Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): it clearly and unambiguously states that there are likely increased costs associated with the influx of felons registering to vote, but that the exact amount of cost increase cannot be determined. Moreover, the financial impact statement clearly and unambiguously explains that the Financial Impact Estimating Conference could not determine the impact on state and local government revenue. Therefore, we conclude that the financial impact statement complies with section 100.371(5). See Advisory Op. to Att’y Gen. re Fla. Growth Mgmt. Initiative Giving Citizens Right to Decide Local Growth Mgmt. Plan Changes, 2 So.3d 118, 124 (Fla. 2008) (“Overall, the financial impact statement is necessarily indefinite but not unclear or unambiguous.”); see also Medical Marijuana II, 181 So.3d at 479 (<HOLDING>); Water & Land Conservation, 123 So.3d at 52 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that state and local government agencies were not persons under the fca (B) holding that  332c7b iii does not apply only to general bans and stating that prohibiting only general bans would 1 require a court to wait for a series of denied applications and 2 lead to the untenable result that once personal wire services are available within the jurisdiction of a state or local government  the state or local government could deny any further applications with impunity (C) holding that district court did not abuse its discretion in striking fact statements that did not comply with the local rules (D) holding that the financial impact statements indeterminate conclusion with regard to the increase or decrease in costs or revenues to state and local government nonetheless complied with section 100371 (E) holding that determination of whether an official was acting on behalf of the state or the local government is determined by state law
Output (English): holding that state and local government agencies were not persons under the fca