Transcript Highlights:

• So, Florida has 2.9 million students, only 67 school districts, right? So, huge school districts.
• So, huge school districts, right?
• </c> per county uh per school district. per county uh per school district.
• </c><01:40:12.080><c> in</c> school district to school district in school district to school district
• particular school, a district level, uh, particular school, a district level, uh, school<01:58:21.199

Summary: The committee met to hear from the New Hampshire Association of School Principals as part of its review of a proposal involving statewide administrative consolidation and changes to school governance. Members first discussed how school board witnesses would be selected, with the chair saying the committee would seek a mix of district sizes and structures and would also accept emailed input. The principals’ association said it represents more than 550 principals and assistant principals and urged caution about any mandatory consolidation, arguing that successful consolidations are gradual and voluntary. Association leaders and principals testified that principals already handle a wide range of responsibilities, including instructional leadership, student discipline, safety, staff supervision and evaluation, family and community engagement, and day-to-day crisis response. They argued that shifting more legal, budgetary, and administrative duties onto principals would reduce time for coaching teachers and supporting students, increase burnout and turnover, and create legal and training risks, especially in areas such as special education, privacy, and labor issues. They also said the roles of superintendents, principals, and school board members are distinct and require different training and expertise. Members asked detailed questions about how responsibilities are divided between principals and SAUs, whether principals recruit and evaluate staff, and how much time principals work. One principal said she works about 60 to 70 hours a week and that additional duties would be difficult to absorb. Another principal described his school’s structure, the importance of community building, and the need to preserve district-wide alignment if consolidation moves forward. No votes were taken during this portion of the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• THIS SLIDE REFLECTS THE 25-26 RAISED SCHOOLS BY DISTRICT CURRENTLY JUST OVER 1200 SCHOOLS IDENTIFIED
• AND PROVIDE MORE SPECIFIC NEEDS TO A DISTRICT IT'S SCHOOLS AND LITERACY COACHES.
• IN BOTH SCHOOLS THE SRLD CONDUCTED MONTHLY LITERACY WALKS WITH SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS AND DISTRICT ELA
• . 88% OF SCHOOL DISTRICTS EARNED AN A OR B THIS PAST YEAR UP FROM 70 TO THE PRIOR YEAR, SEVEN DISTRICTS
• WE RELY ON OUR SCHOOL DISTRICTS AT THE LOCAL LEVEL SO WHAT SCHOOLS AND DISTRICTS SHOULD BE DOING IS LOOKING

Transcript Highlights:

• in a school district with fewer than 200,000 pupils.
• smaller school districts other than Clark County.
• Nathaniel, Clark County School District.
• Nathaniel, Clark County School District.
• Clark County School District.

Committee: Assembly Education

Transcript Highlights:

• My wife and I lobbied that the school district should include the transition planning form in the IEP
• The bill I filed would shift the burden of proof from the parents to the school districts.
• Even the regular education costs that we see in school districts and communities need relief.
• Our school districts. I want to thank R.
• These two factors continue to put financial pressure on local school district budgets.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Education

Summary: The Joint Committee on Education held a hearing focused primarily on special education-related bills, with testimony centered on two major themes: transition planning for students aging out of school-based services at age 22, and the fiscal strain special education costs place on districts. Committee members explained hearing procedures, noted the House was in formal session, and periodically stepped out for votes while staff recorded testimony. A separate bill on special education due process was also taken up briefly, along with a bill on special education finance and another on equitable access/data reporting. On House Bill 752 and Senate Bill 313, witnesses from the Arc of Massachusetts, the Massachusetts Down Syndrome Congress, the Developmental Disabilities Council, families, self-advocates, and Senator Comerford described the “Turning 22” transition as a crisis point that often leaves families without adult placements, services, or clear communication. Testimony emphasized earlier planning, more accountability, better data collection, and a commission to improve coordination and residential placement. Several parents and advocates shared personal accounts of traumatic transitions, delayed placements, and the need for plans to begin at least a year before age 22. The committee later closed testimony on these bills after hearing from all signed-up speakers. House Bill 4217, on special education due process, drew support from Representative Sullivan-Almeida, parents, and advocates who argued that the burden of proof should shift from families to school districts. Testimony described costly legal battles, delays, and parents having to become experts in reading instruction or hire advocates and attorneys to secure services. Brody Dwyer, a 10-year-old student with dyslexia, and his mother described how evidence-based instruction helped him after years of struggle. The committee also heard testimony on House Bill 546/Senate Bill 317, which would require DESE to publish cross-tabulated data on race, disability, gender, income, and other factors; advocates said this would better expose disparities and help address the school-to-prison pipeline. Finally, on House Bill 691/Senate Bill 430, school leaders, educators, and union representatives testified that special education costs are outpacing district budgets and that increasing circuit breaker reimbursement and creating a commission to study long-term sustainability would help prevent staffing cuts and service reductions. No votes were taken during the hearing; the committee repeatedly closed testimony on individual bills as speakers finished and moved through the agenda.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's not so much that the school district...
• And that concludes the findings for Forest City School District.
• And that concludes the findings for Nettleton School District.
• for Green County Technical School District.
• for Green County Technical School District.

Committee: All LEGISLATIVE JOINT AUDITING-EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS

Summary: The Legislative Audit Education Institution Subcommittee met to adopt the previous minutes and review 57 education audit reports, 52 of which had no findings and were filed as reviewed. The committee heard several findings involving school district spending and internal control issues, including Camden-Fairview’s use of operating funds for an employee awards banquet and unauthorized credit card charges, Forest City’s use of operating funds for an end-of-year celebration and entertainment event, Nettleton’s fraudulent vendor payment scheme involving $1.9 million in attempted transfers, Cedar Ridge’s misallocation of Title I funds and payroll/bank reconciliation errors, and Green County Technical’s diverted vendor check that was recovered. Three of the reports had been referred to the prosecuting attorney and attorney general. Members asked questions about whether district officials were present, how the questionable expenditures were broken down, and whether school boards had prior knowledge or approval. The committee deferred the Camden-Fairview, Forest City, and Nettleton reports to the June meeting and requested district representatives attend to answer questions. Cedar Ridge and Green County Technical were not deferred; Cedar Ridge was filed, and Green County Technical was reviewed without further action. Staff also discussed recurring fraud and banking-control issues seen in school audits, including altered checks, email-based banking changes, and the use of positive pay and in-person verification for deposit changes. Members encouraged better communication with school districts and noted that clean audits should be recognized. The committee then filed the remaining no-finding reports and adjourned with no new business.

Transcript Highlights:

• districts first for a lot of school districts who had not already created a graduate profile.
• And so how you choose to regulate what a school district does versus a charter school that is approved
• So under this language, a school district...
• How school districts and charter schools use the resources they have.
• district and charter school.

Transcript Highlights:

• , 325 school districts.
• ><c> spent</c> the school districts have already spent the school districts have already spent those<
• c> districts the school districts have districts the school districts have already<00:15:22.040><c> spent
• /c><00:21:18.840><c> a</c><00:21:19.000><c> district</c> school district um kind of a district school
• > for</c><00:26:07.120><c> the</c> for our school districts to plan for the for our school districts

Transcript Highlights:

• And finally, we reviewed the funding of three school districts by recalculating their 2023-24 school
• One school district, it was about $90,000. Okay.
• If there's, for example, a school district needs to resubmit a report or resubmit data, the school district
• If there's, for example, a school district needs to resubmit a report or resubmit data, the school district
• It goes to the school districts individually.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee subcommittee heard a State Auditor’s Office performance audit on the accuracy and reliability of OSPI’s school apportionment system. Auditors said the system, which calculates and distributes K-12 funding using multiple feeder systems and a core apportionment engine, is outdated, unstable, inefficient, and at high risk of failure. They reported weak controls over data input, documentation, oversight, and staffing, and said OSPI relies heavily on manual workarounds, a few knowledgeable staff, and vendor support. In limited testing of three districts, the auditors found the system calculated funding correctly for the 2023-24 school year, but they identified nine small input discrepancies tied to differences between budget materials and state law, which they said could compound into larger dollar amounts. The auditors recommended replacing or modernizing the system and noted that delays in doing so prolong risk. OSPI largely agreed that the current platform needs replacement and said it has been working toward a new system for years. Agency officials clarified that the Legislature requested a feasibility study in 2022, that the study found the system at risk of catastrophic failure, and that funding for a replacement is now in the state IT pool subject to OCIO/OFM gate reviews. OSPI disputed the audit’s characterization of the rounding and budget-law discrepancies, saying the issue was an agency rule and implementation choice, not an error that caused under- or over-allocation. Officials also said the current system is too old to easily absorb future formula changes, but that the planned replacement should be flexible enough to handle a new funding model if the Legislature adopts one. Committee members asked about the amount and timing of the $16 million project funding, whether smaller districts face greater risk, how many times data is entered, and whether the funding formula should be simplified. Auditors and OSPI both emphasized that formula simplification is a policy question for the Legislature, not the audit. Public testimony came from one online witness, who urged full implementation of the audit recommendations and modernization of the system. The subcommittee took no formal vote and adjourned after the presentations and testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• districts in the state, primarily the largest school districts.
• The school district and the school board...
• The school district and the school board that agreed to this did not understand the full amount of how
• school districts?
• Our governing boards and school districts are competing for leaders with other districts in the state

Committee: Senate Senate Education Committee of Reference

Summary: The committee heard and advanced several education-related bills. HB 2395 would create a voluntary Arizona School Fitness Program in ADE to recognize schools that participate in nationally recognized fitness testing, allow schools to note the designation on report cards, and direct ADE to issue guidelines and best practices. Supporters argued it would encourage student activity and improve health and achievement without penalties; it passed with a due pass recommendation on a 6-0 vote, with two members not voting. HB 2409, the Getting Arizona Ready for AI Act, would create an Arizona Artificial Intelligence Program in ADE to offer voluntary summer AI courses around the state, including digital hygiene/civic integrity and small-business/entrepreneurship components, with optional facility use and possible academic credit. The sponsor said the bill was meant to prepare students for AI-driven job disruption while keeping the program voluntary and low-cost. It passed 4-2 with one not voting. HB 2203 would require ADE to review school and agency reporting requirements, identify duplicative or obsolete reports, and recommend consolidation or repeal; a technical amendment was adopted and the bill passed unanimously by those voting. HB 2008 would bar school libraries from using public funds to pay professional associations for libraries and librarians; opponents called it unnecessary and constitutionally problematic, while supporters framed it as limiting public spending. It passed 4-2 with one not voting. The committee also heard HB 2075, which would require school districts to submit superintendent and CFO contracts to ADE, post them online, and maintain a searchable database and annual compensation report. Supporters said it would improve transparency and prevent excessive or hidden compensation, while opponents argued it unfairly targeted district schools and should, if anything, apply to all publicly funded schools. After extended debate over transparency and comparisons to charter schools and ESAs, the bill received a due pass recommendation on a 4-2 vote with one not voting.

Transcript Highlights:

• school districts are saying 14 number of school districts are saying we're<00:10:15.680><c> just</c>
• I understand that the sending school districts and on line 11 through 14, sending school districts and
• I understand that the sending school districts and on line 11 through 14, sending school districts and
• I understand that the sending school districts and on line 11 through 14, sending school districts and
• I understand that the sending school districts and on line 11 through 14, sending school districts and

Summary: The committee first took up SB 209, which would require schools seeking building aid for construction or reconstruction projects to use an owner’s project manager. The chair explained an amendment that would remove the bill’s requirement that the manager be engaged before application and instead revert to current law, while updating the project threshold from the older $1 million figure to a more current amount and clarifying that the manager’s role is to protect the project owner’s interests. Members asked about the cost of hiring a project manager over several years before a project is funded, the 1.5% fee in rule, and whether the rules already define the manager’s duties. The chair said the amendment addressed those concerns by leaving the timing to current law and relying on existing administrative rules for qualifications and responsibilities. The committee then voted 18-0 to adopt the amendment and 18-0 to recommend SB 209 OTPA, placing it on the consent calendar. The committee then moved to SB 99, which concerns allowing students enrolled in career and technical education programs at receiving comprehensive high schools to take additional academic courses there. The chair said the bill was intended to make it easier for students to access CTE without being blocked by scheduling conflicts in their sending schools, and to clarify how agreements between sending and receiving districts would work. He described concerns about the bill’s cost formula, transportation, part-time versus full-time status, and whether the proposal could unintentionally create open-enrollment or athletic-transfer issues. He said the amendment would mirror existing treatment for homeschool and charter school students, use a familiar funding model, and limit participation to students already enrolled in one or more CTE classes at the receiving school. The chair also emphasized that comprehensive high schools already have a statutory definition and that the bill would help more students participate in CTE, which he said currently reaches only a relatively small share of students statewide. He noted that transportation would be covered only when a CTE bus is available, otherwise students would be responsible for arranging travel as under current practice. After brief discussion, the committee voted 18-0 to adopt the amendment and 18-0 to recommend SB 99 OTPA, also placing it on the consent calendar.

Transcript Highlights:

• There's no school or receiving school district that would be required to accept that career status.
• school district if that's the way you want to do it.
• by the school district if that's the way you want to do it.
• I've heard nothing but success stories from school districts.
• It isn't to come in and just tell a school district what to do.

Bills: SB1726 , SB1236 , SB1633 , SB1413 , SB1317 , SB1360 , SB1342 , SB1477 , SB1189 , SB1546 , SB1524 , SB1338 , SB1193 , SB1812 , SB1617

Committee: Senate Education

Summary: The Senate Education Committee heard and advanced a large slate of education bills. Early measures included SB 1726, requiring formal training for university teaching assistants before they teach classes and evaluate students, with emphasis on First Amendment rights; SB 1236, creating an Administrative Report Consolidation Act to reduce duplicative reporting by schools and agencies; SB 1633, codifying existing higher education residency tuition practices; SB 1413, requiring notice to parents when a teacher is emergency certified and limiting adjunct teachers to 270 clock hours per semester; SB 1317, allowing career teacher status to be portable across districts with local board approval; and SB 1360, expanding the state’s math initiative by restoring instructional coaches and creating a math office at the State Department of Education. Most of these bills passed on favorable votes, with SB 1413 drawing some concern over teacher shortages and the adjunct-hour cap, but still passing.

Transcript Highlights:

• They're supposed to oversee public school districts.
• , going to the school district.
• My home school district, they meet every Wednesday.
• Now, if a school district itself wants to implement within its school district, that's one thing.
• I would imagine a school district would penalize them, and I actually don't think that school districts

Summary: The House approved the journal and recognized several special guests and departing staff before moving to bills on perfection and printing. House Bill 2636, the Mortgage Modification Act, was explained as a banking measure to keep a first mortgage in first position when modified, and it received bipartisan support and was ordered perfected and printed. House Bill 1718, dealing with sovereign immunity caps and the inflation factor under section 537.610, was also advanced after questions about whether the cap should be measured at the time of injury or judgment; the sponsor said the bill would use the injury date and that trial attorneys were the main opposition. House Bills 2120 and 1698, combined as an anti-bullying measure known as Sawyer’s Law, were then taken up and advanced after extensive debate. The bill would require prompt reporting and investigation of bullying, reporting to administrators and school boards, and protections for staff and schools acting under the policy. An amendment from the Lady from Boone sought to remove zero-tolerance references, limit identifying information in reports, and give school boards more flexibility, but it failed on a voice vote. Supporters of the bill cited tragic bullying cases and argued schools need stronger reporting and accountability; opponents of the amendment and some speakers warned about due process, school board overreach, and potential liability. House Bill 2748, requiring daily physical activity for students, was then brought up with an amendment that would remove the emergency clause, delay implementation, and specify weekly activity minutes and how some activity time could count toward class requirements; members debated scheduling, teacher workload, and whether the proposal would reduce instructional time, but the discussion was still ongoing at the end of the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• ><c> but</c> school district doing everything but school district doing everything but being<00:31:08.039
• Now, it makes a lot of sense from a funding standpoint that we as a school district or school districts
• Now, it makes a lot of sense from a funding standpoint that we as a school district or school districts
• It makes a lot of sense from a funding standpoint that we as a school district or school districts should
• </c><00:43:05.319><c> they're</c> school at our district that they're school at our district that they're

Committee: House Education Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• for certain school districts.
• It specifies that for school districts with enrollments between 2,000... ...districts as follows: It
• I spoke with many special ed school teachers and also districts.
• districts like mine, like Shelton School District, in binding conditions, and many other school districts
• districts, and I urge your support to help us help school districts meet the needs that they choose

Summary: The House Education Committee met in executive session on several bills, beginning with House Bill 1795 on restraint and isolation in schools. Staff described the proposed substitute as prohibiting mechanical, chemical, and certain physical restraints, limiting planned use of restraint to cases with written medical necessity and parental consent, and revising the definition of serious harm. Members debated amendments clarifying that serious harm can include harm to another person, barring construction of rooms designed primarily for student isolation, and adding a null-and-void clause. The committee adopted the first two amendments but rejected the null-and-void amendment, then advanced the bill as amended. The final roll call on HB 1795 was 10 ayes, 7 nays, and 2 excused, and it was reported do pass as amended. The committee then considered Second Substitute House Bill 1634, which would create a statewide technical assistance and training framework for student behavioral health, coordinated by OSPI and ESDs with behavioral health agencies and community partners. A second proposed substitute removed some implementation requirements, narrowed the bill to coordination and access to services, added family-focused consultation and planning language, and removed certain reporting and needs-assessment provisions. A null-and-void amendment was offered but failed. Supporters said the bill would provide schools with flexible technical assistance rather than mandates, while opponents raised concerns about fiscal impact and unfunded obligations. The committee approved the bill on a 12-5 vote with 2 excused and reported it do pass. The committee also received staff briefings on House Bill 1662, which would require several education-related agencies and entities to transition to separate administrative services and operational independence on a delayed timeline, and House Bill 1683, which would adjust school board director-district election requirements and thresholds. No amendments were noted on HB 1683, and the committee did not reach final action on either of those bills before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• I was a graduate of Lakewood High School and Long Beach Unified School District, where we were the Lancers
• Our strategic plan connects the daily work of every department and every school to our broader district
• our school at the district level as well.
• I just want to echo that a little bit, speaking from a small school district.
• I'm looking at the school district, for lack of a better way to describe it.

Transcript Highlights:

• And the years that followed, school districts started removing days from their school calendar.
• And did we give more money to school districts like schools in my district, like Sand Springs, who are
• Is it equitable to give the school district of 10,000 or the school district of 2,000 or the virtual
• So is it fair to give the small school district or the virtual charter school district as much money
• as... ...school district or the virtual charter school district as much money as the very big urban school

Committee: House A&B Education Subcommittee

Transcript Highlights:

• districts and charter schools for students with disabilities who are absent from school as provided
• So on page 7, on paragraph B, it says, "School district shall allow a student to be absent from school
• Maybe they don't have a spot for me at this school; I can go work at another school in the district,
• to partner school districts.
• Public schools, public service, and public school districts should be held accountable.

Transcript Highlights:

• School District uh and for the Claremont School District uh and get<00:11:16.399><c> it</c><00:11:16.560
• ><c> on</c><00:15:06.800><c> this</c> that school districts would rely on this that school districts
• </c> conducting an audit of your school conducting an audit of your school district. district. district
• </c> school district. school district. &gt;&gt; Okay. &gt;&gt; Okay. &gt;&gt; Okay. All right.
• </c> applying school district. applying school district.

Committee: Senate Education

Transcript Highlights:

• That's on the school district.
• I’d like a breakdown because I don’t know all of the names of the schools versus the school districts
• There are 27 school districts, including 21 specific school districts, six charter schools, and the military
• We do have a school district. It is one building, less than 20 kids.
• Ash Creek Elementary School District is the one that we're facing challenges with.

Committee: Joint Joint Legislative Audit Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• c> allowing</c> the school districts are only allowing the school districts are only allowing them<00
• </c><00:30:36.720><c> don't</c> school districts uh when they don't school districts uh when they don't
• district before middle school.
• Why does one school district or school districts across the state are able to develop commitment and
• Why does one school district or school districts across the state are able to develop commitment and

Bills: SF0035 , SF0090 , SF0072

Committee: Senate Education