Transcript Highlights:

• at Trinity High School, public school, parochial school.
• at Trinity High School, public school, parochial school.
• I taught at Trinity High School, public school, parochial school.
• </c> include chter schools the CH school is include chter schools the CH school is not<00:38:56.920><
• ><c> and</c> school private parochial school and school private parochial school and there's<00:39:18.079

Committee: House Education Policy and Administration

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 749, which would require high schools to provide at least one hour of instruction on the nature and history of communism. The prime sponsor said the bill was prompted by concerns that students lack basic historical knowledge about communism and its effects, and argued that a short, flexible requirement could be embedded in an existing course without creating a new full class. He described communism as a totalitarian ideology and cited historical examples including the Soviet Union, Cambodia, Vietnam, the Cold War, and current events involving Russia, Ukraine, and Taiwan as reasons students should understand the topic. Members asked whether the subject is already covered in current social studies standards, whether one hour is enough, and whether the bill would apply to public, private, parochial, and charter schools. The sponsor said he did not believe communism is specifically required in current standards, that he would prefer a full course but was proposing a minimal requirement, and that he intended the bill to apply broadly to schools under the Department of Education’s umbrella, though he acknowledged the wording may need clarification for charter schools. He also said the proposal was both reactive and proactive, based on anecdotal concerns and his teaching experience. A second supporter testified that he was born in the Soviet Union and favored the bill, but suggested the instruction should emphasize critical thinking and explain both why communism can appeal to some people and why it can have harmful consequences. No vote or final committee action was taken during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Middle college and early college high schools are formal partnerships between schools and higher education
• days in a school year before administering the screening for kindergarten pupils and at least 46 school
• These new requirements would not prohibit schools from screening students at the beginning of the school
• School Construction.
• the school facility program, which is administered by the Office of Public School Construction.

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Education heard the Governor’s proposals on dual enrollment, reading difficulty screeners, special education, school facilities, and Commission on Teacher Credentialing programs. On dual enrollment, the Department of Finance described a $100 million one-time Proposition 98 investment to expand the Dual Enrollment Opportunities Grant Program, along with changes to make regional occupational centers eligible, add funding for justice-involved youth, prioritize higher-need LEAs, support teacher professional development, and reduce daily instructional minute requirements for some dual enrollment students. The LAO recommended rejecting the new funding as not clearly addressing implementation barriers, while CDE supported the proposal and suggested reserving $10 million for technical assistance. Committee members and public commenters generally supported the expansion, with some asking for technical assistance and broader access, including adult dual enrollment. The committee also reviewed a $40 million one-time Proposition 98 proposal for reading difficulty screener implementation and related trailer bill language that would require screening after 91 school days for kindergarten and 46 school days for grades 1-2. Finance said the timing was intended to reduce over-identification and align with evidence from preliminary data; the LAO recommended rejecting the funding and redirecting it to a discretionary block grant. CDE supported the funding and the general approach but acknowledged the need for local support and training. Several committee members and public witnesses raised concerns that the proposed timing restrictions were too rigid and could delay early intervention, while others supported the delay as a way to improve accuracy and avoid misidentification. For special education, Finance proposed ongoing Proposition 98 increases to adjust for COLA and enrollment changes and to raise the statewide special education base rate to $99 per ADA, equalizing rates across SELPAs. The LAO said the proposal should be adopted but estimated it could be funded for less than the Governor’s figure. CDE and multiple local education representatives strongly supported the increase, citing rising special education enrollment, cost pressures, and large local funding gaps. The committee also heard a brief overview of the school facilities proposal, which continues $1.5 billion in Proposition 2 bond funding for the School Facility Program; OPSC reported significant remaining bond authority but also substantial pending demand, and explained that natural disaster school rebuilding draws from the broader new construction and modernization pools. Finally, the committee reviewed Commission on Teacher Credentialing proposals, including the already-funded $300 million Student Teacher Stipend Program, new state operations resources for misconduct investigations and grant administration, and a $250 million one-time continuation of the Teacher Residency Grant Program. CTC said its grants management system is ready and that it expects better data tracking; public testimony broadly supported the educator workforce investments and urged continued funding for the Golden State Teacher Grant Program and additional support for rural and leadership pipeline programs. No votes were taken, and the hearing adjourned after public testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• Charter schools are free public schools.
• For example, my charter school, in our charter school, we sometimes, My charter school, in our charter
• school, we sometimes have it where we go to school for, we go to school for more than the required amount
• Currently, my son attends Stevenson Elementary School, which is a Purple Star School.
• Currently, my son attends Stevenson Elementary School, which is a Purple Star School.

Committee: Senate Education

Keywords: 989, all

Transcript Highlights:

• School food authorities and entities such as the local school district or charter school are responsible
• meals. in school meals.
• Public Schools.
• Some schools already do their own surveys; some schools do food tastings.
• For a school cook in a rural school in New Mexico. Do you know that? Yes.

Transcript Highlights:

• . schools. schools.
• </c> immigration enforcement on a school immigration enforcement on a school campus.
• </c><00:52:46.079><c> down</c><00:52:46.319><c> the</c> school and middle school just down the school
• Schools.
• </c><01:13:56.719><c> shall</c> school without approval, a school shall school without approval, a school

Keywords: 927, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• check and verify to make sure that those schools are included along with the school district schools
• check and verify to make sure that those schools are included along with the school district schools
• </c> school lunch program. school lunch program.
• . schools. schools.
• </c> um schools. um schools.

Committee: House Education Funding

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• to be in school?
• doesn't I mean Schools uh is that school doesn't I mean charter<01:45:09.440><c> school</c><01:45:09.639
• school doesn't have a school charter school doesn't have a school board<01:45:10.599><c> right</c><01
• public school. ...bodies, we say school boards or Board of Trustees of chartered public school...
• Okay, so... school boards... ...so, um, school boards...

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee work session of the Education Policy and Administration Committee focused on House Bill 131 and House Bill 781, which were described as nearly identical bills addressing student cell phone use in schools. Members noted that HB 781 is an early bill and therefore needed committee action by Wednesday, while HB 131 did not face that deadline. The chair and members discussed the bills’ shared goal of requiring school boards to develop and adopt policies on student personal device use, with debate over whether the state should set minimum standards or leave more to local control. A major topic was funding. One member urged the committee to avoid creating an unfunded mandate and asked for some funding support, while others argued it was too early to commit money and that the committee should first establish the policy framework. The governor’s proposed funding was discussed, including a $1 million figure in the budget and a separate $250,000 amount referenced in the bill, but several members said the money would likely be insufficient to cover all students or pouch systems statewide. The committee also reviewed a handout reflecting proposed budget language that would require school boards to adopt policies on personal device use during the school day, with schoolwide implementation and exceptions for medical disability or language proficiency needs, and a DOE-administered grant program. Members spent considerable time on drafting details, especially deadlines and exceptions. They debated whether the bills should require school boards to “develop,” “adopt,” or also “implement” policies, and whether the effective date of the act should also serve as the deadline for school boards. They also discussed whether exceptions for classroom instructional use should be mandatory or merely encouraged, and whether the bills should explicitly include or exclude charter schools. Additional proposed exceptions included IEPs, 504 plans, English learners, and medical needs such as glucose sensors or insulin pumps, with some members suggesting medical issues be certified by a physician. No final vote or formal action was taken in the work session.

Transcript Highlights:

• through high school.
• and new school?
• in trouble schools.
• school.
• Well, every school and school district is a little bit different.

Transcript Highlights:

• campuses and school grounds.
• to prevent school shooting.
• I know in my schools, we've got some of our city officers are in our schools, our CFOs.
• Those skills translate whether it's a school building, an elementary school, a high school, or a football
• So you're thinking a school like Couch, a school like Kosh, a school like Ripley County R3.

Committee: House General Laws

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• schools who are also able to access Safe and Supportive Schools funding.
• schools who are also able to access Safe and Supportive Schools funding.
• schools who are also able to access Safe and Supportive Schools funding.
• schools who are also able to access Safe and Supportive Schools funding.
• Article 3, charter schools.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• . schools. schools.
• . schools. schools.
• has a new high Burlington High School has a new high school. school. school.
• rural schools, small rural schools, schools, schools, um<04:43:05.600><c> schools</c><04:43:06.000><
• . school. school.

Keywords: 926, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• School Library Books.
• We reviewed 15 school districts and two charter schools.
• school Wi-Fi.
• Through the local school board. So it was aligned with the school board.
• This is really like I've been to many school board meetings where school board elected school board members

Committee: Joint Education Interim Committee

Keywords: 985, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Catholics had started a school system, and that school system was pretty much just as long as A school
• system, and that school system was pretty much just as large as the public school system.
• , Christian schools?
• Churches are the school.
• If they're a private school, they're different than a public school.

Committee: House State Affairs

Keywords: 989, all

Transcript Highlights:

• to new charter schools.
• schools are opening it would expand that to all charter schools with priority given for start up schools
• She referenced LA Unified School Districts. ICE has been lurking near schools for weeks.
• College Ready Public Schools and California Charter Schools Association in support.
• School sexual abuse is not only costing our schools, but more importantly and tragic.

Committee: House Education

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> school kids, public school families. school kids, public school families.
• for school districts, a charter school under current law can use that $132 per pupil for any school-related
• Did some schools get charter schools?
• . school. school.
• Non-public schools can still contract and work with our public schools.

Committee: Senate Education Finance

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> to a non-public uh uh non-public school to a non-public uh uh non-public school school<00:07:29.919
• last day of school, and if you're there at the first day of school and the last day of school, you're
• </c> provide school um support to school provide school um support to school districts<01:20:47.080><
• </c><01:33:56.760><c> you</c> schools and District Public Schools you schools and District Public Schools
• </c> Schools um similar to Charter Schools Schools um similar to Charter Schools EFA<01:44:45.520><c>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Department of Education’s Bureau of School Finance provided an adequacy-funding training for Division II, led by Mark Mello. He walked the committee through the adequacy formula using Albany, Allenstown, and Alton as examples, explaining average daily membership, base adequacy aid, and differential aid for free/reduced-price meals, special education, and English language learners. He also noted a recent change requiring home-education differential aid and emphasized that these aid streams are generally unrestricted district funding rather than money tied to specific students or programs. A major focus was the ongoing litigation over the adequacy base amount and the statewide education property tax, or SWEPT. Mello explained the historical basis of the current base amount, the 2008 legislative report that set the original methodology, and the later court ruling that the adequacy amount should be $7,356, which is now before the Supreme Court. He also described how SWEPT currently raises a fixed statewide amount of $363 million and how that revenue is used to offset the state’s adequacy obligation. For the example towns, Albany and Allenstown receive state adequacy grants because their SWEPT revenue is below their calculated adequacy cost, while Alton is an excess SWEPT community because its local SWEPT revenue exceeds the cost of adequate education. The discussion then turned to the pending “excess SWEPT” issue in the Supreme Court and what would happen if excess collections had to be remitted to the state. Mello said the Department is preparing a hypothetical walkthrough and explained that, if the court upholds the Superior Court ruling, DRA would likely be directed to collect excess SWEPT. Members raised concerns about whether SWEPT must be used for educational purposes and about the cash-flow burden on towns if money had to move from municipalities to the state and then back to districts. Mello and members discussed possible administrative workarounds, such as credits against other state aid distributions, and noted that the committee would continue reviewing the mechanics if the court decision comes down during budget work.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> cross to get to school. cross to get to school.
• . school. school.
• as</c><01:42:46.400><c> well</c> charter school facil um schools as well charter school facil um schools
• We think it should be taken school by school decision.
• We think it should be taken school by school decision.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 2485, which would require cardiovascular screening for student athletes. The Department of Education and Department of Health said they support the bill’s intent but noted that many screenings are already part of existing school-entry and well-child exams. The Attorney General’s office asked for clarifying language on who performs the screenings, where results go, how “positive findings” are defined, how referrals would work, and whether funding would be appropriated if DOE must hire health professionals. The American Heart Association strongly supported the bill, citing the risk of sudden cardiac arrest in young athletes and arguing that sports physicals are an effective opportunity for early detection. No vote was taken, and the committee moved on after testimony. The committee then heard HB 89, concerning a school psychologist working group and possible licensing or credentialing of school psychologists. The Department of Education and Board of Psychology supported the measure. The Hawaii Psychological Association said it supports licensing school psychologists but asked to be included in the working group, arguing it is an important stakeholder. The Hawaii Association of School Psychologists opposed including HPA, saying the issue is between school psychologists and DCCA and that HPA is not part of their organization. Testimony and discussion focused on the long-running disagreement over whether school psychologists should be regulated under the Board of Psychology or another mechanism, and on title protection and scope of practice. No action was reported during this portion. The committee also took up HB 2445, relating to standardized emergency responses for immigration enforcement at or near schools. The Department of Education said it already issued internal law-enforcement guidance and questioned whether the bill was necessary, while also raising concerns about the bill’s 1,000-foot buffer language and the limits of school authority over activity off campus. The Board of Education echoed those concerns and suggested the bill may need clearer definitions. Supporters, including the White Coalition for Immigrant Rights, the Legal Clinic, and an attorney testifying on Know Your Rights training, argued that recent federal changes have increased ICE activity near schools and that a law is needed to ensure clear, public protocols, staff training, and family protections. A student testifier said the measure was a top priority of the state student council. The transcript ends during testimony, with no vote or final committee action shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> from the school staff. from the school staff.
• school board.
• </c> sure our schools are funded this year. sure our schools are funded this year.
• </c> for charter school procurement policy. for charter school procurement policy.
• our traditional schools.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> school districts. school districts.
• c> Um, if the school if a school is not Um, if the school if a school is not meeting<00:03:09.840><c>
• c> with</c> the school or school district with the school or school district with notice<00:03:46.159
• </c><00:07:02.080><c> pay</c> schools a school district can pay schools a school district can pay tuition
• And small schools and sparse schools.

Keywords: 926, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• to be a public school.
• the public school in new where the developer is or within the school district are?
• Are you place a school?
• schools are public schools that I started this committee.
• So I think, you know, obviously charter schools are public schools.

Keywords: 999, senate, all