Transcript Highlights:

• It is worth emphasizing that in this version of the bill, it can not only incorporate educator feedback
• This allows for immediate feedback for parents within 24 hours, and teachers are able to talk and work
• He gets that feedback immediately and then he's allowed. out to work with his teacher and his mom and
• But I'll say that the reason that we entered in. was because after giving much feedback, feedback after
• feedback, we couldn't really get the statute followed as we thought was needed and interpreted that

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• is to make sure that every year an administrator, a building administrator, is evaluated, given feedback
• So basically, that's the essence: we want to make sure that every year there's an evaluation and feedback
• But also, maybe even more importantly, I want to gather feedback on this bill and just this issue as
• cognizant we've got four weeks to go here in the session, and I'm just trying to get the committee's feedback
• I do need to try and get a little bit more feedback as well.

Summary: The Committee on Elementary and Secondary Education met in executive session and first took up House Concurrent Resolution 31. A committee substitute was adopted after the sponsor explained revisions to the proposed civics and patriotism work group, including clearer qualifications, DESE’s role in producing seals, recognition levels for gold/silver/bronze, and a special recognition letter for students entering military service. Ranking member Steinhoff supported the substitute, saying the changes improved implementation and likely reduced fiscal impact. The substitute was then passed do pass, and the committee later corrected the recorded vote on HCR 31 from 15-0 to 16-0. The committee then considered a combined substitute for House Bills 21, 26, and 2197, focused on building-level administrator evaluations and nonrenewal procedures. The substitute required administrators to be evaluated at least once per contract year, required written notice of renewal or nonrenewal by March 1, and gave nonrenewed administrators the right to request written reasons and a closed-door hearing before the school board. Members discussed the removal of earlier language that would have created automatic renewal if deadlines were missed and the decision not to create tenure for principals. Concerns were raised about whether the hearing right gave administrators more protection than other employees, but sponsors said the intent was to ensure annual evaluations and transparency without granting tenure. The committee adopted an amendment, rolled it into a new substitute, and passed the substitute do pass by a 17-0 vote. After leaving executive session, the committee heard House Bill 3489 from Representative Hurlbert. The bill, patterned after Arkansas legislation, would expand access to workforce development assessments such as WorkKeys and allow up to nine hours of college credit for demonstrated workplace skills as recommended by the American Council on Education. Testimony from ACT, the Missouri Chamber, and DESE supported the goal of elevating career readiness, noting employer demand for skilled workers, existing use of WorkKeys in Missouri, and its role in career and technical education and accountability systems. Members asked about the bill’s relationship to the governor’s workforce executive order, whether the language should be mandatory or permissive, and how the credits would transfer. The hearing on HB 3489 concluded without a vote, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• , and the immediate piece of feedback that I got was pretty strong and pretty clear.
• and uh the immediate piece get feedback and uh the immediate piece of<01:11:42.000><c> feedback</c><
• 01:11:42.520><c> that</c><01:11:42.680><c> I</c><01:11:42.800><c> got</c> of feedback that I got of feedback
• But we had a lot of feedback at the public meetings that that was going to involve a lot of increased
• But we had a lot<01:37:04.720><c> of</c><01:37:04.800><c> feedback</c><01:37:05.320><c> at</c><01:37:

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And do appreciate your feedback.
• So your feedback was critical. So, my member, Ortega, please. First, thank you.
• I guess I'm wondering, did you get any feedback as it relates to DV survivors?
• And so I just wondered if there's been any feedback as it relates to this, no.
• I don't have any feedback to provide to you.

Summary: The committee first heard AB 56, which would require social media platforms to display a warning label about potential mental health harms from prolonged use, with amendments shortening the initial warning and allowing immediate access to the platform. The author and supporters, including a parent who lost a daughter to suicide and a therapist, argued that social media contributes to teen anxiety, self-harm, and other harms and that families need clearer public health information. Opponents from tech and civil liberties groups argued the bill would be ineffective, burdensome, and likely unconstitutional, saying it would create warning fatigue and should be replaced by more targeted tools and digital literacy measures. Several members discussed emergency access concerns, language access, and whether the warning should be more actionable; the bill was moved on a 9-0 vote to the Judiciary Committee. The committee then took up AB 358, which would amend CalECPA to allow law enforcement, with the victim’s consent, to inspect certain abandoned tracking or surveillance devices found in a victim’s home, vehicle, or personal property without first obtaining a warrant. The author and a San Diego prosecutor said the bill is narrowly tailored to devices used solely for spying and is intended to help stalking and domestic violence survivors act quickly before evidence is lost. Opponents from EFF and the ACLU warned the bill would weaken warrant protections, create a loophole around CalECPA, and reduce transparency and accountability. Members debated Fourth Amendment issues, abandonment, and the practical need for rapid access; the bill passed the committee on a 9-0 vote to Appropriations. The committee also heard AB 1137, which builds on last year’s CSAM reporting law by allowing any user to report child sexual abuse material, requiring clearer reporting mechanisms, adding human review in some cases, and mandating third-party audits and public reporting. Supporters, including survivor advocates and a parent of a child victim, said the bill would reduce the burden on survivors and improve removal of abusive content. Tech industry opponents said they support the goal but objected to the human-review mandate, public audit disclosures, and enforcement provisions, arguing they could create security risks and compliance burdens. Members generally supported the bill’s intent but raised questions about audit frequency and human review; the bill was moved on call with seven votes at the time of the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><01:15:40.320><c> from</c><01:15:40.680><c> the</c> morning we received feedback from the morning
• , feedback from the Board of Psychology, which we're going to be seeking to integrate further into it
• </c><01:30:17.440><c> And</c><01:30:17.920><c> um</c> &gt;&gt; Uh, thank you for that feedback.
• And um &gt;&gt; Uh, thank you for that feedback.
• So appreciate all the<01:30:25.160><c> feedback.</c> the feedback. the feedback.

Bills: HF3951, HF4005, HF962, HF4585, HF3870, HF4542, HF3893, HF4293, HF4075, HF4057, HF3809

Keywords: submetered utility service, tenant rights, digital payment, eviction protection, housing policy, biometric data, consent, data protection, civil penalties, privacy laws, HF4585, Minnesota, harassment restraining order, HRO, restraining order, temporary restraining order, petitioner notice, service of process, law enforcement notification, sheriff

Transcript Highlights:

• and stakeholder engagement, whole-child and family supports inventory, goals, actions, measures, feedback
• And I'll just express my concern, and certainly the next panel can provide some feedback.
• So we're getting a lot of really important and rich feedback from the field, and we'll have a proposal
• I'd like to get your feedback specifically to that.
• But thank you all, and look forward to hearing some feedback on all the things we raise.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Oh, yes, and that's actually this feedback loop: deploy, collect feedback, analyze, adjust, and then
• No, and this is really good stuff, but legislators are a feedback loop too. Got it.
• But it's good feedback either way. So we put them down there.
• But it's good feedback either way. Yes, sir. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. That's a great point.
• And so that will be something where we will certainly be looking for feedback from y'all on that.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there any feedback to that from Department of Finance?
• Is there any feedback at the moment on the availability of those funds for this purpose?
• And so we'd be interested in your feedback.
• So we'd be interested in your feedback at revision on that, reflective of the comments of the committee
• Even with your feedback there, waiting to see what the numbers show in a couple of weeks.

Summary: The committee heard opening public comment and then took up several K-12 budget items in the Governor’s January proposal. On LCFF and necessary small schools, the Department of Finance described a 2.41% COLA, a roughly $2.2 billion increase for districts and charters, and a $30.7 million ongoing augmentation to raise necessary small schools funding by 20%. The LAO supported funding the COLA and said the small schools proposal had merit, but questioned the 20% figure and warned about a sharp funding cliff around the enrollment thresholds. Members and witnesses repeatedly raised declining enrollment, attendance, and the need to align funding with outcomes and local cost pressures. The chair and several members also asked whether consolidation, shared administration, or alternative formulas could better address small district costs, and the issue was left open for further discussion. The panel then discussed special education equalization. Finance proposed $509 million ongoing Proposition 98 funding to raise the statewide special education base rate to $999 per ADA, which would fully equalize SELPA base rates; the LAO said the same target could likely be reached with less money under current assumptions. CDE strongly supported equalization as an equity issue and said about 15% of students are identified with disabilities, with identification rising by roughly 20,000 to 25,000 students per year. Members raised concerns about staffing shortages, high caseloads, and the need to use any additional funds for inclusive practices, alternative diploma pathways, and the extraordinary cost pool. The committee also discussed whether the budget language should reflect the $509 million amount or the $999 rate, and the item was held open. For the Learning Recovery Emergency Block Grant, Finance proposed restoring $757.3 million one-time to complete the program, while the LAO recommended approval because learning loss remains unresolved and districts have generally used the funds for tutoring, supplemental instruction, and other academic supports. CDE explained that LEAs must revisit their needs assessments and that many districts are using the funds alongside other support systems, but members pressed for clearer accountability and better data on how much money actually goes to tutoring or other direct services. The committee then reviewed the Student Support and Professional Development Discretionary Block Grant, with Finance proposing $2.8 billion one-time and the LAO saying discretionary funding can help districts address local priorities but should be paired with fiscal oversight and possibly more targeted priorities. Members split between supporting flexibility for local needs and worrying that the grant could be used to cover ongoing structural deficits without clear evidence of student-outcome gains; the issue was also held open. Finally, the committee heard a high-level overview of school facilities funding under Proposition 2, with Finance proposing to continue $1.5 billion in bond spending in 2026-27. OPSC said that at the current pace all Prop 2 K-12 funds would likely be exhausted around 2029-30, and that demand is shifting toward modernization as enrollment declines in many areas. Members asked about school closures, reuse of unused sites, and the new small school district facilities program, which OPSC said is moving toward proposed regulations and would begin accepting modernization applications in November 2026 and new construction applications in January 2027. The committee also briefly noted community college facilities funding and asked for more information later in the process.

Transcript Highlights:

• Statewide surveys, our shopper feedback, and our daily experience proves that protein is one of the most
• 04:44.320><c> surveys,</c><00:04:44.880><c> our</c><00:04:45.120><c> shopper</c><00:04:45.600><c> feedback
• ,</c> Statewide surveys, our shopper feedback, Statewide surveys, our shopper feedback, our<00:04:46.479

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Their review process brought invaluable stakeholder feedback, which helped identify meaningful ways to
• We received feedback from our members on potential changes needed to ensure the landowner compensation
• We received feedback from our members on potential changes needed to ensure the landowner compensation

Bills: SB2601

Keywords: landowner compensation, border crime, agriculture damage, law enforcement, crop loss

Summary: The Senate Committee on Border Security met with a quorum and heard only one bill, Senate Bill 2601 by Senator Blanco, laid out by Senator Hinojosa of Hidalgo. The bill was presented as a committee substitute to revise the Landowner’s Compensation Program created last session under SB 1133. The changes would expand eligibility to include land lessees with the landowner’s permission, cover damage to the land itself as well as structures and real property, add continuous smuggling of persons as a qualifying border crime, prohibit insurers from using claims under the program in rate calculations, and require law enforcement to provide requested border crime reports to the Attorney General within 14 days. Public testimony was unanimously supportive. Charles Maley of the South Texans Property Rights Association said the program has been beneficial and that the bill helps clean up implementation issues, including clarifying compensation for debris and pollutants left on land. Stephen Diebel of the Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association also supported the bill, saying it would help address fence damage, destroyed infrastructure, and other harms along the border, and that lessees who manage properties day to day should be eligible for direct compensation when they have the landowner’s permission. Members discussed border-related property damage, including vehicles crashing through fences, broken sheds, livestock escaping, and resulting highway hazards. Senator Hinojosa asked about how conflicts between landowners and lessees would be handled, and testimony indicated documentation of lease authority would be required. After public testimony closed, the committee adopted the committee substitute without objection and voted to report SB 2601 favorably to the full Senate by a 5-0 vote, recommending it as local and uncontested.

Transcript Highlights:

• Do you think that's a reasonable time for you to give us feedback?
• Do you think that's a reasonable time for you to give us feedback on this proposal?
• We have engaged with stakeholders, including nonprofit advocates and counties, to gather feedback.
• If you have any additional feedback you want to give us or any other suggestions, please let us know.
• We're also actively gathering feedback from stakeholders on the proposed expansion.

Summary: The joint informational hearing focused on the impact of H.R. 1 on older Californians and related county administration issues. Chair Jackson and Chair Addis opened by emphasizing California’s rapidly aging population and the need to protect seniors’ access to food, health care, housing, and in-home support services. Testimony from the Department of Social Services, Department of Health Care Services, and Department of Aging described how H.R. 1 would expand work and reporting requirements in CalFresh and Medi-Cal, increase redeterminations, and create new eligibility barriers. Witnesses and advocates warned that these changes could lead to large coverage losses, especially for adults ages 55 to 64, people experiencing homelessness, caregivers, and some immigrant groups, while also increasing administrative burden on counties. The LAO noted that many provisions do not directly apply to Californians 65 and older, but highlighted indirect effects and some direct impacts, including a new home equity limit for certain long-term care recipients and narrower immigration eligibility rules. Committee members pressed the administration and counties on how exemptions would be identified and implemented, whether data systems could automatically protect eligible people, and how outreach would reach older adults, women, LGBTQ seniors, and people with limited digital access. DHCS and CDSS said they are working to use existing data, cross-program information sharing, and human-centered communications to maximize exemptions and reduce churn, including text outreach, print and radio campaigns, and navigator support. Members also raised concerns about the need for legal aid and county eligibility workers to help people navigate complex rules, and requested updated analyses on the number of people likely to lose both Medi-Cal and CalFresh and the broader human and system impacts. No votes were taken. The second major topic was the administration’s proposal to shift some future IHSS costs to counties by establishing a statewide baseline for average authorized hours per case. CDSS said the proposal is intended to improve consistency in assessments and not reduce services, while counties and labor groups strongly opposed it, arguing that rising hours reflect real increases in need, an aging and higher-acuity caseload, and state-mandated assessment tools rather than county error. County representatives said the proposal would strain already limited local revenues, worsen the effects of H.R. 1, and could force cuts to other safety-net services. Committee members questioned the proposal’s timing and impact, but the hearing ended without action, with the chairs asking for continued updates, additional analysis, and more information before May Revision.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's a fair concern, I mean, for concern and feedback, and I definitely will bring it back to our sponsor
• But for now, that's where it remains, and we'll definitely take the feedback on.
• That's a fair concern, I mean, for concern and feedback, and I definitely will bring it back to our sponsor
• But for now, that's where it remains, and we'll definitely take the feedback on.
• We'll definitely take the feedback on.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Importantly, this new streamlined data process is limited to high school students following feedback
• This is something, again, in response to feedback that I've received from committee members, maintaining
• Thank you. ...provide better feedback for the direction of education.
• I appreciate the feedback that I've received.
• I appreciate the feedback that I've received.

Bills: HR171, HCR49, HB632, HB1084, SB310, SB351, SB399

Keywords: HR171, House Resolution 171, M.J. Foster Promise Program, TOPS-Tech, TOPS Tech Award, Board of Regents, Louisiana Works, Louisiana Community and Technical College System, LCATCS, financial aid, scholarship, workforce development, career training, technical education, vocational education, postsecondary credential, associate degree, industry-based credential, high-demand jobs, high-wage occupations

Transcript Highlights:

• But we talked to—we got a lot of really good feedback.
• And based on the feedback, they might say they could choose to do it on our own without us fully making
• If the director hearing, you know, feedback that Mike takes back might say, you know, let's look into
• they be open to that you know helping us through this process you know as we go and based on the feedback
• do it on our own without us fully we're making a recommendation if the director hearing you know feedback

Summary: The Arizona Off-Road Vehicle Study Committee met to review Senate Bill 1519 and broader OHV policy issues, including funding, mitigation, enforcement, and education. Staff summarized the bill’s amended provisions: raising the OHV/ATV weight threshold from 2,500 to 3,500 pounds, directing ADOT to create a new usage classification, creating an Off-Highway Vehicle Law Enforcement Fund, and setting a 50% vehicle license tax for vehicles in the 2,500–3,500 pound range. Members discussed how many vehicles would be affected, with industry testimony estimating about 2,600 new Arizona sales in that weight class in 2025 and growth of roughly 10% annually. Committee members also debated whether changes should be revenue-neutral to ADOT/HIRF or instead generate dedicated enforcement and mitigation funding without reopening HIRF distribution. The committee then turned to education. Staff reviewed SB 1567, which requires OHV course completion before issuance of an OHV indicia and includes a report due December 1, 2026. Game and Fish said the mandatory education appears to be improving behavior, especially helmet use by children. Several witnesses, including representatives from Riding Arizona and ABATE Arizona, supported a consistent statewide training model and suggested expanding the requirement from owners to operators, with possible reciprocity or compact-style recognition with other states. Members also raised practical questions about proof of completion, online access, and how law enforcement would verify compliance. For mitigation and enforcement funding, committee members and invited stakeholders discussed the scale of the need. A research presentation from Arizona Sportsmen for Wildlife Conservation estimated about $3.5 million annually for additional law enforcement and about $7.5 million annually for natural resource mitigation, for a combined target of roughly $11 million per year. The estimate was based on county sheriff input and existing federal land-management data on illegal or user-created roads, with a statewide rough range of 12,000 to 17,000 miles of roads needing some form of closure or decommissioning. Members emphasized that the estimate did not include all possible costs, such as fence repair, tank restoration, or environmental compliance, and discussed soft versus hard closures, prevention, and the need to pair any mitigation spending with enforcement and education. No formal vote was taken in the portion provided; the committee mainly received information, asked questions, and continued discussion of possible recommendations.

Transcript Highlights:

• Basically, we heard the feedback from the cities and counties once the bill stalled in the House last
• That's the feedback I got, which is unfortunate, because it's not mandatory.
• That's the feedback I got, which is unfortunate, because it's not mandatory.
• I will just add that there was some technical language that was feedback from the Department of Revenue
• the Feedback that we heard from stakeholders on adjusting the design of the loans so that they can be

Bills: SB6001, SB6015, SB6054, SB5470, SB5884, SB6018, SB6027, SB6028

Keywords: building code, scissor stairs, safety regulations, construction standards, statebuilding regulations, residential building, construction permits, housing development, planning efficiency, state regulations, wildfire, home hardening, fire-resistant materials, fire-hardened building materials, common interest communities, homeowners association, HOA, condominium, condo association, wildland urban interface

Transcript Highlights:

• The covered provider must collect user feedback related to the efficacy. detected in the content.
• The covered provider must collect user feedback related to the efficacy of the tool and consider that
• feedback as part of improvement efforts.
• Samaya Hassan continued: We appreciate the sponsor's openness to feedback and hope that the committee
• Across puberty creates a period of hypersensitivity to positive social feedback while teens are still

Summary: The committee held public hearings on three AI-related bills. HB 1170 would require large generative AI providers to offer provenance detection tools and include latent and manifest disclosures in AI-generated or altered content; supporters said it is needed to combat deepfakes and disinformation, while opponents raised First Amendment, technical feasibility, and compliance concerns, and the Attorney General’s Office said the bill needs clearer provider definitions and enforcement language. HB 2157 would regulate high-risk AI systems used in consequential decisions such as employment, housing, health care, and parole by requiring risk management, impact assessments, disclosures, and a private right of action; the sponsor said it is needed to address algorithmic discrimination and consumer protection, while industry and civil liberties groups warned it is overbroad, burdensome, and constitutionally problematic, and the AG’s Office supported the concept but asked for changes to enforcement and the right-to-cure provisions. HB 2225 would regulate AI companion chatbots by requiring disclosures, limits on manipulative engagement, and safeguards for minors and self-harm; the sponsor, governor’s office, AG’s Office, researchers, and several families testified in support, citing harms to youth and real-world suicides, while industry groups supported narrower protections but objected to the private right of action and scope. No votes were taken during the hearings.

Transcript Highlights:

• Some of the feedback we got from this first version of the manual, and I'll just go to the slide here
• This next phase, kind of version two of the manual, is that we're taking that feedback and creating more
• The plan, too, is also to work with more, you know, get more additional stakeholder and family feedback
• Our BCBA right now is a remote contractor, and part of her job is also to coach and give feedback to
• And I actually have hope That will be a more efficient way to get immediate feedback to teachers and

Summary: The House Education Committee held a work session on reducing restraint and eliminating isolation in schools, then moved into a public hearing on House Bill 1795 and its proposed substitute. Chair Sharon Santos reviewed committee procedures and emphasized the short session timeline, then framed the discussion as part of a longer-running effort to address student restraint and isolation. Representative Callan, the bill sponsor, said the committee’s pilot and demonstration sites would help identify both benefits and implementation challenges for legislation. OSPI Acting Director of Policy and Legislative Affairs Misha Cherniski presented an update on the state’s demonstration project, saying it is in its third year and has $2 million per year in the current budget for fiscal years 2026 and 2027. He described intensive, targeted, and universal supports, including grants to pilot and demonstration districts, a technical assistance manual, and statewide professional learning. He reported that 68% of project sites saw reductions in restraint and isolation compared with the prior year, and said OSPI’s immediate policy recommendations are to extend prohibitions on dangerous restraints such as prone, supine, wall, mechanical, chemical, and noxious spray restraints, and to clarify the definition of “imminent likelihood of serious harm.” Committee members asked for more detailed disaggregated data by race, ethnicity, grade level, incident type, and sample size, and raised questions about authorized entities, student movement, and whether data captures incidents in nonpublic settings. Representatives from Auburn, Bainbridge Island, and Concrete school districts described how the grant-funded work has affected their districts. Auburn reported major reductions in isolation after removing its last isolation room, expanding behavior supports, and training staff through multiple professional development options; the district said the biggest challenge has been shifting staff mindset and navigating delayed access to vendors and grant systems. Bainbridge Island said it has used grant funds for universal staff training, administrator training, social-emotional MTSS work, and partnerships with multiple providers; it reported zero isolations and sharply reduced restraints, while noting the need to monitor nonpublic agencies closely. Concrete, a much smaller district, said the grant allowed it to hire a part-time BCBA, adopt Safety-Care training, and use OSPI’s manual and tracking tools, but staffing shortages and limited substitute coverage make it hard to attend demonstration sites or training in person. During the public hearing, the substitute bill was summarized as prohibiting certain restraints, banning isolation as a planned intervention, narrowing the definition of serious harm, and extending requirements to other providers of public educational services, while preserving lawful duties of school resource officers. Proponents included disability advocates, the Washington Education Association, and public school employees, who said the bill would reduce trauma and align practice with student safety and dignity. A parent testified about a child harmed by a room that was later used for involuntary confinement. A representative from a specialized learning center testified in opposition, arguing that a complete elimination of isolation for younger students could increase danger in some settings, that medical-provider requirements could be difficult to meet, and that specialized providers need broader exemptions. No vote was taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• So how are you folks working with students to get feedback on the services?
• How have you worked with students to get feedback on those services and what they think would be most
• and that always involves talking to our students and providing them with opportunities to give us feedback
• We have a robust program of giving surveys and eliciting feedback with our marketing and communications
• And similar feedback surveys are conducted across the campus.

Summary: The committee spent much of the meeting hearing presentations on student mental health supports at Central Washington University, Washington State University, the University of Washington, and the State Board of Community and Technical Colleges. CWU described high levels of student distress, loneliness, anxiety, depression, suicidal ideation, and basic-needs insecurity, along with a campus-wide holistic well-being model that includes behavioral intervention teams, emergency aid, peer outreach, community partnerships, and a collegiate recovery community. WSU emphasized loneliness, common presenting concerns such as anxiety, depression, PTSD, and relationship distress, and the role of housing and residence life, resident advisors, living-learning communities, and coordinated crisis response in identifying and supporting students. UW highlighted prevention and support programs through LiveWell, including alcohol and other drug consultations, confidential advocacy, suicide intervention, student needs navigation, peer health educators, and peer wellness coaches. The community and technical college system reported persistent access barriers, especially for students ages 18 to 24 and those facing housing or food insecurity, and said the legislature-funded mental health pilot at four colleges expanded counseling access, telehealth, and referral pathways, while broader system efforts focus on awareness, telehealth, basic-needs supports, and workforce training in behavioral health fields. Members asked each panel how they gather student feedback, and the institutions said they use surveys, evaluations, and ongoing outreach to students in services. Questions also focused on substance-use and recovery resources, Greek life outreach, and whether colleges have enough licensed mental health staff versus academic advisors; the community college board said not all colleges have licensed mental health providers on staff, and some rely on community contracts or telehealth. The committee also discussed whether counseling services are increasing because of post-pandemic effects or because students are more willing to seek help, with presenters saying both factors likely play a role. The committee then shifted to artificial intelligence in higher education. Washington State University, the University of Washington, Western Washington University, and the community and technical college system described campus AI task forces, governance structures, and efforts to set policies for students, faculty, and staff. Presenters said institutions are requiring course-level AI use statements, promoting ethical and transparent use, expanding access to approved tools such as Microsoft Copilot, and using AI for teaching, research, advising, and administrative support while guarding privacy, equity, and academic integrity. Members raised concerns about deepfakes, bias, student monitoring, and whether AI should be used to screen applications or evaluate student work; presenters said human review remains essential and that some institutions prohibit AI use in hiring or admissions screening. The final presentation, from OSPI, described the statewide rollout of the School Links high school and beyond plan platform under 2023 legislation, saying it will standardize career and college planning across K-12, provide better data and student guidance, and connect students to postsecondary pathways and employers; OSPI said the rollout is underway but current funding only extends through June 30, 2026.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, you know, by keeping us in the loop, keeping us... ...where we can give you feedback and learn more
• So teachers can get that feedback a little bit quicker and adapt, and you know, work with kids on those
• It gives you real-time feedback with AI grading, with...
• The language indicates the need to form councils filled with educators to provide feedback.
• It responds to feedback from educators, families, and communities who want transparency, timeliness,

Bills: HB8

Keywords: HB 8, Texas public school accountability, school accountability, public school transparency, STAAR, state assessments, instructionally supportive assessment program, Student Success Tool, Texas Education Agency, TEA, accountability ratings, A-F ratings, through-year assessment, benchmark testing, norm-referenced assessment, college career military readiness, CCMR, local accountability plan, school district performance, campus turnaround

Transcript Highlights:

• Patrick is going to cover what we do, and Donna's going to talk a little bit about feedback and how we
• And a lot of that is listening, getting feedback, anticipating need, and being hand-in-hand-hand with
• getting feedback, anticipating need, and being hand-in-hand with our board to make sure that we are
• So we always ask for participant feedback.
• Are our stakeholders So we always ask for participant feedback. Are our stakeholders engaged?

Summary: The Senate Education Pre-K-12 Committee met to discuss the needs of rural school districts and the role of Florida’s three regional education consortia: the Panhandle Area Education Consortium, Northeast Florida Educational Consortium, and Heartland Educational Consortium. Executive directors and several rural superintendents described the consortia as member-led organizations that provide shared services, professional learning, leadership development, grant support, cooperative purchasing, risk management, IT/cybersecurity help, and back-office assistance that small districts could not afford to provide on their own. They emphasized that rural districts are often very small, have limited staff, and must still meet the same state reporting and compliance requirements as large urban systems. Testimony focused heavily on teacher recruitment and retention, alternative certification, and the difficulty of staffing specialized roles such as CFOs, MIS directors, IT staff, and content-area teachers. Superintendents said many new hires are career changers or alternatively certified teachers who need consortium-supported training, and several argued for more flexibility in funding so districts can raise salaries and compete with neighboring districts and nearby states. Members also asked about the impact of declining enrollment, homeschooling, and voucher-related school choice; superintendents said those trends are reducing FTE and creating budget instability, while also requiring districts to right-size staff and programs. Several speakers described the financial strain on rural districts, including rising insurance costs, transportation costs, and the challenge of forecasting budgets when enrollment changes after the school year begins. One superintendent recounted major hurricane damage and said consortium risk-management support was essential to recovery. Others said the consortia help districts pool resources for property and health insurance, payroll, student data systems, and procurement, and that this shared approach saves money and improves services. No votes or formal committee actions were taken during the meeting.