Transcript Highlights:

• and will be adjusted.
• , and their budget adjustments were either to get a vehicle.
• And I'm also looking at volume three on the budget adjustments for FY25.
• It looks like there is significant budget adjustments for the contractual ...budget adjustments for the
• In FY25, there was a $350,000 budget adjustment and transfer out of the 400 ...dollar budget adjustment

Keywords: 996, all

Summary: The committee first heard an Aging and Long-Term Services Department budget presentation comparing the LFC and executive recommendations. The main differences were in the Aging Network, Adult Protective Services, Program Support, and Long-Term Care Division, especially the executive’s proposed $10 million infusion into the Kiki Savadra Senior Dignity Fund and $6.2 million for expanding New Mexico Care. LFC staff explained that the committee recommendation was lower in general fund and fund-balance use, while the executive emphasized rising senior population needs, meal and transportation costs, and the cost savings of keeping older adults at home. The secretary also reviewed the department’s special requests, including the conference on aging, outreach, emergency preparedness, and the Kiki fund, and described New Mexico Care’s growth, its evaluation results, and the department’s plan to separate Kiki into its own accounting fund. Members largely focused on senior services, rural meal delivery, transportation, caregiver support, and the Kiki fund. Several members urged stronger support for non-metro aging providers and for New Mexico Care, citing its role in keeping seniors out of nursing homes and the program’s reported savings and outcomes. Questions also covered eligibility, background checks for caregivers, respite care, dementia and Alzheimer’s screening, and whether Kiki funds can support home modifications such as ramps. The committee then voted to adopt the LFC recommendation with one executive language change: adding the executive’s page 14 language allowing an additional 12.5% distribution for initial payments to aging network providers at the start of FY27. Representative Dow opposed the motion. The committee then moved to the Attorney General’s budget. LFC staff explained that the office’s budget relies heavily on the Consumer Settlement Fund, with both recommendations reducing general fund revenue while increasing settlement-fund use, and that performance measures were in consensus. The Attorney General said the office was not seeking more general fund, but wanted greater ability to use funds it recovers. He highlighted major consumer and public safety work, including litigation against major social media and AI platforms, a case involving Snapchat and child exploitation/extortion, the statewide crime gun intelligence center, efforts to address oilfield theft, work on missing and murdered Indigenous persons, and efforts to protect federal funds coming into New Mexico.

Transcript Highlights:

• What we were looking at are things like, of course, our operating adjustment, which keeps us where we
• I also would mention we used to be 21% behind when adjusted for inflation of where our office was back
• which is keeps us operating adjustment which is keeps us where<00:09:53.800> we<00:09:53.920>
• used to be 21% um behind when adjusted used to be 21% um behind when adjusted for<00:10:00.160><
• as we discussed our operating adjustment as we discussed today<00:10:49.040> so<00:10:49.720>

Bills: HF627, HF474, HF361, HF1837

Keywords: HF627, fiscal note, fiscal notes, Minnesota Legislature, state government, committee procedure, ranking minority member, minority party, standing committee, Ways and Means, Finance Committee, legislative process, budget analysis, fiscal impact, Minnesota Statutes 3.98, committee chair, legislative transparency, HF474, Hubert H. Humphrey, Henry Mower Rice

Transcript Highlights:

• higher tax than in person so I adjusted higher tax than in person so I adjusted the<00:02:28.120
• the formula and instead of we adjusted the formula and instead of taking<00:15:05.040> it<00:
• <00:17:31.640> the<00:17:31.760> funding sector by adjusting the funding sector by
• adjusting the funding calculation<00:17:32.840> to<00:17:33.000> occur<00:17:33.360>
• In summary, the proposed change in Senate Bill 63 is not merely a fiscal adjustment; it's a necessary

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's way too much, and I think it should be adjusted.
• And then adjustments can even be made there to smooth it out.
• One is the big question of whether or not the funding formula really needs to be adjusted at all.
• Again, thank you for the adjustment; it's needed.
• What's occurred over the course of years is that what that factor has been adjusted.

Summary: The committee met with a quorum, approved the March 4, 2026 minutes, and received a lengthy Department of Public Instruction presentation from Stanley Schauer Jr. on North Dakota student performance data in math and ELA, with comparisons between students with disabilities and students without disabilities. Schauer explained the assessment systems used, the 1% alternate assessment cap for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities, the absence of 2019-20 data due to the pandemic, and how state standards are set by North Dakota educators. Members asked about cohort trends, the role of alternate assessments, grade-level patterns, and whether the state should focus more on reducing the novice category than on moving students from approaching to proficient. Schauer also discussed the new NDA Plus assessment, the state’s planned growth model, and the possibility of future breakdowns by disability category or by schools using science-of-math approaches. Special education educators testified that students with disabilities continued to receive services during COVID because of FAPE obligations, which likely helped limit learning loss, and emphasized that IEP teams focus on individual growth rather than only proficiency buckets. Committee members then shifted to special education funding and possible funding models. Brandon Bombach of Grand Forks Public Schools presented on the state aid formula, focusing on the special education weighting factor and arguing that the current formula does not adequately respond to growing student needs because it counts enrollment but does not adjust when the number of students with IEPs rises. He used examples to show that a district can have the same enrollment and receive the same weighting even if the number of students needing services increases. Members discussed whether the formula should be tied more closely to actual need and accountability, and the chair indicated that the committee would continue gathering data and ideas for a later meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:43:23.359> or<00:43:23.599> the board of zoning and adjustment or the board of
• President, is about clarity and stability for our adjusting that time frame to five days, adjusting that
• This resulted in some fuel adjustment charges that represented a significant spike on people's electric
• <01:50:53.119> searchcharges<01:50:54.320> so the fuel adjustment searchcharges so
• the fuel adjustment searchcharges so that<01:50:54.800> those<01:50:55.119> costs<01:50

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• renter's credit is based on adjusted renter's credit is based on adjusted gross<00:20:58.720>
• and simply base it on federal adjusted and simply base it on federal adjusted gross<01:03:54.080
• to use federal adjusted gross income.
• For instance, prior to 2005, the working family credit used a broader definition and then was adjusted
• to use federal adjusted gross income.

Bills: HF2715, HF2499, HF3420, HF3657, HF2303

Keywords: HF2715, homestead credit refund, property tax refund, property tax relief, homeowner tax relief, homestead credit, co-pay reduction, Minnesota property taxes, tax rebate, state refund, income thresholds, inflation adjustment, property tax circuit breaker, housing affordability, elderly homeowners, fixed income, taxation, Minnesota Statutes 290A.04, renters credit, income tax

Transcript Highlights:

• And finally, fifth, this bill adjusts the fees the state can charge for these permits, all of which are
• And finally, fifth, this bill adjusts the fees the state can charge for these permits, all of which are
• <00:41:20.400> the finally, fifth, uh this bill adjusts the finally, fifth, uh this bill adjusts
• So section one adjusts potable water.
• So section one adjusts the<00:41:39.839> purpose<00:41:40.079> of<00:41:40.240> this

Keywords: 927, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It is adjusted every year by inflation.
• That is a pretty tightly focused cost-of-living adjustment.
• It has been over 20 years now since we've done any kind of adjustment to their retirement annuities.
• So just supporting TSEU's work for a COLA adjustment. Thank you. Ms. Janice Ziedelman.
• So just supporting TSEU's work for a coal adjustment. Thank you. Ms. Janice Sidelman.

Summary: The Senate Finance Committee heard budget presentations for the Texas Historical Commission, the Pension Review Board, the Employees Retirement System (ERS), Social Security and benefit replacement pay, the Texas Emergency Services Retirement System (TESSRS), and the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT). The Legislative Budget Board outlined recommendations and major changes for each agency, including reductions tied to one-time projects at the Historical Commission, continued funding for courthouse grants, heritage trails, and Holocaust/genocide education, as well as new or modified riders and capital items. For the pension-related items, LBB described funding changes for PRB, ERS, Social Security, and TESSRS, including ERS health plan cost growth driven largely by pharmacy costs, the status of pension funding reforms, and TESSRS’s request for additional state support to address its unfunded liability and staffing needs. Members asked extensive questions about the Historical Commission’s one-time funding, unexpended balance authority, courthouse preservation, the Presidio La Bahia and National Museum of the Pacific War projects, and coordination of Texas history messaging across sites such as the Alamo, San Jacinto, Washington on the Brazos, and other heritage locations. The Historical Commission chair emphasized heritage tourism, economic development, and the need for continued investment in historic sites, staffing, IT modernization, and vehicles. On the pension items, senators discussed PRB oversight of local systems, including the Dallas police and fire pension situation, and ERS investment returns, benchmark comparisons, and rising health costs. ERS officials said the plan remains well funded overall, noted a 2021 cash balance reform and a planned supplemental legacy payment, and explained that GLP-1 drugs such as Ozempic and Mounjaro are a major driver of pharmacy spending; they also said the agency is working with the Texas Pharmacy Initiative and that rebates are contractually returned to ERS. For TESSRS, LBB and agency staff said the system serves volunteer and part-paid emergency personnel, is facing an infinite amortization period, and is requesting additional appropriations, staffing, and IT funding, along with a statutory change to allow an actuarially determined state contribution. The agency said it may otherwise need to cut benefits for volunteer firefighters. For CPRIT, LBB reported about $600 million in recommended funding for the biennium and a 10-FTE increase, while the agency described its $6 billion voter-approved program, $3.75 billion in grants awarded to date, and $10.4 million in revenue sharing since 2011. CPRIT’s only exceptional item was a request for a 10% salary increase for two exempt positions. No committee votes or formal actions were taken in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• The rate is $45, but the adjusted rate is 67.50? What, over overtime? I didn't mean to answer it.
• I believe overtime is listed in the second line, so I'm not sure that the adjusted rate would...
• I believe overtime is listed in the second line, so I'm not sure that the adjusted rate would...
• <00:10:10.839> rate I'm not sure that the adjusted rate I'm not sure that the adjusted rate
• government Affairs that the adjusted government Affairs that the adjusted rate<00:10:40.639>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• As we're trying to adjust the next year, in 2024 they were $54 million.
• As we're trying to adjust the next year, in 2024 they were $54 million.
• The file is open and it's assigned to an adjuster.
• The way this works, our involvement is the adjuster requests claim documents.
• The adjuster gets approval and attends the mediation or asks for their amounts.

Bills: SB41, SB153, SB165, SB261, SB264

Keywords: sexual crimes, statute of limitations, criminal justice, victim rights, child abuse, procurement, contracting, small business, local government, disaster recovery, emergency procurement, certification, public spending, juvenile justice, delinquency, rehabilitation, community corrections, risk assessment, public safety, health regulations

Transcript Highlights:

• , in doing that adjustment, we apparently adjusted it so that it reduces the fee income by 25 cents.
• <00:18:48.720> in<00:18:48.960> terms<00:18:49.120> of was we made an adjustment
• in terms of was we made an adjustment in terms of where<00:18:49.520> the<00:18:49.679> money
• <00:18:54.400> we<00:18:55.360> apparently<00:18:55.840> adjusted<00:18:56.320><
• c> it<00:18:56.559> so adjustment we apparently adjusted it so adjustment we apparently adjusted

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, I'll note for these first two items, technical adjustments will be proposed for your consideration
• Uh, this is going to be the subject of one of the tech technical adjustments, uh, I just mentioned.
• This adjustment is necessary to address salary compression.
• The first exceptional item is compensation adjustments.
• The first is for inflation-adjusted operational costs.

Transcript Highlights:

• You talk about how there may have been adjustments in the schedule as you're going along.
• You talk about how there may have been adjustments in the schedule as you're going along.
• You talk about how there may have been adjustments in the schedule as you're going along.
• You talk about how there may have been adjustments in the schedule as you're going along.
• Amendment adjustments. Yeah, I'm having a hard time imagining why that would be.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The committee heard several budget and policy items, beginning with the DMV’s proposal for the federal state-to-state verification system and the Digital Experience Platform (DXP). DMV officials said the state-to-state system is required for Real ID compliance and functions as a pointer system that shares only limited identifying information to help states verify whether an applicant has records in another jurisdiction. Members pressed hard on privacy, access, hacking, notification, and misuse concerns, including whether other states or federal actors could use the system to target Californians. DMV said access is limited to member jurisdictions, requests are transaction-based, records are encrypted, California can see when its data is requested, and legal remedies would include working through AAMVA and the Attorney General if misuse occurred. On DXP, DMV said the project has been reset, is on its revised schedule and budget, occupational licensing is complete, vehicle registration is targeted for completion by the end of the calendar year, and the full modernization is expected by fiscal year 2028-29. The committee then took up the High-Speed Rail Office of Inspector General trailer bill and AB 1608. The Inspector General said current law does not clearly authorize public reports or establish a work-paper retention and disclosure framework, and that the trailer bill and AB 1608 would codify those powers, add access to needed job classifications and purchasing authority, and require public reporting with temporary confidentiality only in limited circumstances such as pending litigation, security vulnerabilities, or fraud-detection weaknesses. Members debated how broad the confidentiality language should be, whether reports could remain confidential too long, and whether the bill should define “proposed agreements” and require notice to the Inspector General when agreements are being reviewed. The Inspector General said he had already found at least one procurement-related state law violation involving an amendment that added services not in the original contract, and members discussed the project’s large cost growth and the need for stronger oversight. No vote was taken on the item in the portion provided. Finally, Caltrans began presenting a trailer bill proposal related to workforce development under SB 150, explaining that it would amend Government Code 14017, which governs use of federal highway formula funds and related workforce development efforts. The transcript cuts off as Caltrans starts its overview, so no further discussion, vote, or action on that item is shown in the provided text.

Transcript Highlights:

• Elimination of the 1.4 future earnings capacity adjustment to align with the original intent of the law
• I'm a former claims adjuster myself.
• Keeping in mind that according to the RAND study, the average caseload for the adjusters at SIBTF was
• I'm a former claims adjuster myself.
• As a former claims adjuster, There's just no way that someone can handle that many cases.

Summary: The Budget Subcommittee on State Administration heard presentations on the Department of Industrial Relations’ labor-related budget items, with the main focus on proposed trailer bill language to reform the Subsequent Injury Benefits Trust Fund (SIBTF) and a related budget change proposal for staffing. DIR said SIBTF has grown far beyond its original purpose, citing the 2020 Todd decision, expanded eligibility based on chronic or asymptomatic conditions, and a backlog that has grown to more than 30,000 pending cases. The administration argued the reforms would restore guardrails, reduce liabilities and employer assessments, and speed processing for severely injured workers; the LAO said the proposal was largely consistent with its prior recommendations. Members raised concerns about using trailer bill language for major policy changes, the retroactive application to open cases, and the impact on workers already in the queue, while supporters from employer groups and public agencies backed the proposal as necessary to control costs and restore sustainability. Public comment was split, with injured-worker advocates opposing the retroactive changes and business/public employer representatives supporting the reforms. The committee then heard the SIBTF workload request, which would phase in 177 positions over five years at a cost of $36.5 million, including staff for the Division of Workers’ Compensation, the Office of the Director Legal Unit, and administrative support. DIR said the additional staffing is intended to address very high caseloads and reduce processing times, but emphasized that the request assumes the reform package is adopted; LAO agreed the staffing increase made sense if paired with reforms. Members asked about vacancy rates, current staffing, and whether the workload request would become the new normal, and DIR said it would monitor caseload trends and adjust future requests as needed. Finally, the committee received an update on the California Workplace Outreach Program (CWOP), which DIR described as a partnership with community-based organizations to educate workers and help employers comply with labor laws. DIR reported that CWOP has reached 1.75 million workers and employers and made 8 million touchpoints since 2020, with the current round awarding $50.7 million to 87 partners for a two-year period through June 2027. Members and public commenters highlighted the program’s role in reaching immigrant, farmworker, janitorial, nail salon, and other vulnerable communities, and several speakers urged continued funding at $30 million per year for five years. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• , adjusted for inflation, adjusted for inflation, we<00:52:18.400> are<00:52:18.640> spending
• If you adjust this Let me repeat that.
• If you adjust this for<00:52:29.280> inflation, for inflation, for inflation, we<00:52:31.040>
• If<00:55:26.640> you<00:55:26.800> adjust<00:55:27.119> that<00:55:27.359><
• c> for<00:55:27.520> inflation,<00:55:28.559> that If you adjust that for inflation

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Senate convened with an invocation, Pledge of Allegiance, roll call, and a quorum established. The journal was approved, absent senators were excused, and new bills and resolutions were introduced, including measures on housing districts, calorie information, alcohol beverage control, county clerk filings, vital records, and a resolution honoring Dr. Samantha Shaver. The chamber also received notice that the House had passed House Bills 384, 144, and 290 and requested concurrence. The Senate then recessed briefly for party caucuses before reconvening. The main floor action centered on Senate Bill 3, relating to school district finances. The bill, as amended by Senate Committee Amendment 1 and Senate Floor Amendment 2, was described as strengthening financial transparency for school districts by requiring public access to budgeting information, monthly credit card statements, superintendent contracts and compensation, audits, and final working budgets. Supporters argued it would improve fiscal responsibility and accountability in response to concerns about spending practices in large districts. The Senate adopted both amendments and passed SB 3 by a vote of 35-1, with one senator explaining a no vote while acknowledging the need for transparency. The Senate then took up Senate Bill 1, relating to education and the governance structure of a large school district. Supporters said the bill responds to a recent court ruling by adding detailed findings to justify treating the district differently and by clarifying that the superintendent handles day-to-day operations while the board focuses on strategic planning, budget approval, audits, and hiring or firing the superintendent. Proponents cited the district’s size, share of state education funding, number of students, and concentration of low-performing schools as reasons for the change. Opponents argued the bill would reduce elected board accountability, questioned whether the structure would improve outcomes, and emphasized broader funding and achievement challenges. After extended debate, the Senate proceeded to a vote on SB 1; the transcript shows a brief proponent statement and a lengthy opposing explanation, but the final vote result is not included in the provided text.

Transcript Highlights:

• been working to amend statutes where needed or rules and policies so that we can always monitor and adjust
• Have you made some adjustments? since your last hearing. Oh, Mr.
• So That's part of the reason why we're always monitoring and adjusting to get more utilization by the
• And we just have to be making some adjustments to see how we can get more participation from them and
• Is there any adjustment Are we looking at anything for our budget other than what was earlier mentioned

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• After adjusting<00:18:46.320> for<00:18:46.640> carry<00:18:46.960> forward<00:18
• :47.360> and adjusting for carry forward and adjusting for carry forward and discretionary<00:
• The table on the slide shows the impact of these adjustments.
• of these adjustments. of these adjustments.
• <00:28:08.799> for sort of mid-year rate adjustment for sort of mid-year rate adjustment for

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: Minnesota Management and Budget Commissioner Aaron Campbell, State Economist Dr. Tony Becker, and State Budget Director Anna Mingi presented the November 2025 budget and economic forecast. Campbell said the state now projects a nearly $2.5 billion surplus at the end of the 2026-27 biennium, about $575 million better than the end-of-session estimate, but also a projected negative balance of about $2.9 billion in FY 2028-29, reflecting a worsening structural imbalance. He said the budget reserve stands at $3.4 billion, with cash flow and budget reserves totaling $3.8 billion after a $244 million addition, and emphasized that Minnesota’s AAA bond rating and reserve policy remain strengths even as future sessions will need to address the long-term gap. Becker said the national economic outlook has changed only modestly since February, but growth remains below trend through the forecast horizon. He cited slower consumer spending, weak private investment, continued tariff uncertainty, lower projected immigration, and modest inflation that stays near 3% through 2026 before easing. Revenue forecasts for the next biennium were revised up to $66.3 billion, driven mainly by higher individual income tax receipts and other revenue, partly offset by lower sales and corporate tax forecasts. He also noted risks from federal policy changes, the recent shutdown’s effect on data availability, and possible equity market volatility. Mingi said general fund spending is projected to rise sharply, with current biennium spending up $3.4 billion from end-of-session estimates and planning-year spending up $1.9 billion. She attributed much of the increase to carryforward from prior one-time appropriations, discretionary inflation, and especially Medical Assistance. MA costs are projected to be about $2.5 billion higher over 2025-29, largely because managed care rates rose more than expected due to higher utilization and higher-cost services, including pharmacy costs, while long-term care and disability waiver costs also increased. In response to questions, officials said the federal reconciliation bill had only a relatively small effect on the health care changes, and that the carryforward amounts reflect unspent prior appropriations that now show up in later years rather than new spending.

Transcript Highlights:

• We get questions regularly when they change their schedule, how to adjust, how to become an early or
• It consists of $1.8 million for a 2.41% cost-of-living adjustment and $7.4 million to address increased
• It consists of $1.8 million for a 2.41% cost of living adjustment and $7.4 million to address increased
• But the first is the COLA adjustment, and the second adjustment is the size of the program based on the
• So there's kind of two pieces to that current service level adjustment.

Summary: The committee heard an update on the administration’s Career Education Master Plan and the new California Education Interagency Council. Administration and agency staff described efforts to better connect K-12, higher education, workforce, and data systems, including the California Cradle to Career Data System, e-Transcript California, and a proposed career passport. They emphasized regional coordination with workforce boards and community colleges, and said the new council’s immediate tasks are to hold its first meeting by the end of June, enter into a data-sharing MOU, and complete a strategic plan by the end of November. Members asked about the council’s authority, reporting requirements, and how it would relate to the broader Master Plan for Higher Education; staff said the council will make recommendations but does not have implementation authority. The committee then took up the Governor’s proposed $100 million one-time expansion of dual enrollment grants and related changes to instructional minute requirements. Finance and the Department of Education said the proposal would support middle college, early college, and CCAP programs, add technical assistance, prioritize high-need LEAs, and reduce the minimum instructional day for certain dual enrollment students from 240 to 180 minutes to ease scheduling barriers. The Chancellor’s Office strongly supported the investment, citing access, acceleration, and equity benefits, while the LAO recommended rejecting the funding, arguing the state already provides ongoing support and that the proposal does not address major barriers. Members raised questions about adult learners, A-G alignment, reporting on outcomes and expenditures, rural access, transportation, staffing, and whether the funding would create lasting program capacity. The item was left open after discussion. The committee also considered trailer bill language to align the definition of long-term English learners across data systems. Finance and CDE said the change would simplify identification by defining LTELs as students who have not attained English proficiency within seven years and RTELs as students not proficient within six years, matching the dashboard and research-based timelines. CDE said the current mismatch between dashboard and assessment definitions creates confusion and delays, while some members and advocates worried the change could reduce earlier intervention or should be handled through policy committees rather than the budget process. The committee voted to reject the proposal and refer it to policy, though the administration said it still supports the budget language. Finally, the committee heard a proposal to extend the Supporting Inclusive Practices project by one year, through June 30, 2027. CDE said the project is promising but raised concerns about the contract structure and fiscal management, while Marysville Joint Unified School District testified that SIP had helped expand inclusive preschool and district-wide practices and reduce reliance on more restrictive placements. Members questioned why funds had not been fully encumbered and whether the remaining money should be redirected to areas with greater implementation need. The item was discussed but no final action was described in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Moving down to the targeted investments, line 7, there's a base adjustment that the executive made based
• We're also recommending that base adjustment of $15 million, which Connor did touch on.
• And so I am not a fan of BAR adjustments to begin with.
• BAR authority, then they would execute that budget adjustment request. And you're right.
• Once again, I'm not a big fan of BAR adjustments to begin with, so there's not a question on where I

Bills: SB37, SB29

Keywords: high-quality literacy instruction, science of reading, structured literacy, reading instruction, literacy assessment, dyslexia screening, phonics, phonemic awareness, fluency, vocabulary, comprehension, biliteracy, English language learner, ELL, bilingual education, dual language program, reading intervention, reading difficulty, reading improvement plan, literacy coach

Transcript Highlights:

• In doing the basic allotment, we can adjust, and we can fill those holes as needed.
• by all of our existing student-centered weights, and it adds a vehicle for future inflationary adjustments
• For Mildred ISD, that adjustment would allow us to give every one of our employees a raise.
• We don't have an automatic basic allotment adjustment for inflation or enrollment-based funding.
• We don't have an automatic basic allotment adjustment for inflation or enrollment-based funding.

Bills: HB2

Keywords: 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, volunteer management system, volunteer registration, criminal history check, background check, Texas Division of Emergency Management

Summary: The committee continued public testimony on House Bill 2, which would make major changes to public school funding, teacher pay, special education, early learning, school safety, and related programs. Many superintendents and education advocates supported the bill’s overall direction but urged changes, especially a larger basic allotment and more flexible funding for rural and small districts. Witnesses from Paint Creek, West Hardin, Cushing, Blooming Grove, Mildred, Buffalo, Plano, and rural school groups said the bill’s targeted raises and new requirements would not fully cover inflation, TRS/Medicare costs, transportation, insurance, or support staff salaries, and several asked the committee to restore the House version’s higher basic allotment and small-school allotment. Charter school representatives supported the facilities funding changes and said charter schools need state help because they cannot levy taxes, while also noting the funding gap with ISDs. Fine arts advocates asked the committee to restore the fine arts allotment, arguing arts improve engagement, attendance, and academic outcomes, especially in rural and at-risk communities. Early learning and special education witnesses supported parts of the bill but raised concerns about pre-K restrictions, disability-related pre-K access, and the need to preserve or clarify special education provisions and mental health oversight language. Several witnesses praised the teacher pay raise, teacher incentive allotment expansion, and teacher preparation investments, saying they would help recruit and retain educators and improve student outcomes. Others, including counselors and support staff advocates, argued the bill should also include raises for counselors, nurses, librarians, bus drivers, custodians, aides, and other non-teaching employees who keep schools running. One witness from the Texas Counseling Association opposed the substitute because it removed a counselor pay provision, warning of counselor shortages and inequities. A parent and special education advocate said the bill’s structure creates too many strings attached and asked for a larger basic allotment instead of more targeted funding. Another witness from Mental Health America urged keeping the collaborative task force on public school mental health services through 2031, and a disability rights advocate said the committee substitute appears to omit some special education items that were in the House version. The committee also briefly took up House Bill 6, a school discipline bill. After questions about automatic mandatory expulsion for vape possession and concerns about younger students, the committee adopted the substitute and voted to report HB 6 favorably to the full Senate by a 9-1 vote, with Senator Menendez voting no and Senators West and Menendez expressing reservations but supporting further discussion. After that vote, testimony on HB 2 resumed. Senators used the hearing to ask about the bill’s cost, the difference between the basic allotment and the bill’s targeted funding buckets, and whether the permanent teacher pay increase shifts pressure off districts. The bill’s supporters emphasized that it represents an historic, roughly $8 billion investment and that many of the new funding streams are intended to be permanent or to address specific district needs.