Transcript Highlights:

• with the Texas Emergency Medical Task Force EMTF that has ambulances and ambulance strike teams, the mobile

Bills: HB1 , HB 2 , HB18 , HB19 , HB20

Committee: House Disaster Preparedness & Flooding, Select

Keywords: youth camps, emergency preparedness, safety standards, health regulations, camp licensing, disaster preparedness, emergency management, flooding, mass fatality, mass casualty, fatality tracking, body recovery, autopsy, justice of the peace, medical examiner, county judge, sheriff, mayor, emergency coordinator, emergency manager license

Transcript Highlights:

• Glass Lewis were at the heart of this, but BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street organized the Exxon Mobil

Bills: SB312 , SB945 , SB946 , SB1367 , SB1861 , SB2044 , SB2337 , SB2403 , SB2819 , SJR54

Committee: Senate State Affairs

Keywords: public school funding, education, budget allocation, financial transparency, state law, local control, fiduciary responsibility, public retirement systems, investment management, proxy voting, financial factors, insurance, political shareholder proposals, fossil fuels, greenhouse gas emissions, environmental regulation, discrimination, credit extension, social credit, value-based standards

Summary: The committee heard Senate Bill 945, 946, 2044, 2819, 2403, 2337, and 312, with all bills left pending after testimony. SB 945 would restrict insurance companies from denying or limiting coverage based on oil and gas activity or ESG-related goals, and supporters argued it would protect Texas energy producers from politically motivated shareholder activism and insurance discrimination. SB 946 would bar creditors from using social credit, ESG, DEI, or religious/political affiliation as a basis for denying or limiting credit; witnesses said it would prevent viewpoint-based financial discrimination and protect access to capital for Texas businesses. SB 2337 would require proxy advisory firms to disclose when recommendations are based on non-financial factors or when they give conflicting advice to different clients; supporters said the measure would increase transparency and curb ESG-driven influence over shareholder voting. SB 312 would direct public retirement systems to focus on financial returns rather than social or political objectives, with the author saying the bill responds to activist pressure on pensions and would reinforce fiduciary duty. The committee also took up election and ethics measures. SB 2044 would strengthen electioneering restrictions for publicly funded education institutions and personnel, prohibiting use of official resources to promote political agendas; testimony focused on alleged school district electioneering in bond and tax elections. SB 2819 would prohibit county elections administrators from holding certain officer positions appointed by elected officials, addressing potential conflicts of interest. SB 2403, the Texas Ethics Commission sunset bill, would restructure complaint handling with a three-tier violation system, risk-based complaint prioritization, longer response times, bipartisan preliminary review panels, and expanded hearing options; members discussed amendments aimed at dismissing minor complaints, clarifying categories, and adjusting lobbying and penalty provisions, but the amendments were withdrawn during committee consideration. Across the ESG and finance bills, invited witnesses from the American Energy Institute, Heartland Impact, Consumers Research, ADF Action, Texas Civil Justice League, and related groups generally supported the measures, arguing that banks, insurers, proxy advisors, and asset managers have used ESG or reputational-risk standards to discriminate against energy, agriculture, firearms, and religious organizations. No opposition testimony was presented in the excerpt, and the committee closed public testimony on each bill and left them pending.

Transcript Highlights:

• We strongly urge the committee to pass HB 3511 and let Texas unlock this mobile decentralized energy

Bills: HB 1951 , HB 2715 , HB 3092 , HB 3237 , HB 3278 , HB 3511 , HB 3592 , HB 3675 , HB 3778 , HB 3782 , HB 3826 , HB 3970 , HB 4016 , HB 4049 , HB 4341 , HB 4344 , HB 4406 , HB 4427

Committee: House State Affairs

Keywords: collective bargaining, public works, government contracts, labor agreements, state funding, removal from office, political subdivisions, local government, judicial proceedings, administrative judicial region, electric transmission, public convenience, landowner consent, utility regulation, energy infrastructure, energy consumption, higher education, governmental entities, sustainability, electricity reduction

Transcript Highlights:

• which is a long-standing program that ensures thousands of Californians with hearing, speech, or mobility

Summary: The hearing was an informational budget session on energy agency proposals, with no votes taken. Early discussion focused on Proposition 4 climate bond implementation, including funding for demand-side grid support, offshore wind development, and transmission financing. The Department of Finance said the budget includes allocations for demand-side grid support and offshore wind, but not yet for the $325 million transmission financing piece pending a required study. The Legislative Analyst’s Office urged the Legislature to consider whether to wait on offshore wind funding, whether to keep shifting funds into demand-side grid support, and how to direct future transmission financing. Members also raised concerns about local technical assistance for offshore wind, Salton Sea priorities, and the need for more information before final decisions. The California Energy Commission and CPUC then reviewed the broader energy package. The CEC highlighted the demand-side grid support program’s growth, distributed energy backup assets, long-duration storage, hydrogen grants, and the SIRP clean energy reliability program. CPUC testimony emphasized affordability, wildfire mitigation costs, rooftop solar cost shifts, and efforts to reduce rates while maintaining reliability and clean energy goals. Members questioned CPUC staffing, delays in proceedings, coordination with the CEC and CAISO, and the impact of rate increases on customers. The agencies also discussed the AB 3264 transmission financing study, with CPUC saying work on the study had already begun and was on track for the July 1 deadline. Several trailer bill and implementation items were also discussed. The committee reviewed a proposal to extend the Deaf and Disabled Telecommunications Program surcharge, with members split over whether it should be handled in budget trailer bill language or policy legislation; the administration said the surcharge supports a critical program serving about three-quarters of a million Californians. The committee also heard a CPUC data-sharing proposal to allow nondisclosure agreements for transmission and reliability data, which members generally supported as a technical fix. DWR explained a proposal to clarify language for the Electricity Supply Strategic Reliability Reserve so it can potentially sell three gas-fired units it owns, and the CEC presented a federal transmission grant proposal tied to grid-enhancing technologies and ratepayer cost recovery. Finally, the committee discussed California Lifeline and possible broadband pilot reforms in light of uncertainty around federal Universal Service Fund support, with CPUC saying it is exploring a statewide standalone broadband option for eligible customers.

Transcript Highlights:

• Finally the committee substitute ensures restaurants and mobile food units can serve workplaces without

Bills: SB264 , SB542 , SB924 , SB1008 , SB1029 , SB1036 , SB1057 , SB1058 , SB1185 , SB1202 , SB1358 , SB1364 , SB1376 , SB1569 , SB1664 , SB1697 , SJR50

Committee: Senate Business & Commerce

Keywords: SB 264, Texas Workers' Compensation Act, group self-insurance, self-insured groups, workers' compensation, Texas Department of Insurance, commissioner of insurance, certificate of approval, guaranty fund, trust fund, wind down, dissolution, labor code, insurance regulation, employer coverage, risk pool, business and commerce, trade workforce economic development, property owners' association, water conservation

Transcript Highlights:

• Do we have a second mobile microphone to be used?

Keywords: Due to a technical issue in the room, the quality of the stream will be diminished. We apologize for the inconvenience. Meeting start 00:00:00 Roll Call 00:02:00 SB 61 Discussion Only 00:03:25 SB 13 Discussion Only 00:07:19 SJR 25 Discussion 00:25:33 SJR 25 Vote 00:28:40 SB 61 Discussion Only 00:29:44, 958, all

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 61, relating to swimming pools, but initially had no representative from the governor’s office or cabinet available to explain the fiscal estimate. Senators questioned why the executive branch’s estimate was $4.25 million to $8.5 million while the committee’s internal fiscal note showed little or no impact. When Department for Public Health staff later joined, they explained their estimate was based on a roughly $85,000 cost for a large outbreak investigation, using a 2014 outbreak as a benchmark, and said the bill could increase workload and outside laboratory costs if private swimming pools became more common as rental properties. They reported 822 waterborne cases in 2024, with 8 tied to private swimming pools, and later corrected an earlier figure to 14 private-pool-related investigations over five years. Senators pressed on the discrepancy between those numbers and the projected 50 to 100 incidents, and staff said the higher figure was a ballpark estimate. The discussion also clarified that private pools are generally excluded by definition, while pools held out for rent may be treated as public pools under current definitions. No vote on SB 61 was taken in the portion provided. The committee then heard Senate Bill 13, concerning the reprocurement of managed care organizations for Medicaid. Department for Medicaid Services officials said the bill would require work on a new RFP, system changes, and oversight improvements, and estimated the cost at $2.8 million based on prior procurement spending of about $2.5 million in 2018-2019, with a 10% growth adjustment. They explained that the work is administrative and therefore matched at 50/50 federal-state funding, not the 80/20 rate used for benefits, and said the expense would be incurred whether the bill passed or not if the state proceeded with an RFP. Senators discussed possible savings from reducing the number of MCOs from five to three, but agency staff said those savings were hard to quantify and that provider and member disruption could create offsetting costs. The committee later moved on to Senate Joint Resolution 25, which would ask the Revenue Department to report on the cost of issuing farmers a wallet-sized tax-exempt card instead of a paper certificate. The resolution was adopted by roll call, with all members present voting aye, and it was reported favorably to the floor.

Transcript Highlights:

• services we provide include work programs and educational opportunities for economic stability and mobility
• 01:44:47.199><c> you're</c><01:44:47.400><c> an</c><01:44:47.639><c> eligible</c><01:44:48.560><c> student
• </c> benefits if you're an eligible student benefits if you're an eligible student over over over 18<
• 45:04.840><c> eligible</c> them really quick followup eligible them really quick followup eligible student
• 07.239><c> which</c><01:45:07.400><c> means</c><01:45:07.679><c> somebody</c><01:45:08.560><c> is</c> student

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee held a Division 3 budget work session focused on the Department of Health and Human Services’ Division of Economic Stability. Karen Hebert, the division director, and Nathan White, DHHS chief financial officer, walked members through the governor’s operating budget pages and a briefing book, explaining that the division was consolidated in 2018 and serves programs aimed at financial stability, poverty reduction, child care access, and related supports. Members repeatedly asked for clearer breakdowns of general fund spending, historical growth since consolidation, and how the division’s broad mission areas map onto specific budget lines. A major portion of the discussion centered on the Bureau of Child Development and Head Start collaboration and the child care subsidy program. Hebert said the child care scholarship/subsidy helps low- and moderate-income families access daycare so parents can work, attend school, or receive treatment, and that eligibility is based on state median income up to 85%. She reported a 45% increase in utilization, 4,032 children receiving daycare support as of the end of January, and about 15% of eligible children being served. She also described the quality improvement system “Granite Steps for Quality,” with 160 providers enrolled out of 717 licensed programs, and noted that 1,200 child care professionals added credentials in the last year. Members pressed for cost-benefit information, asking for data on how much the state pays, how many providers and children are served, and whether the department could quantify unmet need. The witnesses said some projects were funded with short-term ARPA child care dollars and that detailed cost data for specific examples, such as the Gorm Community Learning Center expansion, would need to be looked up. They also explained that the child care fund is a federal block grant with required spending set-asides of 9% for quality, 3% for infants and toddlers, and up to 5% for administration, and that unused funds remain available. The committee also reviewed slide 10’s accounting units, including that the Child Care Workforce Fund is 100% general funds and was created as a priority item under HB 2 from the 2024 session, while some other child care-related units are 100% federal funds.

Transcript Highlights:

• Mobile slaughter plants?
• Chairman. >> Yes. >> Uh, just to comment, I believe CWC's here as well, and they had a mobile plant,
• A health inspector actually told me if I had a mobile slaughter plant, I could cut the meat up in my
• A health inspector actually told me if I had a mobile slaughter plant, I could cut the meat up in my
• We have, yes, as Representative Lotman mentioned, we had a USDA-approved mobile slaughter unit.

Committee: Joint Agriculture, State and Public Lands & Water Resources

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• to stopped-out students.
• , attracting back some of those students that you refer to as stopped-out students and bringing them
• students.
• Therefore, these students will need to turn to the private student loan market.
• looking at any student who has an SAI, or student aid index, under 5,000.

Summary: The committee first heard updates from the California State University on its turnaround plans for seven campuses with enrollment declines. CSU said overall enrollment has grown for three straight years, but some campuses—especially in Northern California—continue to face structural declines tied to demographics and community college pipelines. The system described campus-specific strategies such as outreach to stopped-out and adult learners, guaranteed admissions, partnerships with community colleges and high schools, expanded high-demand programs, and cost reductions including hiring freezes, program suspensions, and shared administrative services. The LAO said the plans were reasonable but urged regular reporting so the Legislature can track results. Committee members pressed CSU for ongoing implementation updates, stronger recruiting efforts, and safeguards around AI use; CSU said it would continue regular check-ins and share best practices across campuses. The second item focused on the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education and its request for a $10 million General Fund appropriation to repay a special fund loan used for litigation costs. DCA and BPPE said the bureau has long had a structural deficit and has already cut positions, streamlined operations, and shifted some costs to the Student Tuition Recovery Fund, but still needs fee increases through the sunset review process. The LAO opposed the General Fund backfill, arguing the bureau can cover near-term costs with its loan, that litigation costs should generally be borne by regulated entities through fees, and that using General Fund money could set a precedent. Finance supported the one-time backfill as a way to avoid larger fee increases on institutions and to isolate the litigation expense from the bureau’s ongoing structural shortfall. Members asked how the bureau would avoid repeating the problem; BPPE said it has updated policies and practices, including disability accommodation procedures and non-discrimination training. The committee then reviewed Cal Grant funding and program updates from CSAC, UC, CSU, and the community colleges. CSAC said the Governor’s budget would increase Cal Grant funding to about $3.2 billion in 2026-27, driven by enrollment growth and higher tuition at UC and CSU, and highlighted efforts to improve payment processing and financial aid data. UC and CSU emphasized that Cal Grants are central to affordability and debt reduction, while also warning that federal changes under H.R. 1 could reduce access to loans and harm graduate and part-time students. Community colleges reported rising aid applications and awards, but said students still face major affordability barriers, especially mixed-status and undocumented students, and asked for more support for aid administration and completion grants. The chair repeatedly asked for data on eligible students who are not receiving Cal Grants and for a phased-in path to implement the Cal Grant Equity Framework; Finance said full implementation would cost hundreds of millions and the state is not currently in a position to fund it. Finally, the committee began discussion of the Middle Class Scholarship Program. CSAC said the program helps low- and middle-income students cover total cost of attendance, not just tuition, and warned that cutting funding by more than half would reduce award coverage from 35% to 17.5% of cost of attendance. CSU and UC said the program is important for reducing student debt and supporting affordability, and CSU noted recent administrative changes have reduced workload and award adjustments. The hearing continued into the next agenda item after these presentations.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our students pay a student health fee, and that makes them eligible to access our services.
• Student supportive services.
• sure students are supported.
• helping students.
• So students know that.

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:

• to stopped-out students.
• students.
• Therefore, these students will need to turn to the private student loan market.
• looking at any student who has an SAI, or Student Aid Index, under 5,000.
• for Student Parent Success.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• to stopped-out students.
• students.
• Therefore, these students will need to turn to the private student loan market.
• looking at any student who has an SAI, or Student Aid Index, under 5,000.
• for Student Parent Success.

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Education heard updates on higher education issues, beginning with California State University’s turnaround plans for seven campuses with enrollment declines. CSU said overall enrollment is growing systemwide, but some campuses, especially in Northern California, face structural declines tied to demographics and community college pipelines. The plans focus on reengaging stopped-out and adult learners, expanding partnerships and guaranteed admissions, improving retention and student support, and reducing costs through program suspensions, hiring freezes, shared services, and procurement consolidation. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the strategies were reasonable but urged regular legislative updates, and the Department of Finance had no additional comments. Committee members emphasized the need for implementation oversight, written updates, and attention to student outreach, financial aid, and privacy concerns around AI tools used in recruitment. The committee then reviewed the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education’s request for a $10 million General Fund appropriation to repay litigation-related borrowing. Department of Consumer Affairs and bureau staff said the bureau has a long-standing structural deficit, has already cut positions and shifted some costs, and that the General Fund backfill would reduce future fee increases on institutions. The LAO opposed the request, arguing the bureau can cover near-term costs with its existing loan and that litigation costs should remain the responsibility of the regulated entities through fees. Finance supported the one-time backfill as a unique situation that would lower fee increases and avoid passing litigation costs on to schools and students. Members asked about preventing a repeat of the problem, and bureau staff said they are pursuing fee increases through the sunset review and have strengthened internal policies and disability accommodation practices. The subcommittee also heard a broad update on Cal Grant funding and student aid. The California Student Aid Commission, UC, CSU, and the community colleges described Cal Grant as essential to affordability, but the LAO noted spending has grown faster than historical averages and said the state likely lacks capacity for major expansion in the near term. The segments highlighted the importance of state aid in covering tuition and living costs, and raised concerns about federal changes to student loans and Pell Grants, especially the elimination of Grad PLUS for some graduate students and limits on part-time borrowing. Committee members pressed for data on students who are eligible but not served by current Cal Grant rules, including adult learners and students affected by age and merit restrictions, and asked for analysis of phased-in implementation of the Cal Grant Equity Framework. Finance said full implementation would cost hundreds of millions of dollars and that affordability remains part of the state’s multi-year compact with the segments. Finally, the committee began discussion of the Middle Class Scholarship Program. CSAC and the UC and CSU said the program is a key part of affordability and debt reduction, especially after the 2022 reforms that expanded awards to total cost of attendance and improved administration. They warned that cutting funding by more than half would reduce award coverage from 35% to 17.5% of cost of attendance and could affect enrollment and persistence, particularly for middle-income students who do not qualify for other need-based aid. The segments also noted that recent administrative changes have reduced award revisions and campus workload, but that data exchange and award volatility remain challenges.

Transcript Highlights:

• students.
• When a student receives a suspension, expulsion, or another That drive the students to act out.
• Students were the jurors, and students were both the prosecution and the defense attorneys.
• Students were the jurors, and students were both the prosecution and the defense attorneys.
• I surmise that's a student perspective in this... How important the student perspective is.

Summary: The Senate and Assembly Education Committees held their annual joint hearing with the California Association of Student Councils and SABLE, where student delegates presented policy ideas developed over two days. Committee members repeatedly praised student voice and noted that several past student proposals had become law. The hearing began with opening remarks from legislators and student organizers, who emphasized the importance of civic participation and the value of hearing directly from students. The chair also reviewed hearing rules and explained that the panels would be treated as peers in a formal policy discussion. The first panel proposed an annual civic engagement day for grades 7-12, with flexible activities such as mock elections, civic fairs, Socratic seminars, and public comment practice. Members asked about costs, grade-level flexibility, voter registration, and how the proposal would fit within existing curriculum time. The second panel proposed amending Education Code Section 35012 to require at least one student board member in every unified and high school district, with expanded training and motion rights. Legislators supported the concept but raised technical concerns about fiscal impact, the need for odd-numbered boards, the scope of motioning authority, and whether districts would need reimbursement if the mandate became statewide. A third panel proposed adding middle school financial literacy instruction by embedding it into existing classes, with curriculum and teacher training developed over time by state agencies. Members questioned how it would fit into adopted materials and whether the state should wait until the new high school financial literacy course is fully implemented before designing middle school instruction. The fourth panel proposed expanding restorative justice by creating a CDE task force and authorizing PPS-certified staff to use restorative justice training materials in discipline processes. Senators discussed prior legislation, confidentiality concerns in closed-session hearings, and the fiscal cost of a state task force, while expressing support for stronger restorative practices. The final panel proposed more active mental health education through short, twice-semester classroom sessions for grades 7-12 focused on coping skills, time management, and awareness of resources. Assemblymember Castillo and Senator Cortese questioned whether teachers and counselors could effectively deliver the program, whether it would duplicate or overburden existing efforts, and whether wellness centers or student-led awareness efforts might be more effective. Committee members generally agreed the topic was important but were skeptical that another curriculum mandate was the best solution, and no votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• A decision unknown to students that would result in the loss of key elective classes students relied
• students.
• When a student receives a suspension, expulsion, or another That drive the students to act out.
• Students were the jurors, and students were both the prosecution and the defense attorneys.
• I surmise that's a student perspective in this... How important the student perspective is.

Summary: The annual joint Senate and Assembly Education Committee hearing featured student proposals from the California Association of Student Councils and SABLE, with opening remarks from legislators emphasizing student voice and the value of hearing youth ideas. Committee members noted the hearing was being streamed and that they would review the testimony even though some members could not attend because of fog-related travel issues. The first panel proposed an annual civic engagement day for grades 7-12, with flexible school-led activities such as discussions, mock elections, and voter registration-related events. Members generally praised the idea but raised concerns about costs, instructional time tradeoffs, how to evaluate effectiveness, and whether the proposal should better connect to existing civics standards and local curriculum. The second panel proposed amending Education Code Section 35012 to require at least one student board member in every unified and high school district, with added training and the right to make motions. Legislators supported student representation in principle but questioned whether the proposal should require one or two student members to avoid board tie issues, why some districts do not already have student trustees, and how the mandate would be funded if it became a state requirement. They also raised technical concerns about the scope of motioning power and the fiscal impact of converting a voluntary local practice into a statewide mandate. Later panels proposed adding middle school financial literacy instruction, expanding restorative justice practices, and creating more structured mental health education time. On financial literacy, students suggested integrating finance into existing middle school classes and teacher training over time; members worried about curriculum overload and suggested aligning the idea with the already-approved high school finance course. On restorative justice, students proposed a CDE task force and training for PPS-certified staff; legislators discussed prior related bills, confidentiality concerns in discipline hearings, and the likely cost of a state task force. On mental health, students proposed short, twice-semester classroom sessions focused on coping skills and awareness of resources, but members questioned whether such brief lessons could be effective and suggested that wellness centers, student-led awareness, and outside referrals might be more practical. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational and ended with encouragement for students to refine their proposals and follow up with legislators.

Transcript Highlights:

• students.
• When a student receives a suspension, expulsion, or another... That drive the students to act out.
• Students were the jurors, and students were both the prosecution and the defense attorneys.
• Students were the jurors, and students were both the prosecution and the defense attorneys.
• I surmise that's a student perspective in this... ...how important the student perspective is.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• A decision unknown to students that would result in the loss of key elective classes students relied
• students.
• When a student receives a suspension, expulsion, or another... That drive the students to act out.
• Students were the jurors, and students were both the prosecution and the defense attorneys.
• I surmise that's a student perspective in this... ...how important the student perspective is.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• A decision unknown to students that would result in the loss of key elective classes students relied
• students.
• When a student receives a suspension, expulsion, or another... That drive the students to act out.
• Students were the jurors, and students were both the prosecution and the defense attorneys.
• I surmise that's a student perspective in this... How important the student perspective is.

Summary: The joint Senate and Assembly Education Committee hearing featured opening remarks from legislators welcoming students from the California Association of Student Councils and SABLE, with members emphasizing student voice and noting that several past student proposals had become law. The hearing then moved through multiple student panels presenting policy ideas, with members responding in a mix of support, technical questions, and cautions about cost, implementation, and tradeoffs in instructional time. The first panel proposed an annual civic engagement day for grades 7-12 to increase civic literacy and participation through flexible school-based activities. Members asked about costs, flexibility for sixth grade, voter registration, and how the proposal would fit within existing curriculum and standards. The second panel proposed amending Education Code Section 35012 to require at least one student board member in every unified and high school district, with added motioning rights and training on budgeting and LCAPs; members raised concerns about mandate costs, board size, and the scope of motioning authority. The third panel proposed middle school financial literacy instruction, potentially embedded in existing classes like math, with a 10-year phase-in for teacher training and curriculum updates; members questioned whether the state should wait for the already-approved high school financial literacy course to be implemented first. The fourth panel proposed expanding restorative justice by creating a CDE task force and authorizing PPS-certified staff to use restorative justice materials in discipline processes; members discussed prior legislation, confidentiality in expulsion hearings, and the likely cost of a state task force. The fifth panel proposed short, twice-a-semester mental health and life-skills sessions for grades 7-12, but members expressed skepticism that brief classroom sessions could meaningfully address mental health needs and suggested wellness centers or student-led awareness efforts instead. The hearing then began panel six on AI implementation in classrooms, with students arguing that districts need clearer guidance on AI use and that education must adapt rather than ignore the technology.

Transcript Highlights:

• They disrupt students' learning, fail to improve student outcomes, and prevent local students, parents
• , students of color, and students with disabilities.
• high school students working to advocate for student voice in Massachusetts.
• And that student is Lily Muce, who is an eighth grade student. Good afternoon.
• Students trampled her.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Education

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Education heard testimony on several bills centered on school accountability, receivership, graduation requirements, charter school access, community schools, school libraries, and student voting rights. Much of the discussion focused on the Thrive Act, S. 374, which would end state receivership and change the state’s accountability approach. Supporters, including educators, parents, advocacy groups, and students, argued that receivership has not improved outcomes in districts such as Lawrence, Holyoke, Southbridge, Boston, and the Dever, and that local communities should have more control, with greater emphasis on community schools, wraparound services, and broader measures of school quality. They also supported related bills on community schools and school library standards, and several witnesses backed a bill to expand student representative voting rights on school committees. Opponents of S. 374, especially charter school leaders, parents, students, and some education advocates, focused on Section 4 of the bill, which would change the charter school net school spending cap in the lowest-performing districts. They argued that the provision would reduce access to charter seats in communities where families are seeking more options, and that schools such as Roxbury Prep, Excel Academy, Brook, Veritas Prep, and Libertas Academy have produced strong results for students, including students of color, low-income students, and students with special needs. Several witnesses said the section would force schools to shrink or close and would remove opportunities for families in districts with long waitlists. Committee members questioned witnesses on both the effectiveness of receivership and the charter school cap language. Chair Lewis and Chair Gordon emphasized the need for a better accountability system and noted concerns about whether current measures, including MCAS-based designations, accurately reflect school quality. Some witnesses said they had discussed the possibility of removing Section 4 from the Thrive Act and suggested it might be addressed in separate charter reform legislation. No votes were taken during the hearing; testimony was received and the committee later closed testimony on S. 374 and several related bills before moving on to the student voting rights bill, S. 367.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you. takeaways um from those students if you takeaways um from those students if you recall<00:
• specialists and student support staff are bringing in the inclusion of student voice with student attendance
• > 1797</c><00:21:07.080><c> students</c><00:21:07.440><c> we</c> 39.3% of the students 1797 students
• and enjoyment in learning and have students on the trajectory to student completion.
• </c><00:23:19.400><c> get</c><00:23:19.559><c> students</c> learning and have student get students learning

Committee: Senate Education Policy

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• in student support services and student success and access, excuse me.
• Together, these projects will provide about 2,388 affordable student housing beds for UC students. student
• Students may go through that as students. Employees on campus, I'm not sure.
• modules, both for the student and for the student employee, because this student employee will have
• students.

Keywords: 988, house, all