Transcript Highlights:

• And you can see for the most part, except for the COVID year, it's gone up pretty much every year.
• One of my areas of responsibility is oversight of the Bureau of Exceptional Education, student Services
• So the Bureau of Exceptional Education and Student Services within the Division of Public Schools, it
• And also a general Ed teacher, a special ed teacher and principal of title one migrant except for so
• Every one of our local educational agencies throughout the state has a dedicated exceptional student

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• from all fund sources is considered, spending surpasses the foundation funding level on all lines except
• Per student than charter districts on all positions except nurses and secretaries.
• The smallest district size categories spent the most per student on all school-level resources except
• And D&F districts spent the most per student across all school-level resources except extra duty.
• And D&F schools spent the most per student across all school-level resources except extra duty.

Summary: The House/Joint Education committee continued its adequacy study with a Bureau of Legislative Research presentation on resource allocation, focusing first on matrix spending and then non-matrix spending. Staff explained the methodology for mapping APSCN expenditure data to matrix lines, reviewed district and school categories used in the analysis, and highlighted key findings: foundation funding covered a large share of matrix costs but total spending on matrix items exceeded foundation funding, with classroom teachers making up the largest share. Members asked for additional breakdowns on waivers, superintendent survey responses, trend data, and spending by district type, size, and rural/urban status. Staff also noted limitations in tracking two matrix lines—salary enhancement for other employees and all personnel health insurance—because of coding and definition issues. The committee then reviewed non-matrix expenditures, including instructional aides, facilities, school safety, mental health, dyslexia services, gifted and talented, and career and technical education. Staff reported that non-matrix spending remained above $2 billion over the last three years, with most of it coming from other funds rather than foundation funding. Members raised concerns about dyslexia identification and funding, mental health needs, school safety, food service, athletic transportation, and whether some items should be added to the matrix. The Department of Education clarified that the building fund reflects district-held funds for construction and maintenance projects, while the facilities partnership program is a separate state process for approved projects. In the final discussion, staff summarized total spending as more than $15,800 per student in 2025, with about 69% going to matrix resources and 31% to non-matrix resources. The chair explained the adequacy process and the committee’s role in setting future funding recommendations, and members discussed the recommendations worksheet included in the binder. The chair then proposed postponing the remainder of Part Two of the presentation until a May meeting after the fiscal session, along with inviting the Department of Education back for more detailed questions; with no objections, the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• from all fund sources is considered, spending surpasses the foundation funding level on all lines except
• starting with three-year trends, every school-level personnel line showed an increase in spending except
• Every school-level personnel line showed an increase in spending except instructional facilitators, which
• more than $150 per student than regular districts on technology and on all school-level resources except
• And D&F districts spent the most per student across all school-level resources except extra duty.

Keywords: 1204, all

Summary: The joint education committee continued its adequacy study with a Bureau of Legislative Research presentation on resource allocation, covering how Arkansas school spending is mapped to the adequacy matrix and how expenditures are split between foundation funds and other funding sources. Staff explained the methodology, district and school categories used for comparisons, and key findings for matrix spending, including that classroom teachers account for the largest share of matrix expenditures and that districts spend more per student than charter districts in most categories. Members asked for additional breakdowns on waivers, trend data, and more detailed spending by district type, and staff agreed to provide follow-up information. The committee then reviewed non-matrix spending, including instructional aides, facilities, school safety, mental health services, dyslexia support, gifted and talented, career and technical education, and other items not explicitly in the matrix. Staff noted that non-matrix spending exceeded $2 billion and that superintendents consistently identified mental health services, school safety, and dyslexia support as important needs not fully captured in the matrix. Members raised concerns about dyslexia identification and funding, school safety, facilities spending, and whether some items such as food service should be included in adequacy calculations. Staff and Department of Education representatives explained that some expenditures are difficult to isolate because of coding and commingled funds, and that certain items are funded outside the matrix or through separate programs. In the final section, staff summarized total spending across matrix and non-matrix items, noting that districts spent more than the foundation amount per student and that most total spending was on matrix resources. They also highlighted data limitations, including two matrix lines that cannot be fully tracked through current accounting codes. The chair then proposed postponing the second part of the presentation until a May meeting after the fiscal session, with additional time set aside to address questions for both staff and the Department of Education. The committee agreed, and the meeting adjourned without any formal vote on policy changes.

Transcript Highlights:

• And that's why you have to list all these exceptions and all that.
• route where we've received no the easier route where we've received no pushback pushback pushback except
• except except today<00:33:42.800> from<00:33:43.000> you.
• Is not when it's under loitering you don't have to worry about all these exceptions.
• That's one of the benefits exceptions.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Summary: The meeting on SB 460 focused almost entirely on where the bill should be placed in statute and how it would be enforced. One side argued the proposal should be moved out of the loitering section and into the sex offender registration framework, saying loitering is already under constitutional challenge, is vague, and does not fit the conduct at issue. They said the bill is meant to create a clear, advance-notice restriction for registered sex offenders, especially around schools, day care facilities, and similar places, and that this would be easier for police to enforce. The opposing view was that the loitering placement is the better fit and that moving the bill would create broader drafting problems by opening the door to reorganizing many other sex-offender-related restrictions. There was also discussion of whether the bill’s references to schools should use the school-property statute, whether churches should be included, and whether the existing loitering statute’s alarm-based elements are too complicated and potentially unconstitutional. The committee also discussed a pending federal challenge to the loitering law, with one member saying there was no injunction yet but the case was being challenged. No agreement was reached. After a brief break and further debate, members concluded that the Senate and House positions remained unresolved, and the meeting ended without a compromise or vote on the substantive dispute.

Transcript Highlights:

• Previously students received a certificate of completion when they met all graduation requirements except
• The skills for each badge were identified through a partnership with the Bureau of Exceptional Education
• Matthew Marino, director of the University of Central Florida's Toni Jennings, Exceptional Education
• And so I've got to say that the aged 12 transition planning process in my opinion is exceptional.
• So in terms of our bureau, exceptional education, student services, that is one of the role of the bureau's

Transcript Highlights:

• And then it says we may give reasonable exceptions.
• And then it says we may give reasonable exceptions.
• So I don't hear any support really for my mimic, except maybe Senator Townsend.
• So I don't hear any support really for my mimic, except maybe Senator Townsend.
• Should we have an exception for therapists who want to offer that service?

Bills: SB23, SB221, SB261, SB264

Keywords: student use, wireless devices, public schools, policy implementation, education technology funding, misappropriation, petroleum products, oil and gas equipment, racketeering, criminal penalties, New Mexico, public safety, health regulations, community welfare, peace promotion, legislative reforms, election integrity, voter coercion, emergency procedures, polling place security

Transcript Highlights:

• And here, these two broad exceptions I think are quite unclear.
• activity exception.
• that exception applied.
• Uh the exception that exception applied.
• <01:42:47.760> uh the commercial activity exception. uh the commercial activity exception.

Bills: HB0103, HB0070, HB0091

Keywords: First Amendment, free speech, lawsuits, immunity, public participation, strategic lawsuits, foreign censorship, digital innovation, constitutional rights, Wyoming GRANITE Act, extraterritorial laws, civil actions, speech protection, legal jurisdiction, joint liability, artificial intelligence, social scoring, biometric data, privacy rights, government regulation

Transcript Highlights:

• It says it provides protections for exceptional value wetlands.
• What constitutes an exceptional value wetland?
• So the definition of a unique wetland is, or exceptional value wetland is—sorry, go ahead.
• Exceptional value wetlands in this case are defined twofold: unique wetland communities and wetlands
• This bill makes an important distinction between exceptional value wetlands and lower quality wetlands

Bills: SB9

Keywords: wetlands protection, nontidal wetlands, Delaware, environmental sustainability, climate change, carbon sink, permitting process

Summary: The House Natural Resources and Energy Committee met and first considered SB 321 with Senate Amendment 1, the community solar utility billing bill. The sponsor explained that it would consolidate the two-bill system for community solar subscribers into one utility bill, with the utility forwarding the subscriber fee to the solar facility through an escrow mechanism so costs are not shifted to other ratepayers. Testimony from the solar industry, the Public Advocate, and environmental advocates supported the measure, emphasizing easier enrollment, fewer barriers for low-income customers, and guaranteed savings. The committee initially lacked enough members present to release the bill, but after a roll call vote it was released from committee. The committee then heard SB 9 with Senate Amendment 1, a wetlands protection bill creating a state non-tidal freshwater wetlands permitting program. The sponsor and DNREC described a framework of exemptions, general permits, and individual permits based on wetland type and value, with an advisory committee to develop regulations. Witnesses explained that “exceptional value” wetlands would include unique wetland communities and high-functioning wetlands, and that the bill was intended to preserve important habitat while allowing farming, drainage, and other exempt activities to continue. Some members raised concerns about flooding, land classification, and the balance of the advisory committee, while supporters said the bill was the product of broad stakeholder consensus and would protect wetlands without unduly harming agriculture or development. Public comment on SB 9 was strongly supportive from environmental groups, the Delaware Native Species Commission, the Home Builders Association, the Farm Bureau, The Nature Conservancy, and affordable housing advocates, who said the bill balanced conservation with practical land use concerns. After remote testimony, the committee took a roll call vote and SB 9 was released from committee. The meeting concluded with remarks thanking the chair for her service and instructions for members to sign the backers before adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• we've been ...under a hiring freeze for some time, and that continues, although there are some exceptions
• So we often then will have increased reliance on exceptions or alternative processes, kind of going back
• to what I talked about. ...on exceptions or alternative processes, kind of going back to what I talked
• about on the hiring freeze, that we do have some exceptions to be able to continue to hire people.
• So it's just those exceptions that are pulled out.

Summary: The Joint Committee on Employment Relations met on May 8, 2026, to review goals and objectives for the 2027–2029 master collective bargaining cycle and to hear updates on higher education and Washington Management Service bargaining. OFM’s Jenny Sheehan outlined the state workforce, noting that most employees are represented, the workforce remains heavily governed by civil service rules and CBAs, and the state is entering bargaining under a constrained hiring and budget environment. She described the bargaining timeline, the role of the June revenue forecasts in determining whether targeted compensation increases can be funded, and the state’s goals of affordability, maintaining labor relations, supporting equity, and addressing non-economic issues such as AI use, leave, immigration-related workplace concerns, and union access in a hybrid work environment. Sheehan also reviewed the 2025–2027 bargaining cycle, including the prior WPEA ratification issue and the requirement that tentative agreements be submitted by October 1 for financial feasibility review and possible legislative funding. She said the 2025–27 agreements cost about $1.2 billion in general funds and $1.7 billion total, excluding the later-funded WPEA agreements. In response to a question, she explained that paid family and medical leave is not bargained over directly because it is governed by statute and ESD rules. She then presented on Washington Management Service bargaining, explaining that only certain WMS employees are eligible to bargain, that representation remains small, and that current WMS contracts are handled through addenda to existing agreements. She also described interest arbitration for certain groups, including ferries and public safety-related employees, and said arbitration awards still must be financially feasible and submitted by October 1. The committee also heard from Western Washington University and the University of Washington on higher education bargaining. Western described its locally bargained contracts, the importance of local bargaining for workload, tenure, grievance, and safety issues, and the impact of the state fund split on budget planning. Western said it has no state funding for student compensation and has requested inclusion of student employees in the wage base. UW outlined its large workforce and the different bargaining frameworks under RCW 41.56 and 41.80, emphasizing that state funding and tuition make up only a portion of its budget and that the fund split and health care cost increases significantly affect compensation planning. UW also highlighted its request for state funding for academic student employee compensation, saying rising costs are reducing the number of positions and affecting class sizes and the academic pipeline. No votes were taken, and the meeting adjourned after members discussed the upcoming bargaining and arbitration timelines.

Transcript Highlights:

• Kathy Hudgens simplified what we mean when we say a person has demonstrated exceptional commitment.
• The memorial resolutions to be adopted in block are spread across pages 2 through 5, with the exception
• Otherwise, all of those other resolutions on those pages are in the block, with the exception of the
• With the exception of the committee resolutions excluded by the clerk, all those in favor of adopting
• So in that block that I announced, all the resolutions between pages 5 and 11, with the exception now

Keywords: March 13, 2026 - Regular Session, 976, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So I'm not familiar with any city spending money associated directly with the creation or except or an
• So the, this bill doesn't change anything about the current law except to clarify that if someone operates
• And they create that in the vacuum of exception that even though you live in that ETJ, the city has the
• Unfortunately, the application of both the model subdivision rules and platting exceptions within statute
• It, it, they, there, there are, there is an exception to that with um certain design work, but the rule

Transcript Highlights:

• for when that exception or the two existing exceptions were used.
• There are two exceptions in the bill.
• The two existing exceptions were used.
• There are two exceptions in the bill.
• There are two exceptions in the bill.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee met on February 4, 2025, for decision making on previously heard measures, then later held hearings on additional bills. Early action focused on several measures that were amended and advanced, including SB 161 on state project exemptions from county permitting, which was heavily revised to allow programmatic or project-specific agreements with counties, require public reporting of exempted projects, and create a working group to study broader permitting and construction coordination issues. The committee also advanced SB 635 on energy efficiency with changes shifting survey leadership to the Hawaii State Energy Office, SB 700 on resilience hubs after narrowing it to focus on emergency-service-capable hubs and removing distributed energy language, SB 869 on community outreach boards with a technical amendment, SB 1081 on a legislative budget office by converting it to a feasibility study, SB 711 on gubernatorial appointments with a salary threshold change, SB 405 on neighborhood board agendas with a committee-report note about OIP concerns, SB 381 with privacy issues deferred to Judiciary, SB 2 as a two-year pilot for fruit tree planting in selected districts, SB 239 on disaster preparedness with sheltering revisions, and SB 998 as introduced with a cost estimate for site selection work. Several measures were deferred or not advanced, including SB 615, which was deferred indefinitely, SB 1132, which the chair said would be set aside in favor of another childcare bill, and SB 111, which was not taken up further because of confusion during an earlier hearing. During the later hearing portion, SB 1175 on procurement drew testimony from the State Procurement Office, which supported the bill but corrected its estimated database revision cost from $7,500 to $30,000; the Department of Transportation also appeared, while the General Contractors Association submitted opposition. Committee members questioned whether the past-performance database should include more detailed quality information and whether a one-year post-completion review would be useful, but no amendment was adopted at that time. SB 1587 on retainage received written support from the Subcontractors Association of Hawaii and no opposition in the room. SB 1543 on government accountability, which would require justification for outside consultants and cap consultant spending, drew opposition from the American Council of Engineering Companies of Hawaii, which argued it could slow procurement, reduce flexibility, and worsen delays given existing vacancies and limited in-house expertise. The Public First Law Center supported the related transparency bill discussed in the hearing, arguing it would close a loophole by making contractor-created records used in government functions subject to disclosure under UIPA, while the Attorney General’s office opposed it. The transcript ends with that testimony still underway, and no final vote is shown for the later hearing bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• There's also in the bill an exception to the misdemeanor warrant requirement.
• Now, there are certain exceptions to that.
• And you see here, I think this would be the 7th exception.
• There have been exceptions over the year in certain situations, like a DUI crash, when there is a crash
• So that's a common sense exception to the misdemeanor warrant requirement to say that officer came on

Transcript Highlights:

• Today we have exceptional item requests focusing on addressing critical workforce shortages in Texas.
• We are known for our exceptional undergraduate engineering program, which ranks among the best in the
• Our highest priority is the restoration of our institutional enhancement exceptional item funding in
• We also respectfully submit the following exceptional item request for your consideration.
• Now we have two additional exception items.

Transcript Highlights:

• Items 2 on page six give an overview of the exceptional items funded by the 88th legislature.
• million in general revenue and general revenue dedicated water resource Management Fund, 153 for all exceptional
• The materials we submitted cover our baseline appropriations request and a few exceptional items.
• First, our baseline request is the same as the 2425 biennium, and our exceptional items address the ongoing
• On the technology side, some of your exceptional items, um. You see, Number one was staffing.

Transcript Highlights:

• We strive to really improve the human condition at every stage of life through exceptional care, spiritual
• We strive to really improve the human condition at every stage of life through exceptional care, spiritual
• care stage of life through exceptional care spiritual<00:09:18.839> enrichment<00:09:19.839><
• 00:27:20.520> their<00:27:20.679> own<00:27:20.919> bedroom<00:27:21.919> except
• <00:27:22.360> if must have their own bedroom except if must have their own bedroom except

Bills: HF729, HF728

Keywords: human services, provider enrollment, medical assistance, healthcare, housing stabilization, substance use disorder, vulnerable adults, fraud prevention, respite care, children, licensed settings, home and community-based services, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• If the exception is received, notice of exception is received, the reply has to be provided within 48
• <00:53:54.240> is um exception is um exception is received,<00:53:56.720> notice<00
• opportunity is once the exception opportunity is once the exception process<00:55:09.280> is<
• exception process is activated. exception process is activated.
• The American Medical exception.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Session on the exceptional item funding.
• Exceptional item request for your consideration.
• Also, we have two exceptional items.
• We also have two exceptional item requests.
• There's also two exceptional items that I'll highlight.

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:

• Now I understand historically many or most, if not all, of our comprehensive schools, with the exception
• of Northern they came with the exception of Northern they came into<00:03:24.159> the<00:03:24.319
• to the rules will will leave exceptions to the rules will will leave some<00:19:29.280> children<
• except at the schoolboard<00:23:55.600> level,<00:23:55.919> election<00:23:56.400>
• for a list of finite things we except for a list of finite things we set<00:26:36.400> out<00

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Interim Joint Budget Review Subcommittee on Education met with a quorum, approved the August 20, 2025 minutes, and then heard a discussion tied to Constitution Day and Kentucky’s constitutional duty to provide an efficient system of common schools. Chairman James Tipton reviewed the history of Kentucky’s model laboratory schools, postsecondary academy programs such as Gatton and Craft, magnet schools, virtual learning, and computer science opportunities, arguing that Kentucky has long expanded educational opportunity through different school models. He described model schools and academy programs as hybrid or innovative approaches that serve specialized student needs and noted that some of these programs receive state appropriations and, in some cases, tuition. Senator Steve West then gave a retrospective on school choice in Kentucky, beginning with the 2017 charter school law and explaining that Kentucky’s charter framework was designed as public-only to comply with the state constitution. He said charter schools have remained largely dormant in Kentucky and used that as context for Senate Bill 207, the School Innovation Act, which he said was modeled on a South Carolina approach. Under SB 207, a local school board can contract with a third-party entity to manage an existing school, receive SEEK funding, and seek waivers from certain state regulations in order to innovate, while retaining limits on items such as school safety and attendance rules. Members asked about how the new model differs from charter schools, whether schools could cherry-pick students, and whether teachers would remain district employees. West and Tipton said the bill is intended to keep the school within the public system, with the local district initiating the process and maintaining accountability through a time-limited contract that can be ended if the school fails to perform. They emphasized that the school would serve the existing student population rather than select students, and that teachers would remain district employees with their pensions and related contributions unchanged. Representative Brown raised concerns that exceptions and charters could leave lower-income children behind, while West responded that the bill is meant to expand choice for families who otherwise lack access and cited examples from other states where outside management and parental involvement helped turn around low-performing schools. No additional votes or formal actions were taken beyond approving the minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• There are exceptions, yes. Any other questions? Okay, you recognize Senator David.
• Exceptions are given, including observances in U.S. Code 36.
• Or do we just wait until the next mpox outbreak to add yet another exception?
• , except if you want to do things with your own reproductive organs, except if you want your child to
• , except if you want to do things with your own reproductive organs, except if you want your child to

Bills: S0092, S0110, S0192, S0212, S0260, S0350, S0394, S0422, S0434, S0442, S0484, S0546, S0556, S0684, S0696, S0706, S0748, S0786, S0820, S0824, S0838, S0840, S0848, S0856, S0962, S1000, S1014, S1036, S1050, S1054, S1080, S1118, S1134, S1338, S1480, S1500, S1506, S1622, S1724

Keywords: employee protections, whistleblower, retaliation, public trust, ethics complaint, Commission on Ethics, Public Employees Relations Commission, public employee, local government attorney, public officer, adverse personnel action, protected disclosure, whistleblower retaliation, state agency, independent contractor, public employment, civil service, reinstatement, back pay, front pay

Summary: The Committee on Rules met with a quorum and considered a long agenda of bills, many of them retained from the prior week. The most debated measure was CS for SB 706, which would preempt naming of major commercial service airports to the state and designate Palm Beach International Airport as the Donald J. Trump International Airport, subject to FAA approval and a trademark agreement. Amendments were offered and rejected, including proposals to prevent private financial benefit from the naming. Several senators spoke in opposition, citing concerns about naming an airport after a sitting president, lack of local input, and the trademark/licensing arrangement; supporters argued there was no cost to the airport and that the bill simply set a state naming policy. The committee reported the bill favorably after a roll call vote. The committee also reported favorably CS for SB 546 on conservation land notice requirements, CS for CS for SB 1014 on municipal utility service to properties outside city limits, CS for SB 1500 on uncontested probate proceedings, SB 962 on excluding farms from certain zoning definitions, and CS for SB 820 on problem-solving court reporting requirements. The committee then approved several bills from Senator DiCeglie and Senator Arrington. SB 840, addressing land-use regulations for local governments affected by natural disasters, was supported by local-government and environmental advocates who said it would restore local control after SB 180’s hurricane-related restrictions; the sponsor said it was intended to correct unintended consequences of last year’s law. CS for SB 856, requiring online listing platforms to show estimated ad valorem taxes on residential listings, was amended to exclude social media platforms and broaden liability protections; the sponsor and a county property appraiser described it as a consumer-transparency measure. CS for SB 110, clarifying homestead exemption treatment for long-term leases that end at death, was also reported favorably. The committee took up a controversial strike-all amendment to SB 212, which focused on public swimming pools and added residency and related restrictions for certain sex offenders and offenders on community control or probation. The amendment drew strong opposition from advocates and affected families, who argued it would worsen homelessness, impose broad geographic restrictions, and lack evidence of improving child safety; supporters said it was a targeted public-safety measure. Despite the objections, the committee reported the bill favorably. The committee also approved SB 684 on electronic signatures for total-loss vehicle and vessel titles, SB 394 on reinsurance intermediary managers, SB 434 on property tax assessment treatment for wind-hardening improvements, CS for CS for SBs 658 and 608 on water-safety requirements for rental properties with pools or nearby water, SB 748 on adding voting-rights restoration information to sentencing score sheets, and CS for SB 824 requiring school districts to inventory unimproved real property. The meeting ended while the committee was beginning SB 848 on stormwater treatment, with an amendment being introduced as the transcript cut off.