Transcript Highlights:

• We’ll continue on with panel two, the California Department of Education.
• And they certainly haven't spoken to anybody at the California Department of Education.
• agencies, county offices of education, districts, et cetera.
• LACO is the largest regional education agency in the nation, and we are currently...
• LACO is the largest regional education agency in the nation, and we are currently supporting the education

Committee: House Communications and Conveyance

Transcript Highlights:

• That's the current higher education funding formula.
• In my work in higher education at some of the smaller institutions, I don't think it's cheaper to educate
• I'm curious on the education one.
• And so that's generated by higher education today.
• Because I think education lifts all.

Summary: The committee met to discuss higher education funding and capital building policy. Members first heard an update from NDUS Deputy Commissioner Lisa Johnson on low-producing academic programs. She described a proposed board policy using a five-year rolling window and thresholds of fewer than 10 undergraduate graduates or fewer than 5 graduate graduates, with programs flagged for three consecutive review periods going to the board. Possible outcomes would include continuation, continuation with modifications, inactivation, or termination. Members asked about how the review would account for program costs, service to other students, workforce demand, and the difference between inactivation and termination. Johnson said the board would consider broader factors and that campuses already do detailed program analysis. Several members also asked about cost savings and staffing impacts from program terminations, and Johnson said the board would try to provide more information later. The committee then received a report on the Capital Building Fund from Jamie Wilkie. He reviewed the program’s history, matching requirements, and recent uses, noting that about $334 million in state and matching dollars has been invested overall, with most going to deferred maintenance and extraordinary repairs. Members discussed whether the program is reducing deferred maintenance and requested updated systemwide data on deferred maintenance and campus space utilization. Wilkie said the board is considering a new study to update deferred maintenance figures, which are based on information more than 12 years old. He also reported that several institutions have used current biennium funds for projects such as residence hall renovations, health sciences housing, generators, and building repairs. Later, the committee began a detailed walkthrough of a draft bill that would replace the current higher education funding formula with an FTE-based model and also revise the capital building fund structure. The draft would use fall enrollment FTEs, add completion incentives for degrees in in-demand fields, and create a separate research funding component for UND and NDSU tied to doctoral completions and external research expenditures. Members raised concerns about the use of older data in the formula, the treatment of waivers, the weighting of professional and health sciences programs, and the use of CIP codes to define CTE and education incentives. The bill draft would also combine capital building fund tiers, broaden eligible uses for deferred maintenance and legislatively authorized projects, change matching requirements, repeal the old formula chapter and the capital pool, and transfer funds from the Strategic Investment and Improvements Fund into the capital building fund. No final votes were taken during the portion provided; the meeting was primarily discussion and review.

Transcript Highlights:

• I serve as a trustee on the Orange County Board of Education.
• We've been discussing legislation that would move the elections for our board.
• And that was when it was only affecting the Orange County Board of Education.
• Occasionally, big money in politics actually... buys legislation.
• But far more often, big money in politics is blocking legislation.

Committee: House Elections

Transcript Highlights:

• It just allows employers to educate the employees that they have an opportunity... ...to educate the
• Sixteen states have proposed legislation, three have passed legislation, and there are now 10 pilot initiatives
• In June, the Special Legislative Commission to Study Poverty recommended passing legislation to establish
• State legislation can change that.
• This legislation, along with, for example, match savings account legislation, which we also support,

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Financial Services

Summary: The Joint Committee on Financial Services heard testimony on several bills focused on financial security, banking regulation, and payment-card fees. Treasurer Deborah Goldberg supported the Massachusetts baby bonds proposal (H. 48) and also endorsed bills on matched savings (H. 1158/S. 737) and retirement planning/Secure Choice (H. 1143/S. 722), arguing these measures would help address wealth inequality, build assets, and improve retirement readiness. Supporters of baby bonds included policy experts and health advocates from Children’s Health Watch and Boston Medical Center, who said early-life asset building could improve long-term economic and health outcomes for children in low-income families. AARP also urged passage of the retirement planning bill, citing the large share of private-sector workers without access to an employer retirement plan. Representative Donato testified for H. 1143, describing it as a voluntary retirement-savings opportunity for workers at small employers. The committee also heard testimony on H. 3933, concerning the Massachusetts Credit Union Share Insurance Corporation, from former Bank Commissioner Mike Hanson, who defended the state’s full deposit insurance system for credit unions and savings institutions as a longstanding consumer-protection model. The Massachusetts Bankers Association raised concerns about the bill’s technical provisions and broader credit union/bank competitive issues, while the Cooperative Credit Union Association supported related legislation allowing modest compensation for credit union directors (S. 821/H. 1338) and flexibility for state financial institutions to grow through partnerships (S. 723). Bankers opposed those credit union bills, arguing they would upset a level playing field and blur long-standing distinctions between banks and credit unions. A major portion of the hearing focused on H. 1259/S. 688, which would prohibit card interchange fees on the tax and gratuity portions of restaurant transactions. Restaurant owners and the Massachusetts Restaurant Association testified in favor, saying the fees are a significant and growing expense, especially as most customers now pay by card; they argued the bills would save restaurants money without affecting state revenue. Credit union, banking, and payments-industry representatives opposed the bills, saying interchange helps fund fraud protection and payment infrastructure, that the proposal would create compliance burdens and likely litigation, and that it would mainly affect Massachusetts-chartered institutions while national banks could be preempted. Committee members noted that a commission on payment-card fees is being established and said the issue would be studied further. The hearing also included support for a separate bill on virtual credit cards for dental providers, with dentists saying automatic virtual-card payments impose hidden processing fees and fraud risks.

Transcript Highlights:

• affecting black communities in Texas, like improving public health education, public health education
• There are some differences between this legislation for K-12 and And the Senate Bill 17 for higher education
• agenda in the Senate Education K-16 committee this session has an incredible. national model legislative
• If under the legislation this legislation, the teacher exists simply to be a sponsor.
• educators in the state of Texas.

Bills: SCR5 , SCR13 , SB3 , SB6 , SB10 , SB12 , SB13 , SB15 , SB17 , SB18 , SB19 , SB24 , SB35 , SB57 , SB65 , SB112 , SB284 , SB290 , SB388 , SB400 , SB402 , SB412 , SB495 , SB499 , SB502 , SB509 , SB621 , SB706 , SB740 , SB815 , SB842 , SB854 , SB875 , SB893 , SB917 , SB974 , SB1025 , SB1061 , SB1073 , SB1106 , SB1268 , SB1281 , SB1300 , SB1362 , SB1379 , SB1447 , SB1451 , SB1555 , SB1902 , SJR36 , SJR12 , SCR13 , SCR25 , SCR5 , SCR22 , SCR12 , SCR24 , SB495 , SB412 , SB10 , SB18 , SB565 , SB372 , SB842 , SB765 , SB62 , SB19 , SB666 , SB707 , SB888 , SB687 , SB706 , SB847 , SB290 , SB13 , SB1248 , SB740 , SB14 , SB1006 , SB504 , SB917 , SB925 , SB388 , SB1902 , SB1121 , SB995 , SB857 , SB305 , SB296 , SB284 , SB35 , SB6 , SB815 , SB3 , SB1281 , SB1379 , SB1300 , SB1497 , SB1499 , SB1498 , SB1451 , SB1061 , SB15 , SB65 , SB241 , SB304 , SB402 , SB499 , SB621 , SB974 , SB1023 , SB1024 , SB1025 , SB1106 , SB686 , SB112 , SB371 , SB204 , SB400 , SB609 , SB1447 , SB670 , SB502 , SB427 , SB850 , SB854 , SB413 , SB1555 , SB1362 , SB1346 , SB1033 , SB1220 , SB1073 , SB810 , SB987 , SB1539 , SB893 , SB447 , SB875 , SB406 , SB509 , SB985 , SB965 , SB17 , SB1119 , SB1505 , SB12 , SB24 , SB57 , SB1194 , SB1253 , SB1215 , SB1532 , SB1268 , SB1302 , SB856 , SB650 , SB583 , SB673 , SB840 , SJR57 , SCR8 , SB213 , SB681 , SB1172 , SB1252 , SB378 , SB610 , SB918 , SB1343 , SB608 , SB487 , SB955 , SB957 , SB988 , SB990 , SB1019 , SB1021 , SB1120 , SB251 , SB958 , SB535 , SB761 , SB1 , SB541 , SB315 , SB379 , SB1018 , SB1737 , SB266 , SB1415

Transcript Highlights:

• We'll have the Legislative Analyst's Office.
• The federal impacts go beyond education, and we in this state decided... ...go beyond education, and
• with the Legislative Analyst's Office.
• We've talked about it at the beginning of the set of hearings here in higher education in this education
• Legislative Analyst. No additional comments. Thank you. Legislative Analyst's Office.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance, chaired by Assemblymember Alvarez, held a hearing focused on University of California budget issues. The committee reviewed UC core operations funding, enrollment trends, federal funding threats, Title IX implementation, and basic needs support. Major themes included the end of the Governor’s multi-year UC compact, the state’s fiscal outlook, UC’s enrollment growth, and the potential impacts of federal policy changes on research, health care, and student aid. On core funding, the Department of Finance described the Governor’s proposal to continue compact-related support, defer some payments, and authorize a cash-flow loan. The LAO recommended a smaller or no base increase, earmarking some funds for capital renewal, retiring deferrals when possible, avoiding new compact commitments, and funding UC annually rather than through compacts. UC argued that the compact has supported enrollment growth, student services, and operating costs, but said campuses face rising expenses, structural deficits, and limited reserves. Members questioned the effects of deferrals on students and discussed the need to prioritize less harmful reductions if cuts become necessary. The enrollment panel focused on UC’s growth in California resident enrollment and the nonresident replacement plan at Berkeley, UCLA, and UC San Diego. The LAO recommended maintaining the current enrollment target, funding enrollment separately from base increases, pausing the nonresident replacement plan, and holding enrollment flat in 2027-28. UC said it has already met compact enrollment goals, grown California undergraduate enrollment by about 18,800 students, and that further growth depends on ongoing state support. The committee also discussed the cost of enrollment growth, possible differential nonresident tuition, and a reporting request for UC to analyze the nonresident replacement approach; the motion to adopt supplemental reporting language passed. The hearing also covered federal funding risks, with the LAO and UC warning that federal changes could affect research grants, medical center reimbursement, and student financial aid. UC said research cancellations and suspensions are disrupting labs and graduate student support, while federal health policy changes could increase uncompensated care at UC hospitals. In the Title IX update, UC described its systemwide civil rights structure, annual student training, and campus support offices, and members praised the work while asking about ongoing concerns and intersegmental collaboration. The final basic-needs item began with Finance stating the Governor’s budget does not change ongoing support, but the transcript cuts off before further discussion or action.

Transcript Highlights:

• So again, nearly 450 million changes in education, in labor and education, but again this is all in flux
• So if they're hit in Indian education, what is the Indian education number, and what was That money used
• Another issue that we have been tracking and looking at is our education department, our education, and
• school in cultural education.
• Again, back to the—we're talking about education and the Bureau of Indian Education.

Committee: House Federal Funding Stabilization Subcommittee

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> education piece. education piece.
• And to really uh for an education piece.
• </c> do that through education and training. do that through education and training.
• It had, education, language, and tools.
• </c> also provide education in schools. also provide education in schools.

Committee: Senate Judiciary and Public Safety

Transcript Highlights:

• higher education system in the world.
• , higher education.
• There's $8 billion for K-12 education.
• Carolyn Chu, Legislative Analyst's Office.
• higher education system.

Transcript Highlights:

• It was about the children and the educators having the financial means to educate the children and make
• And when I hear from the education leadership, a lot of times they talk about the... ...education leadership
• And I realize at the legislative side that we've done a lot to stifle that education, and I would like
• the Democrat Party, and where people stand on issues as they relate to education and educational philosophy
• In fact, education is the reason I'm here.

Committee: House Children and Families

Summary: The Committee on Children and Families heard public testimony on Senate Bill 1002, which would move St. Charles County school board elections and related levy/bond questions from April to the November general election, extend terms to four years, and allow candidates to voluntarily list party affiliation. The sponsor argued the bill would increase voter participation, broaden community input, and potentially save money, while several supporters said April turnout is too low and that November elections would better reflect the county’s voters. Supporters also said the change could help candidates campaign more effectively and bring more attention to school issues. Opponents, including school board members, parents, and the Missouri NEA and Missouri School Boards Association, argued the bill would politicize school board races, crowd out local issues on November ballots, and reduce the value of staggered terms and institutional continuity. Several witnesses objected to carving out only St. Charles County rather than making any change statewide, and some warned that limiting levy and bond elections could delay urgent district needs. One witness also said the bill would burden regular parents and community members who run for school board, while others emphasized that school boards should remain focused on governance, budgeting, and student needs rather than partisan labels. After testimony, the committee voted on Senate substitute for Senate Bill 1002 and advanced it by a vote of 10 aye, 5 no, and 1 present. The committee then took up Senate substitute for Senate Bill 1135, described as the Henderson, Bentley, and Mason’s law, and voted it do pass by 16 aye and 9 no. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Welcome to the Education Committee here.
• Well, thank you, Madam Chair, members of the Education Committee, Senate Education Committee.
• I know you're very interested in education and early education, specifically, so it's nice to have you
• than government education anyway.
• I'm a constituent from the 34th Legislative District, and I serve with the Seattle Special Education

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several House education bills. HB 1796 would allow school districts, under existing debt limits and with voter-approved capital levies, to issue non-voted bonds for certain new construction projects. The sponsor and school district witnesses said it would let districts front-fund projects, speed construction, and reduce inflation-related costs; a member of the public opposed it as bypassing voters. HB 2317 would exempt school-day ECEAP and Head Start programs located in public school or community/technical college buildings from child care licensing. The sponsor and providers said the current licensing process is duplicative, delays services, and creates barriers to expanding early learning; no opposition was heard. The committee also heard HB 2594, which would codify McKinney-Vento homeless student protections in state law, require OSPI planning and reporting, and reinforce district responsibilities for students experiencing homelessness. The sponsor gave personal testimony about experiencing homelessness as a student, and advocates said the bill would improve coordination and accountability at no added cost. For HB 2557, which requires school districts to give parents a copy of special education evaluation reports by the 35th school day and hold the eligibility meeting at least five school days later, the sponsor said it would give families time to review reports; school psychologists and OSPI supported the substitute version, while some advocates asked for shorter timelines and clearer waiver language. After the hearings, the committee moved to executive session and advanced two bills: Substitute HB 2360, allowing schools to maintain and use stock albuterol under specified conditions, and Engrossed Substitute HB 2534, updating requirements for military families’ enrollment, records transfer, and related services. Both bills received due pass recommendations and were sent to Rules, with no recorded opposition in the executive session.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> not harmed by the legislation. Okay. not harmed by the legislation. Okay.
• . education. education.
• funding for education.
• funding for education.
• </c> underfunding education are real. underfunding education are real.

Committee: House Executive Departments and Administration

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> legislation um the legislative proposal legislation um the legislative proposal before<00:21:47.600
• </c><00:36:38.440><c> because</c> on and put it into legislation because on and put it into legislation
• </c> through the tribal Nations education through the tribal Nations education committee<00:42:15.000
• I want to say thank you for allowing me... 2023 the legislation passed a band on 2023 the legislation
• We are adjourned. special education so we can kind of wrap special education so we can kind of wrap our

Committee: Senate Education Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> by the state board of education? by the state board of education?
• </c><00:23:15.039><c> I</c> education. Uh I have not seen that. I education.
• Education.
• </c> special education. special education.
• </c> frameworks for each area of education. frameworks for each area of education.

Summary: The Legislative Oversight Committee met to review statewide education improvement and assessment issues under RSA 193-C:8-a, with the chair focusing on curriculum frameworks, academic standards, and resource elements tied to the state’s adequate education statutes. The chair walked through the statutory relationship between minimum standards for public school approval, academic standards, and local control of curriculum, noting that New Hampshire law requires curriculum frameworks to guide what students should know and be able to do while leaving districts flexibility in instruction. He also raised concerns that some subject areas appear to have current frameworks or standards while others do not, and suggested the committee may need to consider an amendment creating a curriculum frameworks and academic standards coordinator at the Department of Education. Nate Green, director of the Division of Education Analytics and Resources, explained that the terms “academic standards” and “curriculum frameworks” have evolved over time and are often used interchangeably, but can mean different things depending on the subject area. He said the state’s more prescriptive standards largely developed after No Child Left Behind, especially in math, ELA, and science, while older or less-tested subjects such as arts, physical education, and health often retained looser framework-style documents. Green outlined one possible approach of standardizing terminology, but also said New Hampshire could instead define curriculum frameworks separately as a combination of standards, curriculum, and instructional approaches. He emphasized that state standards must support statewide consistency and assessment, while local districts retain control over how they teach. Committee members discussed how these distinctions affect different grade levels and subjects, using examples from math and science to show that minimum standards are broad while academic standards are more specific and grade-level based. Green described how science standards are organized by physical science, life science, and earth/space science across grade bands, while math standards are more directly tied to individual grades. No votes were taken and no formal action was reported during this portion of the meeting; the discussion remained informational and exploratory as members considered whether statutory language or departmental organization should be updated.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill was put together with our State Board of Education, our State Department of Education, teachers
• In the House of Representatives, House Bill 785 by the Education Committee, an act relating to education
• In the House of Representatives, House Bill 846 by the Education Committee, an act relating to education
• Donaldson is a longtime educator. His Ph.D. is not in money; it is in education administration.
• House Bill 920 is an addition to the Health Education Program budget under the State Board of Education

Transcript Highlights:

• Today I'm testifying in strong support of SB 6130 as the Legislative Affairs Director of the Legislative
• The first portion pertains to educational service districts.
• for the preparation and certification of educators, including periodically reviewing approved educator
• Educational quality and equity demand investment.
• Education is a proven way to interrupt this cycle.

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several education-related bills. Senate Bill 6130 would move public high schools’ voter registration events from Temperance and Good Citizenship Day in January to National Voter Registration Day in September, with schools offering Future Voter registration to eligible students in history or social studies classes. The sponsor, Sen. Krishnadasan, and supporters from King County Elections, Pierce County, OSPI, and the Legislative Youth Advisory Council said the change would better match student interest and improve youth civic engagement at no fiscal cost. A senator asked about community service opportunities, and the sponsor said that could potentially fit within existing community service recognition programs. Senate Bill 6247 would expand financial oversight and training for school districts, especially those in financial distress or binding conditions. It would require additional ESD involvement, add WASDA training on budgeting and financial health for school directors, and impose stronger consequences for knowing financial misconduct, including future employment bars and state reimbursement of certain unrecovered damages. Sen. Dozier said the bill responds to district financial problems, including Prescott School District. OSPI supported the bill, while the Association of Educational Service Districts, WSSDA, and WEA raised concerns about ESDs being placed in an oversight role, the need to align the bill with other pending training legislation, and whether some enforcement duties should instead rest with the state auditor. Senate Bill 6268 would require OSPI to keep an online record of final special education community complaint decisions for 20 years instead of the current five years on its website. OSPI supported the bill, saying it would improve transparency and help families, educators, and policymakers identify patterns and understand how complaints are resolved; the sponsor said the retention period may be amended. Advocates from Washington Autism Alliance, The Arc, and parent advocates testified in favor, saying the records help families avoid repeated disputes and reveal systemic issues. Senate Bill 6278 would change how PESB reviews teacher and principal preparation programs and adjust student-teaching field placement plan submission timing; the sponsor said the goal is to ensure educators are better prepared, and PESB testified neutral, saying many of the review elements already exist and the bill would add flexibility. The committee also heard Senate Bill 6260, a budget-savings bill affecting public education. It would lengthen school bus depreciation to 15 years, withhold up to 1.9% of MSOC funds to pay for the High School and Beyond Plan platform, and reduce Running Start funding from 1.4 to 1.2 FTE. OFM supported the bill as part of the governor’s budget approach, but many testifiers opposed it, arguing it would cut district resources, keep older buses on the road longer, shift costs to schools, and reduce access to Running Start—especially for low-income, rural, and technical-program students. School district, college, PTA, counselor, and student witnesses said the current 1.4 FTE model has expanded access and completion, while supporters of the bill emphasized state budget pressures and said the changes would preserve other priorities.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so that's what we're attempting to do with this legislation: fix it. fixed with this particular legislation
• Jim Lindbergh, Friends Committee on Legislation of California. Good morning.
• Jim Lindbergh, Friends Committee on Legislation of California, opposed.
• I'll often hear them say, their education had then become collateral damage.
• Furthermore, there are survivors who simply end their educational pursuits.

Committee: House Public Safety

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 794, by the Education Committee, is an act relating to education, providing legislative findings
• Senate Bill 1291, by the Education Committee, is an act relating to education, providing legislative
• Senate Bill 1291, by the Education Committee, is an act relating to education, providing legislative
• Senate Bill 1291, by the Education Committee, is an act relating to education, providing legislative
• Committee regarding education.

Transcript Highlights:

• The ones that we are responsible to educate. Thank you.
• Parents have sued the State Board of Education.
• with parents and educators about age-appropriate content.
• We have an education problem here in Florida.
• Let me be clear: politics do not belong in education.

Summary: The House convened with prayer, moments of silence for former member Terry Fields and the Parkland victims, the Pledge of Allegiance, and recognition of guests and visitors. The chamber then adopted the Rules and Ethics Committee’s special order report setting the day’s calendar and debate times. The main measure taken up was HB 1119, relating to materials harmful to minors in public schools and charter schools, which the sponsor described as a clarification of existing law to keep pornographic or sexually explicit material away from minors and to give districts clearer standards for review and objection processes. The bill drew extensive debate over constitutional concerns, local control, litigation risk, and the scope of the definition of “harmful to minors.” Members supporting the bill argued it was needed to close loopholes and protect children, while opponents warned it could lead to overbroad book removals, conflict with federal court rulings, and costly lawsuits. A series of amendments sought to narrow or redirect the bill: proposals by Gant, Aristide, Bartleman, Eskamani, Nixon, Rainer, Woodson, and Harris would have preserved literary value review, protected educational and abuse-prevention materials, exempted LGBTQ-inclusive books, limited objections, preserved funding for districts, or delayed enforcement during ongoing litigation. Supporters of the amendments framed them as protecting parental choice, academic value, student safety, and district finances; opponents said they would weaken the bill’s child-protection purpose. All of the amendments failed. After the amendment process, the House waived rules, read HB 1119 a third time by title, and entered structured debate on final passage. Debate continued along the same lines, with opponents emphasizing book removals, First Amendment concerns, and the impact on students and schools, and supporters reiterating that the bill was intended to prevent minors from accessing obscene material. The transcript provided ends during structured debate and does not include the final vote on HB 1119.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:04:04.239><c> was</c> Minnesota Department of Education was Minnesota Department of Education
• It says E37 0081, Education IDC.
• <00:29:51.600><c> other</c> legisl other legisl other branches<00:29:54.360><c> got</c><00:29:54.519>
• </c> restructuring in the last legislative restructuring in the last legislative session<00:40:00.359
• Educators talk School you know Educators Educators talk School leaders<01:31:34.440><c> talk</c><01:

Committee: House Education Finance