wanted
to
mention
two
quick
points
to
supplement.
N
N
The
second
point
I
wanted
to
make
that
I
don't
believe
I
heard
mr
freeman
mention
is
that
even
in
the
absence
of
an
office
of
consumer
advocate,
we
would
have
somebody
fulfilling
that
function,
which
is
how
it
was,
as
you
would
will
recall,
mr
chairman,
because
I
think
you
were
in
the
legislature
when
the
bill
passed
originally
or
you
were.
It
was
just
before
you
started
actually
that
the
independent
office
was
created,
and
so
the
function
was
handled
by
staff,
and
so
the
problem
with
that
is
that
people
would
be
one
day.
N
They'd
be
psc
staff
and
maybe,
in
the
next
case,
they'd
be
consumer
advocate
staff,
and
so
this
independent
office
was
created
so
that
you,
you
sort,
you
have
a
chinese
wall,
so
to
speak,
and
I
and
all
the
bill
does
is,
you
know,
just
gives
stability
to
what
has
been
the
system
since
2003.
B
B
We'll
start
with
you
later:
okay,
sorry
I'll
go
ahead!
I'm
just
just
here
to
answer
any
questions.
Okay
with
that
we'll
go
to
mr
ac
welcome
bruce
to
corporations.
M
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
bruce
hacey
on
behalf
of
montana,
to
go
to
utilities
company,
and
I
need
to
point
out
to
commissioner
throne
that
I
am
wearing
gold
today
in
my
office.
So
thanks
for
that
shout
out
on
behalf
of
montana
dakota,
we
appreciate
the
work
of
the
mr
freeman
and
the
office
of
consumer
advocate.
M
They
do
perform
a
welcome
and
valuable
service
to
not
only
the
public
but
to
utilities.
There
are
many
times
quite
frankly
where
we
may
make
a
mistake
and
upon
being
reviewed,
it
allows
us
an
opportunity
to
correct
mistakes
and
expedite
the
process
and
ensure
that
the
commission
is
reviewing
an
appropriate
product
as
we
bring
it
to
the
commission.
M
So
we
stand
firmly
with
the
oca
and
in
asking
that
the
the
committee
moved
this
bill
forward.
We
think
it's
appropriate
and
and
vote
for
its
approval.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
B
Let
the
record
show
that
mdu
messes
up
every
once
in
a
while,
apparently
just
kidding
mr
ac,
any
questions
for
bruce.
Seeing
none,
always
a
pleasure.
Seeing
you,
mr
laycock,
from
aarp,
welcome
to
corporations.
O
Thank
you
much
appreciate
it.
My
name
is
tom
laycock,
I'm
the
associate
state
director
for
communications
and
advocacy
for
aarp
wyoming.
You
know
we
consider
ourselves
to
have
a
consumer
protection
bent
a
little
bit
in
the
state
and-
and
so
one
of
the
things
you
do.
But
the
nice
thing
is
is
the
fact
that
you
know
myself
and
sam.
Neither
one
of
us
really
have
a
huge
background
utility.
O
So
the
first
thing
you
do
is
you
get
on
the
psc
list
and
they
send
you
all
of
your
notices
and
then
you
start
reading
them.
You
realize
how
technical
it
is
and
and
really
the
one
thing
that
I'm
very
pleased
that
the
oca
has
been
able
and
willing
to
do
is
just
offer
themselves
as
a
psc
to
english
dictionary
for
us,
and
so
what
you
see
in
a
lot
of
other
states
is
organizations
that
have
a
consumer
protection
vent
will
really
they
will
engage
on
most
any
rate
case
whatsoever.
O
And
frankly,
it's
been
wonderful
for
us
to
be
able
to
call
bryce
and
his
group
and
say
here's
the
latest
rate,
changer
or
proposed
rate
change.
Is
this
reasonable?
Is
there
a
reason
for
it?
Is
this
something
we
need
to
get
in
on,
or
is
this
just
kind
of
the
cost
of
doing
business
and
and
to
you
know,
to
a
a
case
they've
been
able
to
to
give
us
that
that
answer
every
time?
O
So
we're
certainly
very
appreciative
of
the
work
that
bryce
and
the
oca
do
we're
very
supportive
of
this
particular
bill
and
we're
thrilled
to
see
the
sunset
removed
all
together.
So
that
said
I'll
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions,
but
thank
you
for
the
time
any.
B
Seeing
none
thank
you
very
much
tom
pleasure.
Seeing
you
any
further
public
comment,
mr
cason
you're.
Just
here
to
okay,
I'm
not
seeing
anything
else
online
committee.
Any
further
questions
you
have
for
any
of
the
presenters,
seeing
none,
I'm
stalling.
Oh
all,
right,
we'll
close
public
comment
committee.
What
is
your
pleasure
on
senate
file
62
moved
by
duncan
seconded
by
claussen
we're
on
the
bill?
Anyone
have
any
amendments
representative
duncan.
A
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
despite
representatives
heirs,
passionate
plea,
I
I
would
like
to
move
to
amend
it
back
to
2028
on
page
one
line.
12.
A
I
just
feel
like,
after
I
found
out
that
it's
customer
generated
fees
by
rates
I
just
feel
like
2028.
We
just
need
a
little
little
checkup.
I
think
that's
reasonable,
rather
than
just
an
open-ended
forever.
B
Okay,
that's
it
real
quick,
mr
freeman.
How
many
times
have
we
extended
the
date
at
least
five
that
we've
tried?
I
know
it
was
2023
and
they
tried
to
make
it
2017
a
couple
years
ago.
Then
it
went
back
to
2023..
How
many
times
have
you
been
before
the
legislature
extending
your
sunset
date
since
you've
been
there.
B
Mr
chairman,
this
would
be
the
fourth
okay
committing
another
discussion.
D
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
would
resist
this
amendment.
I
think
it's
very
important
that
oca
have
that
stability
and
that
longevity
to
attract
the
kind
of
personnel
they
need
to
perform
their
duties.
D
I
I
think
they
need
to
have
a
surety
that
they're
going
to
be
a
long
time
entity
in
our
state
government
and
yeah.
They.
They
do
collect
fees
from
utilities
based
on
their
gross
revenue,
which
gets
eventually
rolled
into
utility
rates,
but
they
have
saved
far
more
multiple
times.
D
H
Reverend
nebraska.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
would
have
to
agree
with
my
vice
chair
that
having
some
longevity
might
also
possibly
provide
better
employees
that
they
know
they're
going
to
be
there
for
a
while
and
educated
in
this
field,
so
they
would
stay
there
and
I
think
we
would
have
maybe
a
better
department
if
that's
what
it
is.
Thank
you,
mr
truman.
Thank
you,
mr.
K
B
L
L
Thank
the
lord
to
find
a
couple
of
brand
new
rate
analysts
that
have
been
very
quick
studies
really
didn't,
have
utility
backgrounds
but
have
taken
to
a
utility
regulation
like
fish
to
water,
and
so
the
turnover
hasn't
been
a
big
problem,
but
I
think
you
know
it
could
be
in
in
you
know.
Frankly,
my
guys
worry
about
whether
or
not
the
sword
of
danacles
will
actually
fall
at
some
point.
B
Is
to
take
the
full
repeal
back
to
a
july
1st
2028.,
all
in
favor
of
the
amendment.
Please
raise
your
hand
all
opposed
to
the
amendment.
Raise
your
hand,
okay.
That
amendment
has
failed
a
lot
of
5'4
votes
today,
committee.
All
right
further
discussion
on
the
bill,
saying
none
question
being
called
barbara.
If
you
would
call
the
roll.
B
So
committee,
I
will
check
with
the
management
audit
committee
or
whoever
was
chair
of
the
management
audit
committee
last
term.
I
don't
actually
know
who
was
to
see
if
I'm
presenting
or
there
present
the
bill
on
the
floor.
I
think
you're
all
aware,
thank
you,
mr
freeman,
for
being
here
and
everyone
presenting.
B
M
B
I
know
you've
been
getting
quite
a
lot
of
emails
from
multiple
groups
about
the
bills
coming
up
in
corp.
B
I
believe
we're
gonna
might
only
have
wednesday
friday
next
monday
for
our
last
three
meetings
and
wednesday
we're
going
to
do
what
athletic
trainers,
the
two
licensing
bills
and
physician
assistants,
and
then
we
may
get
to
senate
file
16,
which
you've
been
getting
emails
about
for
six
weeks,
at
least
and
some
of
you
two
years,
and
then
there
are
some
other
bills
in
the
senate
that
I
know
have
been
very
prolific
in
the
public
and
if
they
come
to
our
committee,
we
would
hear
those
next
monday
suburbs
on
a
bear.
B
We
have
four
bill.
We
have
three
bills
up
wednesday,
plus
one
of
time
allows
those
are
our
interim
court
bills
besides
senate
file
16,
but
we
are
doing
the
co-op
utility
bill
deposits
and
then
friday,
we'll
probably
do
the
what
15
not
to
whatever
that
was,
I'm
remembering
numbers
and
not
names,
but
the
senate,
I
think,
has
seven
bills
from
corp
that
may
still
come
over
to
our
committee.
So
I'm
just
letting
you
know
we're
going
to
be
a
very
full
committee.
The
next
three
meetings
mcguire.
B
Mr
freeman,
we
if
we
hear
senate
file
16,
we
would
welcome
you
back
to
come
visit
and
join
in
the
fun
of
to
advocate
on
behalf
of
consumers
in
wyoming.
If
you
think
that's
a
good
bill
or
not,
I
guess
we're
prepping
you
now
that
you
might
want
to
have
thoughts
and
prepared.