Inside Golden State Politics

California's Budget Roller Coaster

• Nancy Boyarsky

Share episode

H.D. Palmer, deputy director of California's Department of Finance, walks us through Gov. Gavin Newsom's 2026-27  budget proposal. He's optimistic about the plan but concedes there are uncertainties.

host-4ha0_2_01-14-2026_150759:

Welcome to another episode of Inside Golden State Politics. I'm Bill Bosky, former city editor and columnist for the Los Angeles Times, and with us is our executive producer, Nancy Bosky.

squadcaster-fgjg_1_01-14-2026_150758:

And I'm Sherry, political and Self Maven. Nursing a severe case of early award season overload. thought I could mute the nastiness, sourness and brutality swirling around the real world if only for a little while, and take refuge in Hollywood's golden fantasies. No such luck this year. It seems to me too many of the film awards contenders simply mirror the sourness, nastiness and brutality of today's political and cultural environment, and I don't wanna further normalize that kind of behavior. video game is already doing quite a job, and then there is ice. to you, bill.

host-4ha0_2_01-14-2026_150759:

Yes. There's ice in all of our hometowns. Our guest today is Deputy Director of External Affairs for the Finance Department of State of California, HD Palmer. He is no stranger to that job. He's held it, under, governor Edmund G. Brown, junior Arnold Schwarzenegger, and then served under. Governor Pete Wilson, and he is a key man. In preparing this year's budget, which is the subject of our discussion, hd, tell us a little bit about the budget and what does the governor hope to accomplish with it.

squadcaster-eb56_2_01-14-2026_150759:

Sure. First of all, thanks for having me back guys. Always appreciate being on the podcast. the governor, this is Governor Newsom's last state budget, and what he, hopes to do is to kind of put a capstone, if you will, on the progress that he believes that the state has made in a variety of areas over the last, seven years to, to leave for whoever his successor's going to be. A fiscal condition that is, that is, going to be stable and, and something that they will not have to deal with any immediate shocks on when, when that individual takes office. What I mean by that is that the governor has put forward a, a spending plan that is balanced for the coming fiscal year that begins on, July the first of this year. It contains, combined reserves of about$23 billion, which is, in our view, a solid insurance policy, against, fiscal in a volatile stock market. But we also recognize that looking past this coming fiscal year and looking beyond the horizon. we and the legislative analyst office, the state's nonpartisan, fiscal analyst that works with, directly with the legislature, but we both project that there are going to be substantial shortfalls in the years following the next one. In our, in our case, we believe it's in the neighborhood, a little over$20 billion. So. What the governor has indicated is that he intends to build on this budget when he submits his revised budget later in the spring, the so-called may revision that occurs every year and provide updated and additional solutions not only to close the budget gap for the coming fiscal year. but for the one that follows when he will be out of office. So when I was referring to setting the table for his successor, it was to say that the budget that he intends and hopes to sign, come the end of June of this coming year, is gonna be balanced not only for the fiscal year that starts on July the first, but the fiscal year that follows thereafter.

squadcaster-fgjg_1_01-14-2026_150758:

Well, it's really sort of balanced is that there's still a, in, in the finances, budget, there's still what, a$3 billion deficit

squadcaster-eb56_2_01-14-2026_150759:

Mm-hmm.

squadcaster-fgjg_1_01-14-2026_150758:

LA legislative analyst office. estimate there's an$18 billion deficit.

squadcaster-eb56_2_01-14-2026_150759:

Hmm.

squadcaster-fgjg_1_01-14-2026_150758:

Is that a balanced budget? And, and tell me why there's such a difference between those two predictions. I mean, that's wild.

squadcaster-eb56_2_01-14-2026_150759:

Sure. Y Yeah. Let me take, let me take those in order. First of all, we do, forecast a shortfall of billion without any solutions or, or, or steps taken to close that gap. We do that in, in, in the governor's budget. we, we close that shortfall as for the difference between our estimate of shortfall and, and the, and legislative analysts. It, it really comes down to a difference in our revenue forecast.

squadcaster-fgjg_1_01-14-2026_150758:

What does that mean?

squadcaster-eb56_2_01-14-2026_150759:

What that means is that we both, we being the Department of Finance and the legislative analyst office, recognize that one of the biggest risks that are out there this year and for our, from our view and in any year, is the stock market and the volatility that that is built into it. And the reason for that is the large concentration of tech firms in our state, The reliance or the role that capital gains and stock options play in our personal income tax and the fact that we've got a very small concentration of taxpayers, that are responsible for paying the bulk of the personal income tax in this state. If you look at the mo, for example, if you look at the most recent data from the franchise tax board. if you take the roughly 18 million tax returns that are filed in California, take just 1% of those returns, they're responsible for paying nearly 40% of all the personal income tax. in the most recent year that we have data for, and unlike most normal worker bees like us who get our, our income from wages and salaries, this narrow sliver of taxpayers, derives a lot of their income from things like capital gains and stock options and bonuses that are tied to stock performance. So small swings in, in the markets, fortunes of the market upward down can have very significant outsized effects, good or bad. In, in, in terms of our revenue fortunes in, in the state. As I said a minute ago, we both recognize that this is a risk to our forecast. Again, it always has been. The, the analyst, however, takes it one step further and ba they basically build in a downturn or assume a downturn will occur the, in the, in the financial markets over the next 18 months. And so as a result of building that in as a, as a foregone conclusion, if you will, Their forecast for revenues is much lower than ours, and as a result, their shortfall estimate is much higher than we're ours is projected to be. that's, that's not a criticism of them. That's just a, a description of the, of the differences between our two forecast. We believe that based on the economics that we've seen so far, and the cash that we've received to date. We're comfortable with, with where we are at this point in our revenue forecast. case in point, if you look at the, the revenues that LAO, that the analyst projects that underlie their shortfall projection, they project that revenues would grow by only$11 billion between June of last year and June of. 2027, since June of last year, we've rec, we've taken in more than$10 billion above what we projected we were gonna be. So based on that yardstick, we would only, we would have to basically flatline or drop off, in our revenues over the next year and a half for that to come to pass. What we are seeing in the economy and in the, in the, in the, in the market pro producing these revenues so far, we believe justifies our, our, our forecast. Now, one of the things to remember is that both we and the legislative analyst are gonna revise our forecast in about four months. We always do the so-called mayor revision. And part of that is because things change in the economy. Things change in the outlook, for the budget and, Things can change dramatically in ways that we don't, we don't anticipate. So there are going to be new numbers in, in, in, in mid-May, and we're gonna have an updated projection on our revenues and our shortfall. And after we get more data in at that point and we have more UpToDate. snapshot, if you will, of what conditions are like. That is when the governor believes it's appropriate to put forward additional solutions to close whatever, not only whatever the shortfall is for the coming fiscal year, but what we are looking at for the following fiscal year. His, and, and that's traditionally what has happened. In the budgets. We have a proposal that we put out in January, or any administration does. The legislature reviews it during the spring, and then we update our forecast in May, and then we, and then we go to work based off of that in between there and then June 15th deadline for the legislature to pass their budget. So there is a lot of discussion and debate over you. As there always is about who forecast is right or who's wrong. We have a, we can look at the same economic fundamentals and things and, and come to different conclusions, and we clearly have come to a different conclusion as to what's gonna happen with the markets. both of us recognizing that there's a lot of risk because of the volatility in the market, at this point we don't think that we should. Depress our revenue forecast because of that risk. Based on what we've seen so far in the cash we've gotten to date and what we're seeing in the underlying economic fundamentals,

squadcaster-fgjg_1_01-14-2026_150758:

So in the end, who wins you or the LIO

squadcaster-eb56_2_01-14-2026_150759:

you know, it's.

squadcaster-fgjg_1_01-14-2026_150758:

is finally check off.

squadcaster-eb56_2_01-14-2026_150759:

I, I don't, you know, a lot of people like to say who's right, who's wrong, who wins, who loses. This is a difference of opinion. The legislature is gonna have to make their determination. The, the analyst has recommended to the legislature that they take their forecast as a baseline to make their decisions. We believe ours is based on, on. Solid data and our view of where the economy and where the market stand right now. Again, recognizing that things can change in ways that nobody can foresee. If e, if we have the ability with Rolex Precision to tell you what, what data and when there is going to be a downturn in the stock market. Either of us are the analyst. We shouldn't be here doing things like we are right now. We should be in Vegas playing the sports book because we would have of, of vision and the ability to see the future. That, that, so far none of us here and certainly no other economists that we know of, have been able to, to, to divine.

host-4ha0_2_01-14-2026_150759:

That takes care of my, next question, which was going to be a lot of, economists say that, artificial intelligence and the rest of the tech industry is a bubble ready to burst.

squadcaster-eb56_2_01-14-2026_150759:

Mm-hmm.

host-4ha0_2_01-14-2026_150759:

Do you believe that?

squadcaster-eb56_2_01-14-2026_150759:

I would certainly agree with the statement that artificial intelligence and what we've seen here in California has, has certainly been a driver. of, of our economic growth of our gross domestic product here in California and of our revenues. Without question, it has been, you look at one of the, one of the great benefits of California is that we have what I call the intellectual infrastructure of the uc system and a community of technology in particularly the Bay Area. That has been a welcoming environment to people who have come in. And, and created these remarkable developments that have, have revolutionized the world and have contributed to our economy, to our employment, and to our revenues. The other factor, which is related to this is that if you look at most of the people who are employed in these AI firms that have been driving this growth, and you look at it, the people who have found them, they have been immigrants who have come to California. lot of them have come in on what are called H one B visas, which are technical visas that people use to come in legally to the United States and to California to go to work, continuing their education, continue their work, and eventually become naturalized. lot of the people who are driving that growth right now in these firms are immigrants and we don't name companies in terms of what they contribute to our revenues, but if you take for example nvidia, which is probably the largest. Discussed AI firm in the country and the state and probably the world. The founder of that company came to California on an H one B Visa. So what happens with what the federal policy does on legal immigration we believe is gonna have a long-term effect on our economy and our revenues. So it's not just the issue of the volatility of the markets, which is always going to be out there. There's also this other role that immigration has played specifically in California's economic and revenue growth. That we think ought to be recognized and understood as well as we go forward.

squadcaster-fgjg_1_01-14-2026_150758:

It is a little late. Don't you think? We should have been thinking about this some time ago?

squadcaster-eb56_2_01-14-2026_150759:

Well, that's something that we've been thinking about. And one of the things that we saw in terms of our overall population growth, is, is that it started to come back to normal trends, when the, there was a change in the administrations and, returned to more. Regular, normal, rules of the road for legal immigration. to the United States and to California. That's one of the reason that we went in part from showing year over year declines in California's population to year over year growth because we returned to a more normal pattern of legal migration to California. That's starting to change a bit. We've seen a decline in legal immigration to California in the first six months of this fiscal year. or, or the first, excuse me, the first six months of 2025 when the Trump administration came back and changed a lot of the rules on legal immigration, and that's, that's continuing to play out.

host-4ha0_2_01-14-2026_150759:

Some of the, parts of the economy are winners and some are losers. Something. Education seems to be a winner in this budget. could you talk a little bit about that?

squadcaster-eb56_2_01-14-2026_150759:

Wouldn't, wouldn't dispute that at all. Bill. I think one of the things that we were mentioning a minute ago is that we are seeing the continuation of a lot of the reforms that Governor Newsom and the legislature have put in. case in point, we have, for the first time fully funded, we are fully funding, new grade in K through 12 education, transitional kindergarten, which is now known as TK through 12. We are providing an additional$1 billion under the governor's budget to continue the establishment of community schools, which provides not only the obvious, you know, educational, role that a school provides, but also a lot of the ancillary services that are important, to have kids learning and healthy and, and ready to learn. So, such as nutrition, afterschool programs, social services, whole host of those things that, that really have, have taken off in, in communities throughout this state. So we, we think that education has been and will continue to be, you know, people will call it a winner, but certainly reflects that the governor's, view of education being a, a primary focus of, of his budgets.

squadcaster-fgjg_1_01-14-2026_150758:

Okay, let me follow that up with this. it looks to me that the areas of housing and homelessness are the big losers in this budget. They're being the. funding is being cut. explain

squadcaster-eb56_2_01-14-2026_150759:

I would respectfully disagree with that. I mean, the gut, the governor has proposed another$500 million on top of the substantial billions that have been in the budget since he took office, to, to further, you know, the efforts to, to, to. reduce homelessness. Now those. That$500 million that's in the governor's proposal is also tied to or contingent on accountability measures that he believes are important to say that not only do we need to provide local governments with resources to help them, you know, in their efforts in the state's efforts to, to combat homelessness, but we wanna make sure that those dollars are being used efficiently and effectively. And so there is money in the budget, a half a billion dollars next year statewide to continue the state's investment in. Efforts to combat homelessness, but it's also gonna be associated with accountability measures that are going to be put forward and and debated during the spring. But up until, up until, you know, I think it's fair to say, if you take a look back over the last eight years, homelessness had not been a, a state issue. It had either on a fiscally basis or a policy basis, it was something the cities and counties had to deal with. That's changed over the last. or eight years because the governor has really said this is an issue that it ha is a statewide issue. It has to do. Not only with the health and wellbeing of these individuals who are unhoused, it has to do with the quality of life. It has to do with public safety. it has to do with issues such as mental health and substance use disorder. And it requires a, a, a broad and coordinated statewide response. So I think you've seen substantial investments over the last seven years now, eight years under the governor's latest budget really didn't exist before that

squadcaster-fgjg_1_01-14-2026_150758:

I have another a, a sort follow up. Kind of a turn, right turn, follow up. But you know, what you have discussed reminds me of one of the criticisms that I thought was innate in the legislative analyst office report. And it has to do fact that, You finance was criticized governor more. More importantly, it was criticized as what the challenges are, knowing what the possible weak links are with regard to the budget process and the estimates involved. But said the legislative analyst, they didn't see very much in terms of specific programs

squadcaster-eb56_2_01-14-2026_150759:

sure. And that kind of gets to back to what we talked about in terms of waiting for updated information in May. The other thing I think that that is important to note here is, and it plays into this, is. That relative to other fiscal year, years in the past and other budgets in the past, have a huge amount of uncertainty and a huge amount of change that's being driven by Washington directly affecting us. Case in point, HR one, the so-called big beautiful bill that Congress passed last summer and the president signed certainly big debatably on the issue of beautiful. That's having a significant impact on California case in 0.1. We've got additional costs that California now has to bear on that we estimate them to be the neighborhood of about$1.4 billion next year. But if you look at what's going on in terms of healthcare. A critical issue in California, is currently, you know, causing, you know, tens of thousands of individuals to likely be dis-enrolled in healthcare. So there are a lot of things that are in flux. Take a look at the fact that as of January the first, the subsidies that were available to cover premiums under the Affordable Care Act, expired, basically. Doubling people's premiums in California overnight. For those of individuals who have gotten their health insurance through Covered California, which is the state's, health insurance, marketplace. They estimate that nearly 300,000 people are going to lose their healthcare insurance because of that. of those subsidies. On top of that, the changes in terms of Medicaid, which in California's Medi-Cal is going to, we're looking at, you know, roughly 200,000 individuals who are probably going to be disenrolled in the coming year because of the new federal changes. We can assume that that is not going to change and we can start making decisions at this point. to say, for example, and hypothetically, we're gonna cut back on coverage even further than what the, the state has been doing in terms of not enrolling new individuals in certain programs. What if that changes in, in the coming months? What if Congress decides we are gonna insure those folks and then on on the other side, we don't know what's going to happen to the economy yet. If we're going to have to put even more decisions on the table, come May. That deals with the issue of what the federal government does with tariffs. What they do with immigration policy and what they do to the economy, as evidenced just this past week by the, the market reaction and the political reaction to the attempts to, take legal action against the chairman of the Federal Reserve Board. That has been a hugely disruptive issue that has significant effects to the market. So with all of that uncertainty and knowing that we're going to have to update these numbers in May, that's going to change a lot of the rule, the things we've un already put on the table. We believed that it was prudent to hold off on that and to come back with additional decisions when we revise our numbers in May as a normal matter of course. W we do that, the legislature does that. The legislative analyst does that. So far, you know, the legislative analyst has said they have not seen these proposals, but their role is to help guide the legislature and to provide recommendations and advice on how they would suggest to the legislature that they address what they identify as the as, as a shortfall. At least as to this date, we haven't seen any of those specifics. And again, we look forward to seeing what the legislative analysts called meaningful proposals on they, how they recommend to the legislature that they close a budget gap that by their yardstick is larger than what we're seeing in ours hours.

host-4ha0_2_01-14-2026_150759:

Let's talk about undocumented immigrants. Thi. the, the Trump administration, certainly, is hostile to them and, feels that, California and a couple other states are overly generous with benefits. Your budget. Deals with that, but you're limited in how you can deal with it. Because as you said, you don't, you don't know what's coming. But you're an administration that is generally friendly toward immigrants. You're what you said about the, the movers and shakers of, of, of the tech industry is an example of that. So that's how the Newsom administration looks at it. And then you have the Trump administration in Washington who thinks that, these people are, are, are illegal interlopers, how are you, reconciling that? Is that possible?

squadcaster-eb56_2_01-14-2026_150759:

Yeah. well first of all, when we were talking earlier about the tech community and the, and the role that immigration has played, we're, we're talking about legal immigration there. What, what you're, what you're touching on Bill is important, but that is also the issue of undocumented immigration and this, you're absolutely right. This administration has said. that providing healthcare as best the state is able to do so for this population is important. it's not only for a healthcare issue, but but from a fiscal issue as well. the state has provided by its own dollars coverage for individuals through Medi-Cal, the state's health insurance program for low income individuals. who were not documented again, the reasons of straight up healthcare. The other also reason is, has a fiscal component to it too. the fact if you provide individuals with basic care at the front end, more likely not to require more expensive, less effective healthcare. On the other end of that spectrum, and what we're talking about there is the emergency room instead of going to a general practitioner or a Medi-Cal provider. who are not insured are ending up in the ER for basic care. That's a heck of a lot more expensive than providing primary care. The second thing to remember about that is that if these individuals are uninsured, the counties, the 58 counties in the state are the, are the providers of, of healthcare, of last resort. So it's not as, as if these costs would go away. In many cases, they may roll down to the counties as well. So they have. A, a role and, and, and their, you know, their role is, is important in this, and they recognize, I think that that what's going on is going to affect them too. Now the question would be, well, why don't you just simply take all those un undocumented individuals who are, know, being, whose healthcare is being changed by these new federal changes under the Trump administration and just bring'em all under Medi-Cal. That would be one way to do it, but that has a fiscal cost to it as well of about$1.1 billion. And again, when we're looking at having to close a budget gap of nearly$3 billion this year, and looking over the horizon of what we believe is a shortfall of over$20 billion in the company. Fiscal year. That is not something that we can fiscally take on at this point. Again, not because we haven't demonstrated that, that we wanna provide healthcare, but it's, it is a situation where we have to provide a balanced budget. But that is an effect and a byproduct and a result of those changes in Washington that are rippling through our state budget, our state healthcare system, and down to, the county level, I recall very vividly Arnold Schwarzenegger tried to do this during his administration by broadening the sales tax base to areas that currently that heretofore had not been, subject to the sales tax. One of them I remember very well was veterinary services. The governor proposed this, governor Schwarzenegger proposed this and one of his January budgets. I don't think I've ever heard as many. PET publications as there were in California, who came out, in, in outcry over this asking us why does Arnold Schwartzenegger wanna balance the budget on the backs of Fluffy and Fido? That's just one example. There are any number of other groups, whether it's in the legal profession, whether it's in the entertainment profession, where their part of their income isn't subject to sales tax. like it. They lobbied heavily against it. End of the end of the day, the legislature didn't approve that. So there is, you know, technically there is a way to do that, but there is a lot of resistance, for example, to a greater reliance on the sales tax to, to those industries that currently aren't taxed. And also. The fact that we're, the personal income tax and particularly the role that the markets and the economy here with with technology have have been significant revenue generators and revenue raisers over time, as we've seen and as we're currently seeing right now, as evidenced by the fact that our revenues and personal income tax driven by growth in technology are up$43 billion over three years compared to our last forecast.

squadcaster-fgjg_1_01-14-2026_150758:

Oh, you.

host-4ha0_2_01-14-2026_150759:

You hope that.

squadcaster-eb56_2_01-14-2026_150759:

Well, I think, I think we're, we're, we're. I don't think it's an optimist. We're not saying that this is going to go on forever. Unfettered. That's one of the things that happened during the.com boom, back at the turn of the century in 1999 and 2000. Startup firms in Silicon Valley were shooting up like weeds, and everybody thought that those things were going to be growing forever. Well, that, that boom went spectacularly bust and a lot of the investment was speculative at the, at the time. Whereas this time, one of the things to remember is that you've got a lot of. You know, firms that are, have matured and grown and are, are, it's a different situation altogether than what it was 20 years ago. That said, we know the things that o the, the state has no control over can dramatically affect what goes on in terms of the stock markets. We mentioned a minute ago what may happen with the machinations over the Federal Reserve. There was a great deal of concern over tariffs last year. A lot of them didn't come to pass because one, they got pulled back by the, federal administration and number two, a lot of businesses front-loaded their inventory so that there wasn't that big of a consumer shock. We've gotta see how that continues to play out. so we're not saying that this is going to continue forever. are saying that it is difficult if. impossible with precision to pinpoint when there's gonna be a pivot in the market, and we recognize that, but we don't assume it's a foregone conclusion based on the information that we have seen to date and what's going on in the economy, the cash that we've received since our last forecast, and where at the current standpoint we see things going. Having said that. We're gonna do, we do every year, which is we're gonna update our economic forecast in the spring. We're gonna update our revenue forecast. We're gonna see what personal income tax receipts in April look like, and we're gonna update all of our numbers and come out with a revised plan in mid-May. That's going to be the, the guidepost for where we go from there in terms of, of what is finally. debated and adopted on alleged on a budget, not only for the this coming fiscal year, but as we said at the outset in the governor's view, hopefully balanced for the fiscal year that follows.

host-4ha0_2_01-14-2026_150759:

Well, thank you very much. This has been a big help. It's, laid it out in very clear. Language and concepts.

squadcaster-eb56_2_01-14-2026_150759:

Well there, there are, as always, a lot of moving parts, but there's gonna be something that's gonna be different, every year. Fortunately, it's not what it was six years ago when we were looking at a$6 billion surplus in 2020 in January, and then all of a sudden, eight weeks later. We were in lockdown, wearing masks and fighting over toilet paper, and the economy had come to a, a screeching halt because of COVID. we're not in that situation now. However, as always, there are risks and threats to what is going to happen to our forecasts that, that we need to be mindful of and prepare for, and that's what we've done. We believe in this budget with a balanced, plan that sets aside a, a combined total of$23 billion in reserves With the knowledge that we're gonna have to come back in in the spring with even further, steps to make sure that we can address the following year, fiscal year when the governor is gone and not in office, that we address that as well before he leaves.

squadcaster-fgjg_1_01-14-2026_150758:

That's an interesting dynamic and I'm thinking that, you know, this looks a little bit, and one of the criticisms has been that this is kind of a kick can down the road budget that Gavin Newsom has, offered because if he should decide to, for president. will look better to have that on his record than a major, major deficit.

squadcaster-eb56_2_01-14-2026_150759:

I am not gonna get into the political aid, but I would, I would offer the up this side if, if the governor were to just be, you know, concerned with getting a balanced budget and be done with it, with this, his last budget. And let the, and let the next governor deal with whatever the, the shortfall is. He wouldn't have said as he did in his budget last week, I'm looking over the horizon. Not only do I wanna deal with this issue for this coming fiscal year, I wanna look a year ahead. In his recent budgets, we have solved for what we estimated to be a two year problem, he's talking about doing that again. So I would, I would dispute the, the thesis that it's a kick the can down the road budget because he said, To borrow, perhaps with the phrase of one of his predecessors. We'll be back and we'll be back with updated solutions in May to deal with what the updated estimate is gonna be for what we have to do to keep the state on on, on solid fiscal footing.

host-4ha0_2_01-14-2026_150759:

Well, thank you very much. This has been, enlightening.

squadcaster-eb56_2_01-14-2026_150759:

well thank you guys again for having me. Always appreciate it and always love being on to talk to you.

host-4ha0_2_01-14-2026_150759:

Well, we always love to have you. You're one of our. Finest guests you deal with a, a, a complex subject and you make it interesting rather than

squadcaster-fgjg_1_01-14-2026_150758:

understandable.

host-4ha0_2_01-14-2026_150759:

understandable.

squadcaster-fgjg_1_01-14-2026_150758:

That's what I

squadcaster-eb56_2_01-14-2026_150759:

Well,

squadcaster-fgjg_1_01-14-2026_150758:

appreciate.

squadcaster-eb56_2_01-14-2026_150759:

we, we certainly hope so up.

squadcaster-fgjg_1_01-14-2026_150758:

Thanks a lot everybody.

host-4ha0_2_01-14-2026_150759:

thanks

squadcaster-fgjg_1_01-14-2026_150758:

Cheers.

host-4ha0_2_01-14-2026_150759:

Bye-bye.