Transcript Highlights:

• children and many districts most children and many districts most districts<00:36:36.200> in<
• we<00:59:33.000> do District rural District when we do District rural District when we do
• my district of 150 sick days or even more in some districts.
• my district of 150 sick days or even more in some districts.
• > to<01:19:25.880> lose district district is projected to lose district district is projected

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• school districts apply.
• If we break that out by districts and charters, the district average was very similar at $60,458, and
• 72, average teacher salaries at districts based on various district-level attributes.
• leaving that district.
• We want to help districts do that.

Summary: The committee first approved the May 18 meeting minutes and then received a Legislative Audit presentation summarizing Arkansas Department of Education grant distributions for fiscal year 2025. Auditors said the department distributed about $4.6 billion in grants overall, including $3.2 billion from the Public School Fund, $1.1 billion in federal funds, and $268 million from other state and miscellaneous sources, across 56 Public School Fund programs, 14 other state programs, and 29 federal programs. Members asked about specific recipients and programs, including ClassWallet, master principal bonuses, Economics Arkansas, and CDC surveillance funding; audit staff and Department of Education representatives explained that the report was only a distribution summary and not a recipient-level audit. Members also questioned why many districts showed lower funding, and staff said the decline was largely due to reduced federal and one-time COVID-related funds. Senators and representatives also discussed whether some incentive programs, such as master principal and national board bonuses, were tied to student outcomes, and whether Economics Arkansas was the sole entity named in special language for financial literacy funding; department staff said they would follow up on several details. The committee then heard a Bureau of Legislative Research presentation on consumer price index projections from Moody’s Analytics and S&P Global, with discussion of CPI-U and core CPI estimates for future fiscal years. Dr. Carlos Silva explained that the forecasts generally trend toward about 2 percent over time and that recent projections may have understated actual inflation because of recent shocks. Members asked about the accuracy of past projections, and he said he would provide more detail later if needed. The bulk of the meeting focused on the final adequacy report on teacher recruitment, retention, and salaries. BLR staff reported that Arkansas had about 32,800 teachers and 473,000 students in 2025, with a statewide student-to-teacher ratio of about 14 to 1, average teaching experience of 11.9 years, and a slight increase in National Board Certified teachers. The report found that districts with higher poverty and minority concentrations generally had less experienced teachers, and that teacher shortages remained widespread, especially in special education, math, science, and foreign language. Members asked about licensure exceptions, alternative preparation pathways, incentives for ESL and special education endorsements, and the cost and return on investment of traditional versus alternative routes. Staff said some licensure exceptions are being phased out under Act 304 of 2025 and that they would follow up on several requested details. The report also found that teacher retention averaged 87 percent statewide in 2025, with districts retaining teachers at higher rates than charters, and that 30 percent of surveyed teachers were considering leaving the profession. Principals and teachers identified school leadership as the strongest positive factor in recruitment and retention, while workload and salary were the strongest negative factors. On salaries, BLR reported a statewide average teacher salary of $60,254 in 2025, with districts averaging $60,458 and charters $55,724. Arkansas ranked 45th nationally on average teacher salary in 2025, though its cost-adjusted ranking improved to 36th; among SREB states it ranked 12th, and among neighboring states it ranked fourth. Members asked about starting salaries, salary compression, district step increases, and whether the report should be shared more broadly with educators and school leaders. Staff said they would provide follow-up information on several questions, and the committee took no formal action beyond receiving the presentations and asking for additional data.

Transcript Highlights:

• As you and I both talked about many times, districts have diverse needs, district to district.
• can only qualify for the enhanced TIA program if they are already a TIA-approved district. district.
• there are districts where.
• But these districts that we labeled at 5,000 students and under represent 80,000. 3% of the districts
• We give them a to $10,000, any district over $5,000. and ADA, we give those districts, those teachers

Bills: SB26, SB28, SJR36, SB26, SB616, SB565, SB384, SB28

Keywords: teacher compensation, education funding, public school educators, teacher retention, teacher designation, lottery, gambling, internet gaming, mobile application, criminal offenses, aquifer, water management, Edwards Aquifer, sustainability, regulatory framework, SB 565, Texas Water Code, TCEQ, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, compliance agreement

Transcript Highlights:

• Do you know from these districts?
• district and charter spending.
• districts.
• So it appears that it's a lot of movement within districts, charter districts, and traditional districts
• It could be from a traditional district to another traditional district.

Keywords: 1204, all

Summary: The Senate and House Education Committee approved the March 9 and 10 minutes and then heard a presentation on the Arkansas Excellence in Teaching Fellowship Program from Department of Education staff and three third-grade teachers from Cabot, Poyen, and Drew Central. The teachers described the year-long fellowship for high-performing merit pay recipients, saying it provided collaboration with educators across the state, shared resources, and ideas they brought back to their districts. Members asked about the teachers’ experience levels, how they shared information locally, and whether the program should be expanded to more teachers and districts. A major focus of the discussion was third-grade reading, the new ATLAS testing system, and the state’s third-grade retention law. The teachers said they do not teach to the test, but use standards, data, interventions, small groups, and relationships to help students grow. They described progress monitoring throughout the year, early screening in K-2, and interventions such as before-school tutoring, RTI meetings, and co-teaching. One teacher reported that six students in a small group improved 10 to 15 points on ATLAS, and another said a student who started the year reading four words per minute improved significantly with targeted support. Secretary Jacob Oliva said the state is trying to create clarity and alignment through Arkansas Learns, science-of-reading support, literacy coaches, and faster test-result turnaround, with student scores now available within about 24 hours and district-level results expected later in the summer. Members also asked about student poverty, trauma, ACEs, DHS involvement, social workers, community supports, and the role of counselors. The teachers emphasized that relationship-building is essential, especially for students facing unstable home situations, and described local supports such as backpack food programs, church donations, fire department incentives, and family assistance. Oliva said the fellowship was intentionally small in its first year because it targeted top-tier merit pay recipients, but he expects participation to grow. He also said merit pay and fellowship eligibility spans many grade levels and subjects, including kindergarten and hard-to-staff areas, and that D and F schools receive state literacy coaches. No additional committee votes or formal actions were taken beyond approving the minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is awesome stuff because it let you compare district to district.
• This is awesome stuff because it let you compare district to district.
• This is awesome stuff because it let you compare district to district.
• district budget? district budget?
• <00:45:01.680> then<00:45:02.000> district within the same district, then district within

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The support of the district.
• Allegations as it relates to our school districts, our public school districts.
• District had on.
• Districts are pressured.
• The school district has no control over the county appraisal district.

Bills: SB1, SB 1

Keywords: appropriations, budget, state funding, education, healthcare, infrastructure, campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Do you want the amounts for each district or just the district names?
• district names?
• In our district.
• In my district, I have nine school districts, seven of which...
• know the district, who care for the district, who carry the pulse of the district in their hearts, minds

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, we have, uh, no public meetings within our district. We're a small district.
• as opposed to, uh, in the, uh, district itself, uh, outside of the district.
• OK, we met last this month in our district. We had 2 people in the district to attend.
• I don't in my district.
• My district and all districts in Rockwall and Kaufman counties.

Transcript Highlights:

• or Senate district.
• or Senate district.
• the district is to draw a district that has lines that... ...draw a district that has lines that would
• Congressional District 5 and Congressional District 6.
• and House districts?

Keywords: 998, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• or Senate district.
• 5 and Congressional District 6.
• Congressional District 5 and Congressional District 6.
• into that district.
• and House districts?

Summary: The Senate convened in special session with an opening prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, then moved to the special order calendar to consider congressional redistricting legislation, beginning with Senate Bill 8D and then substituting the identical House Bill 1D. The bill would establish Florida’s congressional districts. Senator Gaetz, presenting the measure, said the Governor had proposed the map to address population growth and to draw race-neutral districts, and argued that mid-decade redistricting is legally permissible and has occurred before in Florida and other states. He repeatedly said the Legislature could accept, reject, or amend the proposal, but that the Governor had the prerogative to propose it. The floor debate focused heavily on the legality and timing of the map, especially after the U.S. Supreme Court’s Louisiana redistricting decision was announced during the session. Several senators, including Rouson, Sharief, Smith, Polsky, Arrington, Bracy Davis, Bernard, Nathan, and Berman, questioned whether the map complied with the Florida Constitution’s Fair Districts Amendment, the Voting Rights Act, and equal protection principles. They raised concerns about the short notice, lack of statewide public hearings, the use of partisan data, the absence of sworn testimony from the Governor’s representatives, the claimed severability of the Fair Districts Amendment, and the impact on minority communities and communities of interest. Gaetz generally declined to offer legal opinions, saying those issues would ultimately be for the courts, but he relayed the Governor’s position that race-based provisions in the Fair Districts Amendment are unconstitutional and that the proposed map is race-neutral and compact. Members also debated whether the map’s population data and compactness scores justified the district lines, with critics arguing that the plan cracked and split communities in places such as Central Florida, Tampa Bay, and South Florida. Gaetz said the Governor’s office relied on 2020 census data plus updated population estimates from the Office of Economic and Demographic Research and the American Community Survey, and that the mapmaker said he drew the map himself without outside consultants. After questions concluded, the Senate adopted a motion to substitute HB 1D for SB 8D, read the bill a third time, and proceeded to debate the House bill. The transcript ends during debate, with no final vote on passage shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• or Senate district.
• 5 and Congressional District 6.
• Congressional District 5 and Congressional District 6.
• into that district.
• and House districts?

Summary: The Senate convened in special session and took up Senate Bill 8D, later substituting identical House Bill 1D, to establish Florida’s congressional districts. The opening prayer and Pledge of Allegiance were followed by procedural remarks, then extensive floor discussion focused almost entirely on the redistricting proposal, its timing, and its legal basis. Senator Gaetz, explaining the bill, said the Governor had transmitted the map two days earlier, argued that mid-decade congressional redistricting is not prohibited by law, and said the Governor’s stated reasons were to address population growth and to draw race-neutral districts. He also said the legislature could accept, reject, or amend the proposal. Much of the debate centered on the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent Louisiana decision and whether it affected Florida’s Fair Districts Amendment and the Voting Rights Act. Senators Smith, Rouson, Sharief, Polsky, Arrington, Bracey Davis, Bernard, Nathan, and others questioned the short notice, lack of public hearings, the use of partisan data, the absence of sworn testimony, and whether the map diluted minority voting strength or fragmented communities of interest. Gaetz repeatedly said he was not offering legal opinions, that the Governor’s counsel believed the Fair Districts race-based provisions were inconsistent with federal law, and that any legal challenge would be for the courts. He also said the Governor’s mapmaker reported using census and demographic data, along with political data as one of many inputs, and claimed the map’s compactness was comparable to the current map. A motion by Senator Smith to temporarily postpone consideration of the bill failed on a 12-23 vote. After the Senate returned from a 30-minute break to review the new Supreme Court decision, debate continued. The chamber then substituted HB 1D for SB 8D, read the House bill, and advanced it to third reading. The transcript ends during debate on final passage, with Senators Rouson and Bernard speaking in opposition and arguing the map was procedurally rushed, legally vulnerable, and politically motivated.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're talking about district to district. What about inside the district?
• What about inside district to district. What about inside the<00:30:44.559> district?
• the district? the district?
• This is dealing with district to district. Okay.
• . district. district.

Keywords: Education - Room 216, January 6, 2026; 12:45 PM, 925, all

Summary: The committee welcomed three new members and elected Senator Brian Rhodes as committee secretary by acclamation. It then took up three education bills. Senate Bill 2001, a $2,000 across-the-board pay raise for teachers, teacher assistants, and certain higher education instructors, was explained as a partial step that could be increased later if more funds become available. The bill also included language to prevent school districts from offsetting state raises for teacher assistants by reducing local supplements. After no questions, the committee adopted a motion that the bill be reported. Senate Bill 2003, which expands the program allowing retired individuals to return to teach, drew the most discussion. The bill broadens eligibility beyond retired educators, raises the retirement-pay percentage from 50% to 65%, shortens the required break in service from 90 days to 45 days in most cases, removes the critical-shortage-area limitation, and allows retirees to teach in any district. Senator Hill offered and the committee adopted an amendment to clarify that the retiree must be receiving a PERS retirement allowance. Members debated possible effects on the retirement system, but the bill was ultimately reported. Senate Bill 2002, dealing with public school district transfers, would remove the sending district’s ability to veto a student’s transfer to another public district. Senator Hopson offered a single amendment, adopted by the committee, to allow receiving districts to charge a reasonable fee, require transfer notice by March 15 absent good cause, and preserve MHSAA’s authority over extracurricular eligibility. Members discussed transportation, equity, and athletic recruiting concerns, and the amendment was clarified to leave the fee amount to the receiving district’s board. After the amendment, the bill was reported.

Transcript Highlights:

• c><00:34:44.240> an<00:34:44.480> actual district by district to get an actual district
• A lot of districts do the district.
• or all districts will be districts or all districts will be conservative<01:17:26.800> when<01
• by district or see if um deer district by district or see if um deer has<01:38:24.800> done<01
• /c><01:47:58.080> responsible district and the district is responsible district and the district

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The commission met to continue its study of the cost of special education, with the chair emphasizing that the group needs to narrow its focus over the coming year toward specific cost drivers, including the IEP process, Medicaid, charter schools, and EFAs. Members reviewed a draft first report due November 1 and agreed it would be a brief synopsis of prior meetings, with minutes attached. The September 30, 2025 minutes were amended to correct the number of federally funded department staff from 234 to 23, and to revise language about Senator Sullivan’s comments so they reflected concerns about IEP advocates and fees charged to families rather than support for the concept. The amended minutes were then approved unanimously, with abstentions noted for members who were absent. The main presentation focused on how special education costs are handled for students attending charter schools. The DOE representative said there are 804 students with disabilities in charter schools across 88 of the state’s 176 districts, and that the district of residence remains responsible for all services and costs. She explained that students must meet IDEA criteria through district evaluation and parent consent, and that services are determined through individual IEP meetings rather than by a blanket charter-school decision. Members asked how those costs are tracked, whether any students are merely “monitored,” and whether districts separately identify charter-school special education expenses; the answer was that most districts fold those costs into their overall special education budget, though some may break them out as a line item. The discussion then turned to transportation and mileage costs for staff providing services at charter schools. Testimony indicated that districts may use their own staff, contract staff, or contract with a charter school for certified services, and that travel costs are often either built into contracts or absorbed as part of staff time rather than separately reimbursed. Members questioned whether mileage is reimbursed when staff travel to distant charter schools and whether those costs can be isolated in district budgets; the response was that practices vary by district and are not usually broken out by special education function. Several members argued this makes it difficult to determine the true cost of delivering special education, especially given New Hampshire’s model in which the district of residence pays regardless of where the charter school is located. The chair noted the complexity of the system and compared it to the state’s separate tuition and transportation approach for career and technical education centers.

Transcript Highlights:

• or Senate district.
• The construction of that district.
• 5 and Congressional District 6.
• Congressional District 5 and Congressional District 6.
• and House districts?

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• the district is to draw a district that has lines that Draw a district that has lines that would promote
• 5 and Congressional District 6.
• Congressional District 5 and Congressional District 6.
• into that district.
• and House districts?

Summary: The Senate convened in special session and took up Senate Bill 8D / House Bill 1D, which would establish Florida’s congressional districts. The sponsor, Sen. Gates, explained that the Governor had transmitted a redistricting plan two days earlier and argued that mid-decade redistricting is legally permissible, citing population growth and the Governor’s view that race-based districting is unconstitutional. Much of the floor time was spent in extended questioning about the process, the lack of public hearings compared with prior redistricting cycles, the use of population estimates from the Census/EDR/ACS, compactness scores, and whether the Governor’s office used partisan data or outside consultants. Gates repeatedly said he was relaying the Governor’s proposal and legal theory rather than offering his own legal opinion, and he said any constitutional challenge would be for the courts. A major portion of the debate focused on the U.S. Supreme Court’s newly issued Calais decision and its implications for the Fair Districts Amendment and the Voting Rights Act. Senators questioned whether the decision struck down Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, whether it affected Florida’s constitutional ban on partisan gerrymandering, and whether the Legislature should postpone action to review the ruling. A motion to temporarily postpone the bill failed by voice vote and then by recorded vote, 12 yeas to 23 nays. Senators also raised concerns that the proposed map cracked minority communities, including Latino and Black populations in Central Florida and Tampa Bay, and that it would produce a heavily Republican-leaning map despite the state’s voter registration mix. After debate on the Senate bill, the chamber substituted the identical House companion bill, read it a third time, and proceeded to final debate. Opponents argued the map was an illegal partisan gerrymander, was based on assumptions rather than verified data, and would likely lead to litigation. Supporters maintained that the Governor had authority to propose a congressional map, that the plan was race-neutral, and that the Legislature could accept, reject, or amend it. The transcript ends during continued debate on House Bill 1D, with no final vote shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• in our schools and districts.
• Cooperative purchasing: because we're large, we have 37 districts, we're 36 districts, we're able to
• and focusing on district need.
• But Nefeck is able to do that on our behalf and negotiate as 16 districts or 15 districts, and then they
• of that district.

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Pre-K-12 Education met with a quorum and first heard a Department of Education program review on three district support programs: assistance to low-performing schools, the Florida Partnership program, and regional literacy teams (RAISE). Dr. Paul Burns described how the Bureau of School Improvement supports schools with D/F grades through regional teams, classroom observations, professional learning, and targeted funding, noting that 104 of 168 low-performing schools improved after 2022-23 and that the share of failing schools fell from 6% to 4%. He also outlined the Florida Partnership’s $4 million annual appropriation for advanced-course teacher training and student access, and the RAISE literacy program’s $5 million funding, universal/targeted/intensive supports, and progress monitoring results. Senators asked about rural participation, post-COVID reading data, parent support, and how long schools remain under monitoring after improving; Burns said rural districts can participate statewide, parents can access school and department support, and schools continue to receive monitoring after exiting low-performing status to prevent recidivism. The committee then received a presentation on the school district education foundation matching grants program from Suzanne Pridgen, who explained that the Consortium of the Florida Education Foundations administers the grants, which require private matching funds and support tutoring, literacy, STEM, career education, professional learning, books, and supplies. She said the program leverages about $1.44 in private support for every state dollar. The committee then moved to the regional education consortia, where representatives from PAEC, NEFEC, and Heartland, along with several rural superintendents, described the consortia as member-led organizations that provide economies of scale, professional learning, HR, risk management, purchasing, legal and operational support, crisis assistance, and leadership development for small and fiscally constrained districts. Superintendents from Lafayette, Holmes, Calhoun, Union, DeSoto, and Hendry counties testified that the consortia are essential because rural districts often have very small staffs, multiple-duty administrators, and limited in-house expertise. They cited support with insurance and hurricane recovery, training for new finance and HR staff, instructional coaching, CTE and leadership programs, and help with turnaround schools. Members emphasized that these districts can be high-performing despite limited resources, and several senators praised the consortia’s value. Senator Gaetz asked about additional back-office collaboration, possible regulatory relief, and FEFP issues tied to scholarship-related enrollment swings; rural superintendents responded that more local control would help. The meeting ended with a motion to adjourn, which was adopted without objection.

Transcript Highlights:

• So district supports, we think about instructions. So important to our rural districts.
• We were in a district last year.
• The district in years.
• My district is that her school.
• So one district may decide to go Apple computers. Our district decided Chromebooks.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• District Committee.
• Well, I'll use District 32 and District 35 as examples.
• They have taken Senate District 9 and Congressional District 9, which were African-American districts
• district, and this now affects District 13.
• district in the country.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I will refer to Topok Elementary School District as the district throughout my presentation.
• district accountable to making improvements... ...at your December 2025 meeting, holding the district
• We can't get districts out of noncompliance if the districts are not doing the work themselves to get
• The district is a rural district, and it requires a lot of oversight and managing multiple roles, which
• School District performance audits assess districts operational efficiency and effect A.

Summary: The committee first heard an update on Topok Elementary School District’s long-running noncompliance with Arizona’s Uniform System of Financial Records. The Auditor General’s office explained the USFR noncompliance process and reported that Topok had made substantial progress, correcting many deficiencies in areas such as open meeting law, procurement, payroll, attendance reporting, property control, and information technology. The district’s superintendent and staff described the corrective actions they had taken, the use of outside consultants, and their plan to maintain compliance through stronger leadership, training, and consistent procedures. Members praised the district’s progress and asked about the remaining deficiencies and the status of the 3% state-aid withholding, which the Auditor General said would be addressed by the State Board of Education. The committee then considered a request for a fourth school safety special audit, tied to concerns raised by Representative Martinez about Phoenix Union High School District and school violence response practices. The Auditor General said the proposed audit would be a new topic focused on policies and procedures for responding to credible threats of violence and allegations of staff misconduct affecting student safety, and could include Phoenix Union in the sample. Representative Martinez described a fatal 2024 shooting, weapons incidents, and concerns about district oversight. The committee approved the motion 10-0. Next, staff presented the fiscal years 2027-2028 school district performance audit schedule, describing 26 randomly selected school districts and career and technical education districts, plus 84 planned follow-ups. The Auditor General said the schedule is intended to shorten the average time between audits and that the school audits division is now fully staffed. Members asked about county coverage and the inclusion of ESA accountability, but the schedule was ultimately presented for review rather than approval. The committee also heard a detailed federal compliance audit presentation on the Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) administered by DES. The Auditor General reported repeated findings involving missing provider documentation, questioned costs, and FFATA reporting errors, including a 2024 sample that led to questioning $2.88 million in costs. The office recommended stronger documentation, record retention, reporting procedures, and staff training; DES concurred and said it would correct the findings in 2026. Members discussed the limits of the single-audit scope, the possibility of a broader special audit, and the federal government’s recent actions on CCDF oversight in other states. Finally, the committee considered and discussed a special audit request for CCDF that would broaden review to provider oversight, licensing, site visits, and billing accuracy across multiple state agencies, with estimated costs of $547,000 to $625,000 and a projected report date of July 31, 2027.

Transcript Highlights:

• district, or in the case of legislative redistricting, a different House or Senate district.
• the district is to draw a district that has lines that...
• Congressional District 5 and Congressional District 6.
• into that district.
• and House districts?

Summary: The Senate convened in special session and took up Senate Bill 8D, later substituted with House Bill 1D, both establishing Florida’s congressional districts. The sponsor, Senator Gates, explained that the Governor had transmitted a proposed redistricting plan on short notice and argued that mid-decade congressional redistricting is legally permissible, citing population growth and the Governor’s view that race-based provisions in the Fair Districts Amendment are unconstitutional. He repeatedly said the Legislature was not being asked to prove the Governor’s legal theory, only to consider the proposal, and noted that no amendments were offered. A lengthy question-and-answer period followed, with senators raising concerns about the rushed process, lack of statewide public hearings, and the map’s effects on minority communities, compactness, communities of interest, and partisan fairness. Senators questioned whether the map cracked Latino and Black communities, whether partisan data was used, whether the Governor’s office had outside consultants, and whether the plan complied with the Florida Constitution, the Fair Districts Amendment, and the Voting Rights Act. Gates generally deferred on legal conclusions, said the Governor’s representatives had testified the map was race-neutral and used political data only as one factor, and emphasized that any constitutional challenge would be for the courts. After a motion to temporarily postpone failed by a recorded vote of 12 yeas to 23 nays, the Senate continued debate. Senators Rouson, Bernard, and others spoke in opposition, arguing the proposal was rushed, partisan, and harmful to communities of interest and minority voting power. Gates maintained that the Governor had a constitutional prerogative to propose the map and that the Legislature could accept, reject, or amend it. The House companion bill was then substituted for the Senate bill, read a third time, and the chamber moved into final debate on the congressional redistricting plan.