Transcript Highlights:

• Aarp waiving in support of the thank. Thank you. Thanks, Alex. Anderson, Wave in support.
• Anthony DeMarco, Florida bankers waives in support.
• We believe that this demonstrates the state's ongoing commitment to supporting our adoptive families
• and happy to to support them in those efforts.
• We rise in support on this bill at this stop.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• and it's the same type of support.
• I rise in support of support H.R. 17.
• So I hope that you'll support this and not only support this measure but go and support these athletes
• I rise in support of HR 21.
• And so I rise in strong support of HR 21 because this day matters.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• If there are demonstrations or outbursts of opposition or support in the gallery, the chair will order
• I've heard you say that the Latinos seem to support Republicans.
• Please support this amendment. It’s meant for a CVAP study.
• Republicans support it, but Democrats do not. And that's the bottom line.
• It has been supported. It has council approval and it absolutely should pass.

Bills: HB4, HB 4

Keywords: district composition, congressional election, Texas, legislature, voting districts, 997, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So we're in full support of the bill. We're in full support of Mr.
• So we're in full support of the bill. We're in full support of Mr.
• And this really demonstrates this broad concern.
• We are in support of very similar reasons.
• I'm here to testify in support of HB 2304.

Summary: The committee heard public testimony on House Bill 2239, which would allow family burial grounds on privately owned land and exempt them from private cemetery requirements, while imposing limits such as recording burials with the county auditor, setbacks, and a cap on the burial ground covering no more than 10% of the parcel. The sponsor said the bill is intended to help rural landowners and families, including Native communities, keep burials on land with family and cultural significance. Testimony from a farmer and the Washington Cattlemen’s Association strongly supported the bill as a way to honor family ties to land. A question was raised about what happens if a later property owner wants to disturb an existing burial ground; staff said the bill requires notice but is silent on that issue. No action was taken on HB 2239 in the transcript. The committee also heard House Bill 2304, a follow-up to last year’s condominium liability reform, expanding the option for declarants to use a 2-10 warranty for stacked-flat or mid-rise condominium buildings up to four stories. Supporters from housing, real estate, builders, AARP, Habitat for Humanity, the City of Seattle, and others said the bill would reduce liability barriers, increase condo production, and create more attainable and accessible homeownership options for first-time buyers, older adults, and people with mobility challenges. The Office of Insurance Commissioner supported the bill but suggested technical language changes to avoid referring to the warranty as insurance. Members asked about consumer protections and the distinction between warranties and insurance, and staff and testifiers noted existing layers of protection. No vote was taken on HB 2304 in the transcript. In executive session, staff summarized House Bill 2095 on vulnerable users of public ways and House Bill 2248 on Secretary of State filing processes. For HB 2095, staff described a proposed substitute and several amendments, including changes to education requirements, civil liability language, protected areas, punitive damages thresholds, and liability rules. For HB 2248, staff said the proposed substitute made cleanup and consistency changes to corporate filing provisions. The committee then moved the proposed substitute for HB 2248 out of committee with a due pass recommendation, and it passed 11-0 with two excused members. Action on HB 2095 was deferred to a later date.

Transcript Highlights:

• These proposed amendments are supported by the education and training that audiologists receive during
• </c> These proposed amendments are supported These proposed amendments are supported by<00:03:43.600>
• </c> I respectfully encourage you to support I respectfully encourage you to support this<00:10:20.960
• I'm here today in support of the Respiratory Interstate Compact.
• I'm here today in support of the Respiratory Interstate Compact.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee first approved the October 23 meeting minutes and then heard testimony on a planned 2026 bill to modernize Kentucky’s audiology practice act. Witnesses from the Academy of Doctors of Audiology and a Kentucky audiologist said the proposal would largely codify existing authority and add new powers to order certain imaging and lab tests related to auditory and vestibular conditions, as well as prescribe topical ear medications. They argued the changes would reduce delays, especially in rural areas, improve access to hearing and balance care, and help address provider shortages. Committee members asked about evidence for the expansion, responsibility for reviewing imaging results and incidental findings, and whether the changes might affect referrals or scope of practice. The witnesses said they could provide evidence, that the audiologist would be responsible for obtaining and reviewing radiology reports and following up with patients and primary care providers, and that the goal was to speed treatment and streamline referrals when needed. The committee then heard a separate proposal to update the Kentucky Board of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy statutes by licensing MRI technologists and diagnostic medical sonographers, who are not currently required to be licensed in Kentucky. The bill would create a transition period through January 1, 2028 for current practitioners, require national credentialing for new applicants after that date, expand the board from 9 to 11 members, and clarify scope and enforcement provisions. Supporters said the measure would improve patient safety, align Kentucky with most other states, and recognize national credentials. Members questioned how many workers would be affected, whether the state currently meets national standards, the cost of licensure, and whether the bill could worsen staffing shortages, especially in rural areas. The witnesses said about 800 MRI technologists and 1,600 sonographers in Kentucky are currently certified, initial licensure would cost $100, and existing licensees would not pay an additional fee. They also said the board viewed the change as a safety measure and noted increasing portability of MRI services across state lines. Finally, the committee began hearing a respiratory care interstate compact proposal. The sponsor and respiratory care representatives described the compact as a way to allow licensed respiratory therapists from member states to practice across state lines. They outlined the profession’s role in hospitals, emergency departments, home care, pulmonary labs, long-term care, and telehealth, and said the compact would help with workforce flexibility and access to care. The transcript cuts off before the discussion concluded or any action was taken on that item.

Transcript Highlights:

• I look forward to supporting your nomination.
• And I urge... my colleagues to support you as well.
• and the Department of State's support throughout this process.
• I appreciate your support.
• I want to thank my children for their unwavering support.

Keywords: legislative process, public involvement, community engagement, transparency, introductions

Summary: The meeting was characterized by a series of introductions and personal anecdotes shared by the committee members, with a focus on the importance of community engagement and transparency in legislative processes. Members expressed their commitment to open hearings and the necessity for public involvement in discussions impacting constituents. Several members remarked on how personal experiences shape their legislative priorities, thus reinforcing the human element of governance. However, there was a noticeable absence of discussion regarding specific bills, indicating that the session may have been more exploratory or introductory in nature.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I'll look forward to your support on that. Senator DeMaio. Thank you.
• It doesn't even, it's not supported by your own research methodology.
• They have additional staff that work to support and supplement that.
• It's not to oversee them in perpetuity; it's to help support, as Mr.
• We don't advocate for it, wink, nod, but we still support that.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit Committee held an oversight hearing on the state auditor’s October 2024 report on California’s Forensic Conditional Release Program (CONREP) for sexually violent predators. Members and witnesses discussed public safety, the long delays in finding community housing, the role of local housing committees, and the Department of State Hospitals’ oversight of Liberty Healthcare, which operates much of the program. Several legislators from rural and high-desert districts said their communities have been disproportionately affected by placements and questioned why many placements end up in remote areas. State Auditor Grant Parks said the audit found that CONREP participants were convicted of new offenses less often than sexually violent predators who were unconditionally released, but that 18 of 56 participants had been revoked and returned to state hospitals for noncompliance. He said it took an average of 17 months to place current participants in the community, with 20 additional people awaiting placement for an average of 20 months, and that the program incurred significant pre-placement costs. Parks also said local officials were often unclear about their role, DSH had not given clear guidance at the time of the audit, and California lacks a transitional housing option used in some other states. He reported that DSH had implemented four of the five audit recommendations, while declining the recommendation to explore state-owned transitional housing. DSH Director Stephanie Clendendon and Liberty representative Ken Carabello defended the program as a court-ordered, highly supervised treatment model intended to reduce reoffending and support reintegration. They said DSH is actively involved in placement review, that Liberty searches countywide under statutory restrictions, and that community feedback and court approval are part of the process. DSH said it has now implemented guidance for housing committee designees, formal program reviews, an outcome tracker, and an analysis of whether to separate some Liberty services into different contracts. DSH continued to oppose transitional housing, arguing it would not solve the core siting and statutory problems and would add cost. Several members remained critical, arguing the program is broken, costly, and unfairly concentrated in certain communities, and some called for major statutory changes or suspension of the program.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:16:41.759><c> Thank</c><00:16:42.000><c> you,</c> support it. Thank you, support it.
• So I actually support this complaints. So I actually support this bill<00:19:13.919><c> strongly.
• </c> written test which they're demonstrating written test which they're demonstrating it<01:54:02.960
• She got 126 out of 128. it improves support for university it improves support for university systemic
• </c> Um, so asking students to demonstrate Um, so asking students to demonstrate minimal<02:18:17.760

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Education Funding Committee’s higher education subcommittee met to discuss HB 443, HB 510, and related issues. The chair explained the subcommittee membership and noted that Representative Luno was absent and replaced by Representative Bricky, with other full committee members allowed to participate in discussion but not final votes. No votes were taken during this meeting, and the chair said final subcommittee recommendations would likely come in the first week of November. On HB 443, which concerns terms of appointment to the Higher Education Commission, the chair described the bill as intended to let the governor replace members who are not attending or no longer representing the appointing organization. He said the prior governor supported the idea, but the current governor’s office believes the bill is unnecessary because nonattendance or loss of representation would already amount to resignation or removal. Members raised questions about legal authority and whether the same principle should apply to other boards. The chair said he was leaning toward finding the bill not needed, but would continue discussion later. The committee then spent most of the meeting on HB 510, which would establish due process rights for students, student organizations, and faculty at public higher education institutions and address collective bargaining issues. Supporters, including Representatives Papovich and Brown, argued the bill would provide clear, minimum protections, especially because campus rules are lengthy and vary by institution; Brown also suggested adding an independent ombudsman or representation for students. Opponents, including Representatives Burton and Bricky, said existing campus regulations already provide due process and that the bill could interfere with campus governance and collective bargaining. The chair and others discussed whether the bill’s definitions should be aligned with existing law to avoid confusion, and several members suggested using existing statutory definitions or cross-references. The chair also said the bill would apply only when disciplinary action is involved, not as a general challenge to DEI policies, though members referenced recent national examples involving DEI-related disputes as context.

Transcript Highlights:

• Strengthening broker education would support more effective use of the clearinghouse.
• Strengthening broker education would support more effective use of the clearinghouse.
• IIAB of California supported the clearinghouse bill in 2020 because we believed it would provide yet
• California's challenge is not whether clearinghouses work, but whether the clearinghouse is supported
• I think it's important because California law supports it that the agent basically owns that business

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I want to thank everybody for their support of this bill.
• I am supportive of this.
• And I think we all should be able to support this.
• And I think we all should be able to support this. Thank you.
• So I don't support what you're doing in the bill here today.

Bills: HF3489, HF3990, HF3825, HF3826, HF3827, HF3822

Keywords: grooming, child protection, student safety, sexual exploitation, educator licensing, teacher discipline, mandatory reporting, mandated reporter training, school misconduct, predatory offender, child abuse, sexual abuse, sex trafficking, child sexual abuse material, child pornography, position of authority, school employee, school administrator, license revocation, license suspension

Transcript Highlights:

• Adding to this financial support were clean hydrogen tax credits available through the U.S.
• "What kind of industries does this support? Well, there's a dozen value chains for seaweed.
• What kind of industries does this support? Well, there's a dozen value chains for seaweed.
• And we greatly appreciate the support of a variety of organizations that have been helping us.
• We're proud to support member companies who are innovating in this space.

Summary: The Select Committee on Climate Innovation and Infrastructure held a hearing focused on emerging technologies for climate resilience and infrastructure. The first panel discussed the Calistoga Resiliency Center, a utility-driven microgrid that keeps the city powered during public safety power shutoffs using hydrogen fuel cells, lithium-ion batteries, and liquid hydrogen storage. PG&E described microgrids as a resilience tool but emphasized that cost remains the main barrier to wider deployment. Energy Vault explained the project’s design, its ability to provide at least 48 hours of backup power on a small parcel of land, and its use of green hydrogen and battery storage to improve efficiency and reduce emissions. A Calistoga councilmember and NCPA representative also discussed the Lodi Energy Center hydrogen project, saying it could help decarbonize power generation and transportation, but that federal and state funding changes, tax credit timing, and other policy shifts have made the project difficult to advance. The Green Hydrogen Coalition supported the Calistoga model as a blueprint and urged policy changes to create demand and reduce barriers for renewable hydrogen, including addressing behind-the-meter rules and recognizing hydrogen in state energy planning. The second panel focused on water resilience and desalination, with the California Desal Association and Oneka Technologies discussing wave-powered desalination for the City of Fort Bragg. Cal Desal said California’s changing hydrology, reduced snowpack, and drought conditions make local water supply options increasingly important, but noted that conventional desalination is expensive and slow to permit. Oneka described its offshore, wave-powered system as a zero-electricity desalination technology that produces drinking water without greenhouse gas emissions and with limited land use, and said the Fort Bragg pilot is intended to demonstrate the technology under California conditions. The company and Cal Desal both stressed that permitting is a major obstacle, with the project requiring multiple agencies and a timeline far longer than in other jurisdictions. They also said the technology’s autonomous operation could improve water resilience because it does not depend on the electrical grid. The final panel featured the Climate Foundation’s marine permaculture proposal, which aims to restore kelp forests and support carbon removal and coastal food systems. The presenter said warming oceans and nutrient loss have devastated kelp forests along the California coast and argued that offshore platforms that raise and lower seaweed to access nutrients and sunlight could help regenerate ecosystems while producing food, feed, fertilizer, and carbon benefits. He said the technology has shown strong growth rates and storm resilience in other regions, but that California permitting remains a major hurdle, involving 17 state and federal agencies. He proposed a streamlined, code-based permitting approach for smaller projects and said the group is seeking matching funds to complete a first California pilot. Throughout the hearing, members and witnesses repeatedly highlighted the tension between innovation and the high cost, complexity, and length of California’s permitting and funding processes.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> captured the gold medal, demonstrating captured the gold medal, demonstrating the<00:25:22.520><
• I appreciate your support.
• I appreciate your support.
• </c> supporting the park. supporting the park.
• </c> supporting this legislation. supporting this legislation.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Monday, March 16, 2026, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Legislative restrictions and demonstrations of the offense.
• Condition is paying child support.
• The bill passed with overwhelming support. support.
• I'm testifying in support of HB 46.
• So we're in support of the conversation.

Bills: HB46, HB272, HB551, HB1661, HB2820, HB3181, HB4145, HB4157, HB46, HB272

Keywords: low-THC cannabis, dispensing organization, Texas Compassionate-Use Program, medical use, patient access, registration, healthcare, legislation, credit card fraud, debit card fraud, prosecution, illegal possession, state law, political contributions, address privacy, Texas Ethics Commission, election transparency, campaign finance, election supplies, ballots

Transcript Highlights:

• My name is David Sines, and I'm here to testify in support of SB1961.
• I think it's an excellent piece of legislation, and we're fully supportive.
• We're here to support you.
• We're always going to support innovation, free enterprise, and free markets.
• You may begin. support of this bill. I own two businesses here in Texas.

Bills: SB1998, SB646, SB2786, SB2076, SB2615, SB1961, SB1418, SB2647, SB1322, SB2788

Keywords: pediatrics, medical education, subsidiary, preceptorship, medical training, student programs, mental health, loan repayment, education funding, mental health professionals, healthcare access, Texas Success Initiative, exemption, public officers, employees, higher education, Capitol view, Austin, urban planning, construction

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:12:03.920><c> real</c> women and children demonstrating real women and children demonstrating
• </c> again that's more I think supporting again that's more I think supporting evidence<00:23:17.120>
• </c> control and the department now support control and the department now support this<00:27:07.520>
• </c> basic question, is there a demonstrated basic question, is there a demonstrated need?
• </c> support this common sense legislation. support this common sense legislation.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• In support. Israel Via, with YCJ, in support. I mean, in opposition, I'm sorry.
• I strongly support it.
• I support SB 1373.
• Officers in support.
• I'm supporting your bill.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Christine Smith, Health Access California, in support. I'm at Pelfaxis, California, in support.
• McKay Carney on behalf of Cottage Health, in support. David Bologas of the Alliance, in support.
• California, in support.
• That goal had real support.
• Thank you. had real support.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Health heard a series of bills focused on access to care, insurance coverage, and public health. AB 387 on youth sports AED access drew support from the author and safety advocates, but opposition from school, park, city, and county groups over liability, cost, and access concerns. The author said he would continue working on amendments to shift the bill toward requiring access to existing AEDs rather than mandating facility procurement. Committee members emphasized the life-saving purpose of the bill while also raising affordability and access concerns for youth sports programs. The committee also heard AB 1682, which would require health plans and insurers to cover FDA-cleared scalp cooling devices for chemotherapy patients. Supporters, including breast cancer survivors and health groups, described the emotional and quality-of-life benefits of preventing hair loss and said cost is the main barrier to access. There was no formal opposition, though one senator raised concerns about whether the mandate could exceed essential health benefits. The chair and members expressed support for the bill’s goals and said it would be taken up when quorum was established. AB 2093, a follow-up to the 988 crisis line law, sought to clarify statewide leadership, improve coordination among 988, 911, and mobile crisis teams, and create a more sustainable funding structure. Behavioral health organizations and crisis center representatives supported the bill, saying implementation challenges and demand growth require statutory fixes. Committee members generally supported the concept but noted the bill was a gut-and-amend and that additional work was needed with county and behavioral health stakeholders. The committee then heard AB 1843 on hepatitis C treatment, AB 1629 on dental assignment of benefits, AB 2540 on community college access to medication abortion services, and AB 1929 on disclosure of health plan investments. AB 1843 had broad support from medical and public health groups but opposition from health plans, which argued it conflicted with the prior-authorization framework in SB 306 and could raise drug costs. AB 1629 was supported by dental and patient advocates but opposed by dental plans and insurers over concerns about network participation and out-of-pocket costs. AB 2540 drew strong support from reproductive health advocates and student representatives, while community college health services and some others opposed or were neutral pending amendments; the author said the bill was about equity and accepted amendments to reduce burdens. AB 1929 was backed by labor and immigrant rights groups as a transparency measure, but opposed by health plans and insurers who said Covered California was not the right entity to administer the disclosures and that the information was already publicly available. Throughout the hearing, members repeatedly weighed public access and transparency against cost, administrative burden, and implementation concerns.

Transcript Highlights:

• In support. Israel Via, with YCJ, in support. Good morning, Chair and members.
• Thank you for your support.
• I strongly support it.
• I support SB 1373.
• I'm supporting your bill.

Summary: The committee met without a quorum and operated as a subcommittee while hearing several bills, with members repeatedly noting that votes would be taken later once a quorum was established. Early in the meeting, the committee heard SB 1446 on parole en banc review and SB 1278 on elderly parole eligibility for certain sex offenses. SB 1446’s author said the bill would give commissioners more discretion in en banc review, make votes public, and allow referral for sexually violent predator evaluation in certain cases; supporters included the California District Attorneys Association, while opponents from Uncommon Law, the Ella Baker Center, and public defender groups argued it would add confusion, create constitutional and litigation concerns, and duplicate existing safeguards. SB 1278 would exclude certain rape, child sexual abuse, and habitual/serial sex offense convictions from elderly parole eligibility; district attorneys and police chiefs supported it as a victim-safety measure, while civil rights and defense organizations opposed it as unnecessary, costly, and inconsistent with evidence on aging and recidivism. Both bills were discussed but not voted on due to the lack of quorum. The committee then heard SB 1354, which would bar out-of-state military or law enforcement personnel from entering California to perform such functions without the Governor’s permission. The author and supporters framed it as protecting state sovereignty and limiting unauthorized armed incursions; the committee accepted an amendment removing a criminal penalty and leaving enforcement to the Attorney General. No opposition testimony was offered, and members expressed support, but no vote was taken because quorum was still lacking. The committee also heard SB 926, a bill to fund implementation of Proposition 36. Supporters, including sheriffs, district attorneys, probation officials, and the League of California Cities, said local agencies need funding for treatment, supervision, and administration; opponents argued the proposal was fiscally reckless, lacked accountability, and overemphasized incarceration. Amendments removed a specific appropriation and shifted funding decisions to the budget process, but the bill was also held pending quorum. Later, the committee heard SB 874, which would require background checks for unlicensed providers of Medi-Cal behavioral health treatment services, create a stakeholder workgroup, and direct DHCS to issue guidance and report on program integrity. Support came from local health plans and behavior analysis providers, who said the bill would improve safety and consistency; there was no opposition testimony. The committee then heard SB 1210, which would extend CalGang oversight and due process protections to local gang databases as well as shared ones. Supporters described privacy abuses, racial disparities, and personal harm from inaccurate gang labels; law enforcement opposition argued the bill would impose CalGang standards on informal investigative files and would significantly change the gang definition. The author said the bill closes a loophole and preserves prior reforms, but no vote was taken. The committee also began hearing SB 1019 on creating a California Cargo Thief Task Force, with strong support from BNSF, trucking, shipping, port, and supply-chain representatives who described organized, multi-jurisdictional cargo theft and rail sabotage; no opposition was heard, and members indicated support, but action was deferred pending quorum. The meeting then moved to SB 1217 on a non-consensual intimate image clearinghouse, with the chair and author describing privacy-related amendments and the bill’s focus on helping survivors remove exploitative images; the transcript cuts off as that presentation began.

Transcript Highlights:

• I support SB 1373.
• Officers in support.
• I support. Thank you. I support. Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair.
• In support.
• In support.

Summary: The committee met without a quorum and operated as a subcommittee while hearing several bills on public safety, parole, criminal justice oversight, Proposition 36 implementation, behavioral health, gang database reform, cargo theft, and nonconsensual intimate images. The chair explained hearing procedures and noted that SB 906 was pulled from the agenda. Several measures were heard but not voted on because quorum was lacking. SB 1446, a committee bill, would expand discretion in en banc parole review, make en banc votes public record, and allow CDCR referrals for sexually violent predator evaluation of certain incarcerated people serving determinate or indeterminate terms. Support came from the California District Attorneys Association; opposition came from the Ella Baker Center, Uncommon Law, public defenders, and others who argued it would add confusion, litigation risk, and unnecessary duplication. The author said the bill was intended to clarify review standards and improve transparency. SB 1278 would exclude certain sex offenses and habitual/one-strike offenders from elderly parole eligibility. The San Diego District Attorney’s Office and California District Attorneys Association supported it, citing cases such as Gregory Vogelsang and David Funston; opponents from Uncommon Law, the Ella Baker Center, and others argued elderly parole is already highly restrictive, evidence-based, and cost-effective. Vice Chair Seyarto strongly supported SB 1278, emphasizing victim justice and public safety. SB 1354 would bar out-of-state military personnel not operating under Title 10 from entering California to perform military or law enforcement functions without the governor’s permission; a committee amendment removed a criminal penalty and left enforcement to the Attorney General. SB 926 would provide funding for Proposition 36 implementation, with committee amendments deleting a specific appropriation and shifting funding decisions to the budget process; supporters said counties need resources for treatment, probation, and administration, while opponents criticized the bill as fiscally reckless and duplicative. SB 874 would require background checks and clearer statewide standards for Medi-Cal behavioral health treatment services, especially ABA services for children; supporters said it would improve patient safety and program integrity. SB 1210 would extend CalGang-style oversight, notice, appeal, and DOJ regulation to all gang databases, not just shared ones; supporters described harms from inaccurate, unregulated local databases, while police chiefs opposed applying the CalGang framework to all local investigative files. The committee also heard SB 1019, which would create a DOJ cargo theft task force and add reporting requirements; supporters from BNSF, trucking, shipping, ports, and law enforcement said organized cargo theft is harming supply chains and worker safety, and no opposition was presented. Finally, SB 1217 would create a DOJ clearinghouse to help victims remove nonconsensual intimate images, including AI-generated deepfakes, from covered platforms; amendments narrowed the bill’s scope and clarified law enforcement’s role. The author and survivor witnesses described ongoing trauma from repeated reposting of exploitative images and argued the bill would provide a centralized removal process. The transcript ends during testimony on SB 1217, with no final votes taken on the measures heard.

Transcript Highlights:

• Three, demonstrate alignment with state and local continuous improvement plans.
• The administrator allocation is 0.075 per support unit.
• The administrator allocation is 0.075 per support unit.
• My role is strictly peer support.
• But they have to be classified as support staff or as the language they have given, instructional support

Keywords: 989, all

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 599, which would change the distribution of the state’s Digital Content and Curriculum appropriation. Sponsors said the current first-come, first-served process exhausted the $1.6 million annual fund in minutes and left many applications unfunded, so the bill would direct the Department of Education to use a needs-based rubric instead. The rubric would prioritize districts serving economically disadvantaged, rural, or underserved students, projects tied to reading, math, or college and career readiness, and districts that had not recently received funding. The bill also keeps the existing $50,000 per-district cap. There was no public testimony, and the committee voted to send HB 599 to the floor with a due pass recommendation. The committee then took up House Bill 728, a school funding definitions bill revising Title 33 definitions for instructional, administrative, per-pupil, classified, and related staff. Sponsors said the bill was intended to clarify long-standing funding categories, address an LSO report showing some staff were being funded as instructional even though they did not directly instruct students, and improve transparency in the school funding formula. An amendment was proposed to create a new category for “instructional support staff” for certain certified staff who support instruction but do not directly teach students, while also moving some language in the administrative definition. Sponsors said the changes would not immediately alter funding but would help structure a future funding formula. Testimony on HB 728 was mixed. Twin Falls Superintendent Brady Dickinson said instructional coaches are essential in his district and warned the bill, as written, could prevent districts from funding them through instructional allocations. Heather Williams of the Idaho Association of School Administrators opposed the bill’s challenged sections, saying the roles at issue belong in the instructional bucket and that the current administrator allocation is too small to absorb them. Peggy Hoy, an instructional coach, said coaches are not administrators and warned the new definition could undermine trust and discourage teachers from seeking support. Sponsors responded that the bill was meant to classify staff more transparently and that districts would retain flexibility. The committee first rejected a motion to hold the bill, then voted to send HB 728 to the amending order for possible amendments, and adjourned before completing the rest of the agenda.