Transcript Highlights:

• Well, we crossed that bridge yesterday on LB 841 when we dealt with the IEP process.
• Well, we crossed that bridge yesterday on LB 841 when we dealt with the IEP process.

Bills: LB878, LB958, LB958A, LB762, LB1187, LB966, LB929, LB962, LB1209, LB937A, LB962A, LB1050, LB1050A, LB965, LB1022, LB753, LB788, LB913, LB1055, LB1195, LB429, LB721, LB722, LB727, LB745, LB749, LB778, LR293, LR296, LR422, LR495, LR496, LR497, LR498, LR499, LR500, LR501, LR502, LR503, LR504

Keywords: paid parental leave, state employees, workplace benefits, family support, economic impact, Medicaid, Medical Assistance Act, home and community-based services waiver, HCBS waiver, waiver participant, assessment tool, clinical interviewing, service tier, retroactive coverage, doula, doula reimbursement, maternal health, prenatal care, pregnancy, birth outcomes

Transcript Highlights:

• IEPs do not mention uh consider print disability or twice exceptional, currently both undefined in education
• It's my understanding the library association on slide four specifically mentions IEPs, individual education

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• setting up policies around the health or social-emotional well-being of that child, it's similar to an IEP
• The IEP is a document that the government's put together to talk about the services that the child's

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The committee first heard Superintendent Tom Horn’s State of Education address, which focused on school safety, academic outcomes, teacher pay, school choice, and opposition to DEI/CRT in schools. Horn argued that students cannot learn unless schools are safe, cited increased funding for school police officers and a recent Tucson charter school incident as evidence for more officers, and said the department’s academic efforts have centered on Project Momentum, tutoring, cell phone restrictions, career and technical education partnerships, and support for Native American districts. He also urged direct teacher pay increases through Proposition 123 and said the state board should revise teaching standards and school grading practices. Members questioned him about DEI compliance, cell phone enforcement, ESA accountability, teacher preparation programs, school safety funding, and literacy outcomes; Horn said the department’s role is largely advisory in a local-control state, that it tracks school practices on a website, and that it lacks academic outcome data for ESA students because private schools are not tested by the state. The committee then took up House Bill 2008, which would prohibit public school libraries from using public funds to pay dues or memberships to professional library associations that advocate for libraries and information services. Representative Cooper, the sponsor, said the bill was intended to keep school libraries politically neutral and prevent taxpayer money from supporting ideological advocacy, while arguing that membership could still be paid privately and that free professional development options exist. Opponents, including former librarian Judy Schweber, Marana board member Hunter Holt, and the ACLU of Arizona, argued the bill would undermine professional development, local control, and constitutional rights of association and petition, and that there was little evidence public funds were actually being used this way. Supporters, including Adrienne Johnson, said some library materials and associations promote political viewpoints and should not be funded with public dollars. After public comment and debate, the committee voted 7-5 to give HB 2008 a do pass recommendation. Members who explained no votes said the bill targeted a non-issue, lacked data showing a problem, and would divert attention from funding and literacy needs. Members supporting the bill said it was a reasonable restriction on public spending and a way to keep school libraries ideologically neutral. The committee then announced it would move on to House Bill 2249, the Parents’ Bill of Rights and Remedies.

Transcript Highlights:

• session was that 42% of Vermont students who are tuitioned to Granville High School in New York have IEPs

Keywords: 926, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And we want to make sure, from what I'm hearing, a lot of students now are developing IEPs or 504s so

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:

• And we want to make sure, from what I'm hearing, a lot of students now are developing IEPs or 504s so

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:

• Autism Society of Florida board member, policy advocate for individuals with developmental disabilities, IEP

Bills: S0824, S1170, S1620, S1738, S7036

Keywords: school district, real property, inventory, land use, education, video monitoring, safety, special education, parental rights, public education, school board rights, transparency, employment conditions, nondisclosure agreements, educational facilities, student safety, teacher accountability, physical plant, school design, construction standards

Summary: The Education Pre-K-12 Committee considered several K-12 bills and resolutions. SJR 1104, by Senator Massullo, would place on the ballot a proposed constitutional amendment protecting voluntary religious expression in public schools; supporters said it simply codifies existing law and protects student and employee rights, while opponents warned it could entrench religious pressure and exclusion. The resolution was reported favorably. The committee also heard SB 1738, by Senator Yarborough, on educational facilities; an amendment removed crime-prevention-through-environmental-design language and adjusted transparency/safe-space provisions, and the bill was reported favorably as amended. SB 824, by Senator Truenow, was amended into a transparency measure requiring districts to submit annual reports on unimproved land holdings to DOE, and it was reported favorably. Appointments in tabs 7 and 8 were recommended for confirmation. The committee then took up SPB 7036, a comprehensive education package by Chair Simon. The bill would expand educational emergency triggers, adjust Title I withholding uses, align charter school rules with school improvement processes, update safety and early learning provisions, expand literacy and math interventions, and revise educator pipeline policies. Members raised concerns about a provision that could allow the state to develop instructional materials; Simon said that section was still being considered and would need guardrails. The committee adopted a motion to submit the bill as a committee bill, and it was reported favorably. SB 1620, by Senator Leak, proposed a “school board members’ bill of rights” giving board members direct access to district documents and staff, limiting district attorneys’ dual representation, strengthening nepotism rules, and prohibiting nondisclosure agreements. Volusia County school board members and others testified both for and against the bill, with supporters citing transparency and accountability and opponents warning about confidentiality, staff pressure, and undermining the superintendent’s authority. The bill was reported favorably. Finally, SB 1170, by Senator Calatayud, as amended, would allow parents of students in self-contained ESE classrooms to request cameras, with district policies governing review, notice, timelines, and appeals. Parents, advocates, and educators testified strongly in support, while one witness opposed it as an unfunded mandate. The committee reported the bill favorably.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Office of the Special Education Ombud, supports families and students who are dealing with the IEP

Transcript Highlights:

• But it also wasn't easy to make sure the school district followed her IEP.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• the school year you're waiting<01:09:37.359> for<01:09:37.839> your<01:09:38.080> IEP
• 01:09:38.799> paperwork<01:09:39.279> from<01:09:39.520> your waiting for your IEP
• paperwork from your waiting for your IEP paperwork from your doctor<01:09:40.000> before<01:09

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• I've always had an IEP, and this includes from grade school all the way through college.
• I've always had an IEP, and this includes from grade school all the way through college.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Hearing officers presumed students districts IEP actions are appropriate.
• district sent a... attorney to attend a parent meeting that was legally protected under our child's IEP

Bills: SB12, SB1565, SB13, SJR12, SB686, SB371, SB204, SB609, SB112, SB400, SB813, SB 12, SB 13

Keywords: parental rights, education, social transitioning, diversity, equity, inclusion, school policy, student clubs, school district, grievance procedure, public education, diversity and inclusion, funding penalties, school libraries, library advisory councils, library materials, educational content, challenging materials, constitutional amendment, school choice

Transcript Highlights:

• I know when I was a new mom, I was stunned to go to an IEP meeting and learn that the eligibility category

Keywords: 907, all

Transcript Highlights:

• program was expanded in 2019 to include medically necessary services, including those in a student's IEP

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Health Care Financing held a public hearing focused on two broad sets of issues: home- and community-based care, and school-based Medicaid reimbursement. In the morning session, legislators and advocates testified on bills affecting children and disabled enrollees, including proposals to clarify rate-setting for home health and home care services (H. 767/S. 870), allow family members and spouses to be paid caregivers under MassHealth (H. 1394/S. 886 and related bills), extend MassHealth coverage for applied behavior analysis and other therapies beyond age 21 for adults with autism and developmental disabilities (H. 1351/S. 871), and protect medically fragile children by improving access to continuous skilled nursing. In the later portion of the hearing, testimony shifted to a bill to improve MassHealth reimbursement for schools (S. 862), with speakers describing the school mental health crisis and the need to reinvest Medicaid funds directly into school health services. Witnesses on the home care rate-setting bill said current reimbursement methods are opaque and outdated, contributing to workforce shortages, unfilled shifts, long waitlists, and patients remaining in hospitals longer than necessary. Home care providers and trade groups argued the bill would not set rates directly but would require more transparent methodology and fuller consideration of real costs such as wages, benefits, taxes, training, and technology. On caregiver bills, many family members and provider organizations described the financial and emotional strain of caring for disabled or medically fragile relatives, especially when parents, spouses, or guardians are barred from being paid caregivers. They argued the bills would recognize existing unpaid care, help families remain at home, and reduce reliance on more expensive institutional care. Advocates for adult ABA coverage said services remain medically necessary after age 21 and that ending coverage at that age creates an inequitable “cliff” for MassHealth members compared with those with private insurance. For the PACE/community care bill, elder law attorneys and PACE advocates said current MassHealth income rules force some older adults with modestly higher incomes to spend down to $542 per month, making community living unrealistic and pushing people toward nursing homes. They supported changing the eligibility structure to a premium-based approach that would allow more people to remain in the community. On the school Medicaid bill, advocates said schools are providing effective, preventive mental health care, but reimbursement currently flows to municipalities rather than directly back to school health budgets, limiting districts’ ability to hire and retain staff. No votes were taken during the hearing; the committee heard testimony and several witnesses requested favorable reports on the bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• Special education refers specifically to services provided to students with an IEP, or individualized

Summary: The committee first approved the May 18 meeting minutes and then received a Legislative Audit presentation summarizing Arkansas Department of Education grant distributions for fiscal year 2025. Auditors said the department distributed about $4.6 billion in grants overall, including $3.2 billion from the Public School Fund, $1.1 billion in federal funds, and $268 million from other state and miscellaneous sources, across 56 Public School Fund programs, 14 other state programs, and 29 federal programs. Members asked about specific recipients and programs, including ClassWallet, master principal bonuses, Economics Arkansas, and CDC surveillance funding; audit staff and Department of Education representatives explained that the report was only a distribution summary and not a recipient-level audit. Members also questioned why many districts showed lower funding, and staff said the decline was largely due to reduced federal and one-time COVID-related funds. Senators and representatives also discussed whether some incentive programs, such as master principal and national board bonuses, were tied to student outcomes, and whether Economics Arkansas was the sole entity named in special language for financial literacy funding; department staff said they would follow up on several details. The committee then heard a Bureau of Legislative Research presentation on consumer price index projections from Moody’s Analytics and S&P Global, with discussion of CPI-U and core CPI estimates for future fiscal years. Dr. Carlos Silva explained that the forecasts generally trend toward about 2 percent over time and that recent projections may have understated actual inflation because of recent shocks. Members asked about the accuracy of past projections, and he said he would provide more detail later if needed. The bulk of the meeting focused on the final adequacy report on teacher recruitment, retention, and salaries. BLR staff reported that Arkansas had about 32,800 teachers and 473,000 students in 2025, with a statewide student-to-teacher ratio of about 14 to 1, average teaching experience of 11.9 years, and a slight increase in National Board Certified teachers. The report found that districts with higher poverty and minority concentrations generally had less experienced teachers, and that teacher shortages remained widespread, especially in special education, math, science, and foreign language. Members asked about licensure exceptions, alternative preparation pathways, incentives for ESL and special education endorsements, and the cost and return on investment of traditional versus alternative routes. Staff said some licensure exceptions are being phased out under Act 304 of 2025 and that they would follow up on several requested details. The report also found that teacher retention averaged 87 percent statewide in 2025, with districts retaining teachers at higher rates than charters, and that 30 percent of surveyed teachers were considering leaving the profession. Principals and teachers identified school leadership as the strongest positive factor in recruitment and retention, while workload and salary were the strongest negative factors. On salaries, BLR reported a statewide average teacher salary of $60,254 in 2025, with districts averaging $60,458 and charters $55,724. Arkansas ranked 45th nationally on average teacher salary in 2025, though its cost-adjusted ranking improved to 36th; among SREB states it ranked 12th, and among neighboring states it ranked fourth. Members asked about starting salaries, salary compression, district step increases, and whether the report should be shared more broadly with educators and school leaders. Staff said they would provide follow-up information on several questions, and the committee took no formal action beyond receiving the presentations and asking for additional data.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'll note here that special education refers specifically to services provided to students with an IEP

Keywords: 1204, all

Summary: The committee first received a presentation from Legislative Audit on Arkansas Department of Education grant distributions for fiscal year 2025. Auditors explained the report summarizes $4.6 billion in grants to school districts, charter schools, education cooperatives, and other entities, with most funding coming from the Public School Fund and federal sources. Members asked about specific recipients and programs, including ClassWallet, master principal bonuses, Economics Arkansas, and CDC surveillance grants. Department of Education staff clarified that the audit report only shows distributions, not how recipients ultimately used the money, and noted that some funding declines reflected the end of one-time federal COVID relief dollars. Senators also asked about the special-language appropriation for Economics Arkansas and the use of public school fund revenues. The committee then heard a Bureau of Legislative Research presentation on Consumer Price Index projections from Moody’s Analytics and S&P Global, followed by a detailed adequacy-study update on teacher recruitment, retention, and salaries. The teacher report covered teacher counts, education levels, experience, shortages, preparation pathways, licensure exceptions, survey results, and salary trends. Key findings included about 32,800 teachers statewide in 2025, an average retention rate of 87%, and 30% of surveyed teachers saying they were considering leaving the profession. The report also noted shortages in special education, math, science, and other areas, growth in alternative preparation pathways, and the phaseout of several licensure exceptions under Act 304 of 2025. Members asked extensively about survey methodology, teacher satisfaction, preparation for classroom environment and special education, the cost and return on investment of alternative licensure routes, and whether exit-interview data exists statewide. The presenters said they could follow up on several questions, including details on alternative programs, incentives for ESL and special education endorsements, and comparisons to other surveys. On salaries, the report said the statewide average teacher salary in 2025 was $60,254, with districts averaging slightly higher than charters. Arkansas ranked 45th nationally on average salary in 2025, though 36th when adjusted for cost of living, and average district salaries had declined 8% in inflation-adjusted terms since 2016. Members also discussed the LEARNS Act minimum salary floor of $50,000, salary disparities among districts, and whether the state should focus more on retaining experienced teachers as well as raising starting pay.

Transcript Highlights:

• third grade, and we want to make sure, from what I'm hearing, a lot of students now are developing IEPs

Summary: The joint education committee continued its adequacy study with a detailed Bureau of Legislative Research presentation on resource allocation, covering how Arkansas school districts and charters spend foundation and other funds on matrix and non-matrix items. Staff explained the methodology for mapping expenditures, the district and school categories used in the analysis, and key findings showing that districts spend more per student from all fund sources than the foundation amount alone. The presentation highlighted that classroom teachers account for the largest share of matrix spending, while operations and maintenance, student support staff, nurses, and other lines also drew significant attention. Members asked for additional breakdowns by district type, size, rural/urban status, and trend data, and several questions focused on how waivers affect funding and spending, especially for library media specialists and other positions. The committee then discussed non-matrix spending, including instructional aids, non-technology-related facilities, school safety, mental health services, dyslexia support, food service, gifted and talented, career and technical education, and other items not explicitly defined in the matrix. Staff reported that non-matrix spending exceeded $2 billion in 2025, with most of it coming from other fund sources, and that the top superintendent-identified unmet needs over recent surveys were mental health services, school safety, and dyslexia support. Members raised concerns about dyslexia identification and funding, possible over-identification, and whether some support costs are being coded in ways that obscure the true spending picture. There was also discussion of facilities funding, the building fund, and the Department of Education’s partnership program for school construction and maintenance, with staff agreeing to provide more information and potentially bring department officials back for a future meeting. Throughout the meeting, members repeatedly requested more granular data and clarifications, including waiver counts and funding impacts, trend lines for superintendent-reported needs, district-by-district spending spreadsheets, and definitions for certain matrix and accounting terms such as salary enhancement, LEA indebtedness, and other employee health insurance. The chair noted that the committee would continue the adequacy process over the coming months and use the worksheet in the binder to develop recommendations for the next biennium. No votes were taken during this portion of the meeting; instead, the committee received the report, asked for follow-up data, and agreed to continue the discussion at future meetings.

Transcript Highlights:

• So IEP students who don't participate in the statewide assessment, English language learners who've had

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• schools all over the state that specifically reach out to us when they are bringing a new family into the IEP

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• like that word, really—able to provide services, interventions, whatever for Our children who have an IEP